Corporate-Funded Think Tanks Testify to Congress While Hiding Donor Conflicts of Interest

Analysis of congressional testimony revealed that think tanks funded by corporations and wealthy donors appeared as expert witnesses before congressional committees without disclosing their financial conflicts of interest. Between 2021-2024, 34% of think tank witnesses came from “dark money” organizations that refuse to disclose donors, while only 30% of think tank witnesses fully disclosed their funding sources. Major think tanks like the Heritage Foundation and American Enterprise Institute received millions from corporations including Facebook, Google, Amazon, and defense contractors while testifying on policy issues affecting those same industries.

Corporate Funding of Policy Research

The Heritage Foundation and American Enterprise Institute received funding from Koch brothers foundations, DeVos family foundations (Amway fortune), Bradley Foundation, and Walton Family Foundation (Walmart), creating a network of corporate-funded policy advocacy disguised as independent research. Foundations tied to Richard Mellon Scaife bankrolled AEI, Heritage, and other conservative think tanks throughout the 2000s and 2010s. Just under half (12 of 25) of the most-cited think tanks accepted money from weapons manufacturers, with General Electric bankrolling 11 of them. Facebook, Google, and Amazon donated to both AEI and Heritage while these organizations testified on tech policy, antitrust regulation, and taxation issues affecting donor companies.

Dark Money and Non-Disclosure Policies

Think tanks are not obligated to publicly identify donation sources, creating “dark money” flows that make it virtually impossible to determine funding sources and conflicts of interest when these organizations influence policy. AEI maintains a “longstanding policy of not disclosing or discussing its donors,” despite regularly testifying before Congress on tax, regulatory, and foreign policy issues. This opacity allows corporations to launder their policy advocacy through supposedly independent think tanks, giving corporate positions the credibility of academic research while hiding the financial relationships that shape that research.

Congressional Committee Testimony

Dark money think tanks like AEI and Heritage ranked among the most prominent witnesses testifying before Congress, providing expert analysis on legislation affecting their corporate donors without disclosing those relationships. When Heritage testified on tax policy, members didn’t know the organization received funding from wealthy families seeking tax cuts. When AEI provided defense policy recommendations, committees remained unaware of weapons manufacturer funding. This systematic non-disclosure allowed corporate interests to shape congressional understanding of policy issues through supposedly neutral expert testimony that actually reflected donor preferences.

Defense Contractor and Tech Company Influence

The prevalence of weapons manufacturer funding for think tanks testifying on defense policy—with General Electric alone supporting 11 major organizations—created an ecosystem where congressional committees received defense policy advice from organizations financially dependent on increased military spending. Similarly, Facebook, Google, and Amazon funding of think tanks testifying on tech regulation ensured that congressional committees heard from “experts” whose organizations depended on continued generosity from the companies under regulatory scrutiny. This created a subtle form of regulatory capture where the information informing congressional decisions came from sources with undisclosed financial stakes in policy outcomes.

Significance

Corporate-funded think tank testimony to Congress represented a sophisticated form of lobbying disguised as independent expertise. By routing corporate money through think tanks that refused donor disclosure, companies could shape congressional understanding of policy issues without triggering lobbying registration requirements or disclosure obligations. The system proved particularly insidious because it operated at the information level—influencing what congressional committees believed to be true about policy issues rather than merely advocating for particular positions. When 34% of think tank witnesses came from dark money organizations and only 30% fully disclosed funding, Congress was essentially receiving policy advice from undisclosed corporate interests while believing it came from independent scholars. The lack of donor disclosure requirements for testifying organizations created a massive loophole in ethics rules—while registered lobbyists faced disclosure requirements, think tank representatives could advocate identical positions without revealing who paid them. This allowed corporations to multiply their influence: direct lobbying by registered lobbyists, campaign contributions to committee members, and “independent” expert testimony from corporate-funded think tanks, creating an echo chamber where congressional committees heard pro-corporate positions from multiple supposedly independent sources that were actually funded by the same corporate interests.