How much has America given to Ukraine?

The visit to Ukraine President Volodmi Zelanski at the White House to negotiate aimed at ending the war has made the United States (US) support in the headlines again.

President Donald Trump has criticized the amount of assistance provided by the US in the past compared to Europe. But the figures that have already been quoted are not supported by evidence.

The BBC Verification has spent how much the US has spent since the United States of Ukraine in February 2022 since the full -scale invasion of Russia and how much it has been spent compared to Europe’s contribution.

The US has spent a total of $ 130.6BN (£ 98.9bn) between 24 January 2022 and 30 June 2025, According to nail instituteA German -based think tank that tracks international support for Ukraine.

The US Department of Defense has provided its own figure in view of all the expenses on Operation Atlantic resolution – Russia’s response to Russia’s invasion.

This is called $ 184.8bn has been “approved” – A figure that covers American military training and replenishment of US defense stocks in Europe.

This only lasts until 31 March 2025, making it lower than the calculation of the nail institute – although especially higher.

The BBC Verifi has asked the US departments of the defense and the state whether they can supply more recent data.

Back in February, while he was hosting French President Macron, Trump claimed:

“We have spent more than $ 300BN and Europe has spent about $ 100BN – this is a big difference”

BBC verified the claim of that time and Concluded that the number of trump did not increase As published numbers – both nail and the US government – showed that the US had spent much less than $ 300BN.

This case remains on six months.

It is true that America is the largest single donor for Ukraine, by some difference. But the Europe United has spent more money than the US, according to the Nail Institute.

Between January 2022 and the end of June 2025, Europe as Europe spent $ 165.7bn on Ukraine, in the same period compared to the US $ 130.6BN, according to the calculation of the Kail Institute.

This figure includes direct assistance from the European Union (EU), but both from the European countries, both inside and outside the European Union. This includes military, financial and humanitarian aid.

Trump earlier claimed that Europe will get its money back as it was giving “loan” to Ukraine.

This inspired Macron – who was sitting next to the US President at his Oval Office meeting in February – saying that both Europe and America had given a mixture of grants and debt.

According to nail data on especially financial aid, President Macron is correct. But the statistics of the institute also suggest that President Trump has a point – the US has sent more grants, while the European Union has sent more loans.

However, again, there are different figures.

By 18 July, The European Union says its members have provided around $ 180BN so far35%of the total with loan.

Like the Department of Defense of the United States, the European Union has used a wide definition of what matters to Ukraine.

The debt of the European Union must have been on liberal terms – so Ukraine will normally pay low interest. In some cases, Ukraine is not expected to pay anything, with repayment coming from revenue from frozen Russian property.

What we can say is that Ukraine has been helping Mixing of loan and grant,

The UK is one of the largest individual state donors in Ukraine – the $ 2.8BN (£ 2.3BN) was signed during the latest travel to London on 1 March.

In late July, The UK government had done $ 29.5BN (£ 21.8bn) for Ukraine overall.This includes $ 17.6BN (£ 13bn) in military support.

According to nail data, the only countries to spend are the United States and Germany.

However, the UK’s contribution is much smaller than in the US

It raises a question for the UK and other European countries: if peace is not safe in the near future and the US decides to withdraw a large part of its funding, can other states create a difference?

This will require a significant increase in their current contribution.

Additional Reporting: Thomas Spencer, Christine Jense and Daniel Vener