The president’s son-in-law reportedly solicited new capital for his investment firm while participating in U.S. diplomacy, but no public evidence shows that the fundraising influenced American policy.
Jared Kushner sought to raise another $5 billion from Middle Eastern investors for his private-equity firm while participating in U.S. negotiations with Iran, according to a new report raising questions about the separation between his diplomatic work and private financial interests.
“Earlier this year, as Kushner engaged in talks with Iran, he was also discreetly raising another five billion dollars for Affinity in the Middle East,” Dexter Filkins reported in a New Yorker investigation.
The report does not identify every prospective investor, disclose any final commitments, or establish that Kushner’s diplomatic activities produced investments for Affinity Partners.
No public evidence cited in the report shows that Kushner changed a U.S. negotiating position in exchange for money or that a foreign government conditioned an investment on an official American action.
The timing nevertheless creates an ethics question: Kushner was representing the United States in negotiations affecting Middle Eastern governments while seeking capital in the same region for a firm already heavily financed by foreign state investment funds.
Kushner Joined U.S. Negotiating Teams
Kushner served as a senior White House adviser during President Donald Trump’s first administration but did not initially accept a conventional government position when Trump returned to office.
He nevertheless resumed a substantial diplomatic role alongside special envoy Steve Witkoff, participating in American efforts involving Gaza, Ukraine, and Iran.
In April, the White House identified Kushner as a member of the U.S. delegation attending talks with Iran in Islamabad, Pakistan. Vice President JD Vance led one round, accompanied by Witkoff, Kushner, and national security officials.
The negotiations addressed Iran’s nuclear program, ballistic missiles, regional armed groups, sanctions, and control of shipping through the Strait of Hormuz. The talks also sought to end a widening regional war that had disrupted energy markets.
That round ended without an agreement after approximately 21 hours. Later negotiations involved Kushner and Witkoff without Vance.
Kushner reportedly declined a government salary.
“Jared is donating his energy and his time to our government, to the president of the United States, to secure world peace, and that is a very noble thing,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told The New Yorker.
Unpaid service does not necessarily eliminate federal ethics considerations. Applicable rules can depend on a person’s legal designation, authority, access to government information, and participation in matters affecting personal financial interests.
The White House has defended Kushner’s work as a voluntary contribution to the administration’s diplomatic efforts. It has not publicly released a detailed ethics agreement identifying his appointment status, financial disclosures, recusals, or limitations on contacts with Affinity investors.
Affinity Relies Heavily on Foreign Capital
Kushner founded Affinity Partners after leaving the White House in 2021. Most of the firm’s original capital came from foreign investors.
Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund committed $2 billion despite concerns reportedly raised by its internal investment advisers.
The panel questioned Affinity’s limited track record, dependence on Saudi capital, operating structure, and proposed management fees. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who chairs the fund, approved the investment after the panel’s objections.
Affinity charged the Saudi fund an annual management fee of 1.25%, equivalent to approximately $25 million a year on the full $2 billion commitment.
The United Arab Emirates and Qatar each subsequently invested $200 million. Kushner’s firm then raised an additional $1.5 billion from Qatari and Emirati sources shortly before the 2024 presidential election.
Those investments brought Affinity’s assets under management to approximately $4.8 billion at the time.
New Middle Eastern investments helped the firm grow by about 30% during 2025, pushing its assets above $6 billion, according to the magazine. Affinity estimates its annual internal rate of return at 25%.
The firm’s investments include Israeli financial and automotive companies, technology ventures, and international development projects. It also participated in a consortium organized to acquire video game manufacturer Electronic Arts.
Sources Allege Investors Valued Political Access
The New Yorker quoted unnamed sources who believed Gulf governments viewed Kushner’s proximity to Trump as part of his value.
“They were investing money in him,” a former senior U.S. official said of the Gulf monarchies. “They thought that would bring them some influence that would protect them, and it did the opposite.”
Another American described as having deep relationships with Middle Eastern leaders offered a more pointed interpretation.
“My sense is that he thinks he was killing two birds with one stone—he was helping the Arabs defeat the Iranians, and he wanted to be paid for it,” the person said.
Those statements are not proof of a quid pro quo, and the unnamed individuals did not present public evidence that Kushner exchanged an official action for an investment.
The available reporting also does not establish that a Gulf government instructed Kushner to pursue a particular position toward Iran as a condition of supporting Affinity.
The overlapping relationships nevertheless present an appearance concern. Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates all had direct interests in the Iran negotiations, including questions involving regional security, oil markets, shipping, sanctions, and U.S. military policy.
Those same governments were existing or potential sources of capital for Kushner’s firm.
Earlier Investigation Examined Affinity’s Fees
Affinity faced congressional scrutiny before Kushner returned to diplomatic work.
In 2024, then-Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) examined the firm’s foreign funding, management fees, investments, and financial performance.
The committee’s Democratic staff said Affinity had collected as much as $157 million in fees from foreign clients, including approximately $87 million from the Saudi government.
At that stage, Affinity had generated no returns for investors and had been slow to deploy its capital, according to the committee’s findings.
Those findings predated the improved performance later reported by The New Yorker, including Affinity’s estimate of a 25% annual internal rate of return.
Wyden argued that the investments might have been motivated by access to the Trump family rather than purely commercial considerations.
Kushner has denied that Affinity operates as a vehicle for political favors. Responding to earlier criticism of the Saudi investment, he challenged critics to identify a decision from his White House service that was not in the American interest.
No criminal charges have been filed against Kushner over Affinity’s foreign funding or his recent diplomatic activities. No court has found that he engaged in bribery, pay-to-play conduct, or an unlawful exchange.
Ethics Attorney Calls for Scrutiny
Virginia Canter, a former government ethics attorney, told The New Yorker that Jared Kushner’s dual roles deserve a closer look.
“If Kushner wasn’t the son-in-law of the president, he would be under investigation by the F.B.I.,” Canter said. “No one else could get away with this.”
Any legal analysis of the situation would likely hinge on Kushner’s official status within the administration. Federal conflict-of-interest laws apply differently to formal advisers, volunteers, special government employees, contractors, and private citizens.
So far, the administration has not publicly disclosed which of these titles applied to Kushner during the negotiations.
Questions Remain About Fundraising and Recusals
The New Yorker report establishes that Kushner was reportedly pursuing Middle Eastern capital while participating in Iran diplomacy. It leaves several important questions unanswered:
- Did Affinity receive new commitments from governments involved in, or directly affected by, the Iran negotiations?
- Did Kushner disclose his fundraising contacts to White House lawyers?
- Was he subject to a written ethics agreement or recusal policy?
- Did he receive classified or market-sensitive information while continuing to manage Affinity?
- Did any prospective investor raise business matters during diplomatic discussions?
- What legal designation governed his work for the administration?
- Did Kushner withdraw from any negotiations directly affecting Affinity’s investors?
Public answers could clarify whether Kushner’s overlapping roles created only the appearance of a conflict or a more direct financial problem.
For now, the most serious allegations remain unproven. The reporting does not show that Kushner traded American policy for investment or allowed a prospective investor to dictate U.S. diplomacy.
It does show that an investment manager whose business relies substantially on Middle Eastern governments was simultaneously representing the United States in negotiations with major consequences for those governments.
Patrick Houck is an avid political enthusiast based out of the Washington, D.C., metro area. His expertise is in campaigns and the use of targeted messaging to persuade voters. When not combing through the latest news, you can find him enjoying the company of family and friends or pursuing his love of photography.