Independent Journalism · Not Legal Advice · Verify Against the Court Record · Editorial Policy
A business workspace setup featuring documents, coffee, and financial elements.

Fact Check: 10 Claims About the Reported US-Russia Business Deals

by

Postwar oil ventures, airline overflights, titanium and potash: those were among the incentives Washington and Moscow have weighed to coax Putin toward a Ukraine settlement, according to an FT article dated October 27, 2026. Summaries of a story like this can run well ahead of it. This US Russia deals fact check holds ten claims, about lifted sanctions, signed contracts, Exxon and more, up against the FT’s text and the public record.

Where it stands: Nobody has reported a signature on anything. The US official who spoke to the FT said economic agreements “would be included in and subject to a comprehensive peace framework that stops the killing in this brutal war; nothing is finalised,” and the paper noted that US officials have tied the ventures to the war ending first.

The named parties stayed mostly silent. Exxon gave the FT no immediate reply, Boeing declined, Peskov did not answer, and Dmitriev’s office would not comment. No White House, Zelensky or EU reaction to the FT story itself had been found as of October 28. For the full list of proposals, see our report on what the FT disclosed.

US Russia deals fact check: the claims at a glance

Claim Verdict What the record shows
US sanctions on Russia are lifted Misleading Graham Act measures waived; older sanctions stand
The deals are signed False “Nothing is finalised,” per US official
Exxon is returning to Russia Unsupported Exxon says no plans to re-enter
Ukraine was at the table Not per the FT No direct Ukrainian or European role
“Business Deals” note was in St Petersburg in September Mixed up Moscow Sept 5; St Petersburg Oct 21
Dmitriev’s figure was fourteen billion Wrong unit He claimed $14 trillion
Russian potash is under US sanctions False Licensed since 2022; still imported
The US would own Zaporizhzhia Not what the FT said FT idea is management by a US entity
Boeing uses no Russian titanium Unproven Purchases suspended; wider chain not disclosed
The diesel deal cut US diesel prices Not supported EIA average rose two weeks running

Have US sanctions on Russia been lifted?

Some measures have been switched off, but the sanctions regime as a whole has not been lifted. On October 16, 2026, the president signed Executive Order 14436, which set aside the new Graham Act’s duties and sanctions. ABC News reported that the order “does not affect existing sanctions imposed previously by executive order,” while noting it removed a clause that had required those sanctions to stay.

Separately, Treasury authorized imports of Russian diesel through April 7, 2027, and The New York Times reported that Treasury is reviewing a delisting request from Dmitriev’s Russian Direct Investment Fund through its standard procedures. A review is not a decision. Whether Congress gets a vote on relief depends on which sanctions are touched; the CAATSA review piece in this series walks through it.

The claim that the diesel deal lowered prices fails on federal data. The Energy Information Administration’s weekly US average for on-highway diesel was $6.179 a gallon on Oct. 12, $6.276 on Oct. 19 and $6.352 on Oct. 26. Those figures show the direction of prices, not what caused the change.

Is any deal signed, and is Exxon going back to Russia?

No signed deal has been reported, and Exxon’s stated position is that it is not going back. In September 2025 chief executive Darren Woods told the FT: “We don’t have any plans to re-enter Russia.” He said the talks were about settling the arbitration over the 2022 seizure of its 30% Sakhalin-1 stake.

The FT restated that stance on Oct. 27 and got no fresh reply from the company. The Telegraph, relaying the FT story, added a caveat: “It is unclear whether it has changed its position.” Until Exxon says otherwise, “Exxon is returning” is a claim without a source.

Was Ukraine in the room, and where did Witkoff meet Putin?

Not for these ideas, by the FT’s account. The paper wrote that the proposals were raised between American and Russian officials “without direct Ukrainian or European participation.” Zelensky was due to meet Witkoff separately in Oslo on Tuesday, Oct. 20, Al Jazeera reported, but that meeting was not described as covering these business ideas.

The venues need care because the FT’s own text swaps them. Its body places a business discussion “in St Petersburg in early September” and the notepad at “a subsequent visit to Moscow last week.” Other outlets put it the other way round. ABC News placed Witkoff and Jared Kushner at the Kremlin in Moscow on September 5, 2026. For the later visit, Al Jazeera located the Witkoff-Putin talks at Saint Petersburg’s Constantine Palace, on Wednesday, Oct. 21, with Kushner on a video link. The FT’s photo caption also places last week’s meeting in Saint Petersburg.

The “Business Deals” wording comes from the FT’s description of Kremlin pool photographs. MS NOW separately described a note card at the St. Petersburg meeting listing three agenda items, including the business deals.

Is the $14 trillion figure a real valuation?

It is a claim by one interested party, not an assessed value. According to the Kyiv Independent, Dmitriev put the value of possible joint projects at “more than $14 trillion” on Feb. 18, on condition that Washington drop sanctions. The FT amended its article to make clear he gave that estimate in February.

Two traps follow. The number is trillion, not billion. And it is separate from the roughly $12 trillion package The Economist had reported, which Dmitriev’s figure answered. For scale, MS NOW put Russia’s annual economic output at $2.5 trillion. Our full check of the Dmitriev figure goes further.

📨 Get Free Accountability Coverage Alerts

Free · No spam · Unsubscribe anytime

What about potash, titanium and the Zaporizhzhia plant?

Each is easy to overstate. On potash, the FT said the idea “would require the EU to lift sanctions,” but Russian potash is not under US sanctions: Washington said in July 2022 that Russian fertilizer trades would not breach its rules, and Reuters reported in September that the US is still receiving Russian potash. The FT’s wording fits Belarusian potash and its blocked Baltic transit more closely.

On titanium, Boeing suspended Russian purchases in 2022, but Reuters noted it “has not said to what extent the metal is still used in its supply chain.” Saying its exposure is now zero goes beyond the record.

On the nuclear plant, the FT described a US entity taking over management and splitting the power. The ownership idea is older: a White House statement in March 2025 said “American ownership of those plants would be the best protection.” Russia, per The New York Times, has made clear it will not give up control.

When are the Abu Dhabi talks, and has Europe agreed?

No date has been set, and Europe has not signed on. Speaking on Oct. 23, Zelensky gave a target of “the first half of November,” while CNN quoted Putin as willing to resume talks after November 10. Al Jazeera notes that the last US-mediated peace talks were held in February.

European diplomats told US counterparts they oppose relaxing sanctions or striking business deals before the war ends, the FT reported, stressing that decisions affecting EU interests cannot be made without Europe’s approval. EU economic sanctions currently run until July 31, 2027. Background on the earlier waiver is in our Graham Act waiver explainer.

Frequently Asked Questions

Are Russia sanctions gone after the Graham Act waiver?

Not across the board. An October 16 executive order waived the new Graham Act duties and sanctions, and Treasury licensed Russian diesel through April 7, 2027, but sanctions already imposed by earlier executive orders remain in place.

Has the US signed any business deal with Russia in the peace talks?

None had been reported by October 28. The US official quoted by the Financial Times said nothing is finalised and placed any economic agreement inside a comprehensive peace framework.

Is ExxonMobil going back to Russia?

Not on the record. Chief executive Darren Woods said in 2025 that Exxon was not planning a return and that its contacts with Moscow concerned compensation for the seized Sakhalin-1 stake. The company gave the FT no immediate response this week.

Was Ukraine part of the US-Russia business talks?

Not directly, according to the FT. It reported that American and Russian officials raised the ideas between themselves, with neither Kyiv nor European governments taking part.

Is the $14 trillion figure an official valuation?

No. It is Kirill Dmitriev’s own estimate from February 2026 of potential US-Russia projects, tied to lifting sanctions. No independent body has assessed it.

Sources

This article is news reporting and analysis based on the public sources listed above, as they stood on the dates shown. Where officials, lawmakers or analysts disagree, including on whether an action is lawful, their positions are attributed to them; Donald Trump Class Action is not a court and nothing here is legal advice. Facts in a developing story can change.

Owed money from a settlement? Check what is open at OpenClassActions.com. Caring for someone with dementia? Find practical guides at HelpDementia.com. Working out a skin routine? Evidence-based answers at AcneAdvocate.com. Forgot the name of a movie? Identify it at FindThisMovie.com. Was your data exposed? Track active breaches at DataBreachRadar.com.
⚠️ OPINION & EDITORIAL CONTENT: All articles, commentary, and analysis on donaldtrumpclassaction.com represent the personal opinions of the authors and are presented for informational and editorial purposes only. This site is not affiliated with Donald Trump, the Trump Organization, or any government agency. Nothing here constitutes legal, financial, or professional advice. Read full disclaimer.

We use essential cookies to make this site work and remember your preferences. We do not use advertising or analytics cookies. Privacy Policy. Cookie Policy.