Harvard University is under federal scrutiny after a new report revealed it accepted over $100 million from China and about $1.6 million from “Palestinian territories” since 2017—while failing to properly disclose where the money went.
The revelation, published Thursday by Open the Books, comes amid a sweeping review by the Department of Education under Secretary Linda McMahon. On April 18, the department formally launched a records request into Harvard, citing “incomplete and inaccurate disclosures” about its foreign funding.
“As a recipient of federal funding, Harvard University must be transparent about its relations with foreign sources and governments,” McMahon said. “Unfortunately, our review indicated that Harvard has not been fully transparent or complete in its disclosures, which is both unacceptable and unlawful.”
According to the report, Harvard has accepted $1.1 billion from foreign entities since 2017, much of it routed through vague contracts or gifts with little to no description of how the funds were used. A key concern is that $34.2 million in Chinese contracts included language allowing Beijing to “designate a principal investigator” for research—effectively granting the Chinese Communist Party a say in Harvard’s research priorities.
That’s not all. Harvard also accepted millions more from England, Japan, and Hong Kong. But it’s the Chinese and “Palestinian” funds that raised red flags for federal investigators—particularly as the school faces separate backlash for antisemitism on campus and its handling of pro-Palestinian protestors.
Harvard was already under fire for allowing extremist demonstrators to disrupt classes, occupy university buildings, and set up encampments without meaningful consequences. In September, a Congressional probe found that Harvard “failed” to discipline students involved in openly antisemitic activity, including vandalism and harassment.
The Trump administration responded by demanding reforms. When Harvard refused to implement new standards—including stronger screening of foreign students and accountability for antisemitic incidents—the administration yanked over $2 billion in grants and $60 million in contracts.
Harvard sued, but this latest funding revelation only adds to the pile of concerns.
“This records request is the Trump Administration’s first step to ensure Harvard is not being manipulated by, or doing the bidding of, foreign entities,” McMahon warned. “That includes actors who are hostile to the interests of the United States and American students.”
The report also highlighted a scandal from 2020, when a Harvard chemistry professor was caught lying about his ties to China’s Wuhan University of Technology. The professor was paid $50,000 per month through China’s Thousand Talents program, while conducting $15 million in U.S.-funded research. The DOJ later confirmed the case as part of a broader campaign by China to exploit elite American universities.
Critics argue that Harvard—and other elite schools—have grown too dependent on foreign money, especially from nations with authoritarian governments or extremist affiliations. The worry is that research agendas, campus speech norms, and even student admissions policies may be influenced by those cash flows.
The Trump administration is now using its leverage over federal grants to force transparency. Five states—Kansas, Kentucky, Indiana, Ohio, and Wyoming—have already passed laws to prevent foreign entities from funding ballot initiatives or educational campaigns within their borders.
Open the Books found that Harvard’s foreign gifts often contained minimal or no documentation explaining how the money would be spent, or even who within the university was overseeing the transfer.
“We’ve seen this before,” said one official familiar with the investigation. “Foreign governments don’t write checks to American universities out of charity. They expect influence.”
So far, Harvard has not responded to questions about the report or the Department of Education’s records request.
The outcome of the investigation could have national implications, as other top-tier universities may soon come under similar scrutiny. For Harvard, it’s the latest example of what happens when ideological arrogance collides with federal oversight in the Trump era.
