In a wide-ranging speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, President Trump made a series of contested claims that BBC Verify has investigated. From his desire to acquire Greenland to the US’s contributions to NATO, the president’s assertions do not always align with the facts.
Greenland: Trump claimed the US “gave Greenland back to Denmark” after World War II, adding “How stupid were we to do that?” However, Greenland has never been US territory. In 1933, an international court ruled that Greenland belonged to Denmark. During WWII, the US and Denmark signed an agreement allowing the US to defend Greenland, but this did not involve a transfer of sovereignty.
NATO Contributions: Trump criticised NATO members, claiming the US was “paying for virtually 100%” of the alliance’s defence. In reality, US spending on defence has accounted for around 70% of the total spent by NATO countries in recent years, not 100%. The president also incorrectly stated that NATO members were now paying 5% of their GDP on defence – the current target is 2%, to be achieved by 2035.
Wind Energy in China: Trump claimed he had been unable to “find any wind farms in China,” despite China having one of the largest wind farms in the world. China is the world’s largest producer of wind energy, generating more than double the amount produced by the US in 2019.
North Sea Oil: Referring to the UK’s energy policies, Trump stated that the government “take[s] 92% of the revenue” from North Sea oil companies. In fact, oil and gas firms operating in the North Sea pay a total tax rate of 78% on their profits, not their revenue.
Investment Figures: The president claimed his administration had “secured commitments for a record-breaking $18 trillion” in investment. However, the White House’s own tracker shows investments totalling $9.6 trillion, and experts have expressed scepticism about the reliability of the higher figure.
Throughout his speech, President Trump made a number of inaccurate or misleading claims. While the president has touted his administration’s economic achievements, the facts do not always align with his rhetoric.
