Anthropic and Trump Administration Deny Negotiations Over Government Stake in Company

The Trump administration and Anthropic on July 3, 2026, denied reports of negotiations over transferring a stake in the AI company to the U.S. government. A Reuters source familiar with the situation confirmed: no such discussions took place between the parties.

What triggered the wave of denials?

On the same day, July 3, 2026, Financial Times published a report that OpenAI offered Washington 5% of its own shares. According to the publication, a similar arrangement could potentially be applied to other major AI market players. This offer became an unprecedented signal: one of the largest private AI laboratories was voluntarily offering the state a shareholder position — not just as a regulator or customer.

Against this backdrop, questions naturally arose about Anthropic as well — the developer of the Claude model family and one of OpenAI's main competitors in the American market. The company ranks among the top three developers of foundational AI models and is known for its focus on AI system safety. Anthropic and the Trump administration issued denials almost simultaneously: negotiations over the state's participation in the company's capital had not taken place and were not ongoing.

• July 3, 2026 — Reuters published a denial citing a source familiar with the situation
• Financial Times on the same day reported: OpenAI offered the U.S. government 5% of its shares
• Anthropic and the White House rejected the presence of similar negotiations with the company
• Anthropic — an independent American AI developer, creator of the Claude model family

The speed of the denial — released the same day the FT publication appeared — speaks to the sensitivity of the topic: any association of the company with state participation in capital is perceived as a fundamentally important signal for the market and investors.

Why did the idea of a government stake in AI arise at all?

The Trump administration consistently makes technological leadership a national priority and actively seeks ways to secure strategic control over critically important developments. Artificial intelligence occupies a central place in this strategy: from semiconductor manufacturing to diplomatic agreements around AI standards. In this context, direct government participation in the capital of leading AI companies looks not like an exotic option, but as one of the real tools of influence.

OpenAI's offer — if it corresponds to reality — changes the conventional logic of interaction between government and private business in the technology sector. Previously, government influenced AI companies through regulation, tax regimes, and government contracts. A stake in shares — is a fundamentally different mechanism: the state becomes financially interested in the company's value growth. For a laboratory, this is simultaneously access to political weight and potential restrictions on independence in making strategic decisions.

"The

Trump administration and Anthropic did not discuss transferring a stake in the company to the government," — Reuters, July 3, 2026.

The fact that Anthropic was forced to publicly deny a hypothetical deal is itself telling: the question of government participation in AI is perceived as a realistic scenario requiring an official response.

What this means

Public denials reduce the likelihood of such a deal with Anthropic in the short term. However, the precedent set by the OpenAI story remains. The question about the role of the state in the capital of strategically important AI companies has ceased to be theoretical — it is already being discussed at the level of major players and officials. How the balance between government influence and the independence of AI laboratories will look — is one of the key questions of technology policy in the coming years.