The New York Times reports that Meta received $25 million back this summer from political groups it had funded for the midterm elections, according to filings made public this week, making its campaign budget about 40 percent smaller than the $65 million it had outlined.
Most of the money, $22 million, came back from the American Technology Excellence Project, the political committee Meta funded with $45 million in September 2025, the Times reports. A Meta spokesman told the paper the refunds were part of “adjustments” and declined to answer further questions about why they took place.
Business Pill · GROSS VS NET
A Business Engineer explainer on the difference between a gross figure and a net one. It explains the concept in general and says nothing about Meta or its political spending.
The key insight: As we read it, the number that changed is the net, not the gross: the Times reports Meta outlined a $65 million budget and has taken $25 million of it back, while the committee’s IRS filings show $45 million in and $6.8 million spent through June.
According to the Times, the American Technology Excellence Project issued two returns to Meta in July and August for a total of $22 million, according to new filings with the Internal Revenue Service on Thursday, 15 October.
The other $3 million came from Mobilizing Economic Transformation Across (Meta) California, a California-specific advocacy group that Meta backed with $20 million in August 2025. The Times says the group refunded $3 million almost exactly a year later, according to a state filing.
The Times describes the effort, announced about a year ago, as aimed at electing state politicians who are friendly to the artificial intelligence industry. The committee’s own stated purpose, in its IRS filings, is to support the election of state and local candidates who “promote and defend U.S. technology companies and leaders”.
The American Technology Excellence Project’s IRS Form 8872 reports, as mirrored by ProPublica’s 527 Explorer: a $45 million contribution from Meta Platforms dated 24 September 2025, and expenditures of $328,848 (22 September to 31 December 2025), $5.78 million (January to March 2026) and $693,429 (April to June 2026). Values rounded to millions. The July-to-September report, which the New York Times says carries two returns to Meta totalling $22 million, was not yet shown when read on 17 October 2026.
What Was Posted on X
NEWS โ
Meta quietly and unusually has withdrawn $25 million from its AI push in the midterm elections.
That’s about a 40% drop in the amount Meta planned to spend. The company invested $65 million into politics, but then got tens of millions refunded.
New York Times reporter Theodore Schleifer posted the story on 16 October: Meta has withdrawn $25 million from its AI push in the midterm elections, which he describes as about a 40% drop in what Meta planned to spend, after investing $65 million and getting tens of millions refunded.
What the IRS Filings Show
The committee is a Section 527 political organization that files Form 8872 with the IRS, and ProPublica’s 527 Explorer mirrors its electronic reports. They list a single contribution: $45 million from Meta Platforms, dated 24 September 2025.
The reports show $328,848 spent from 22 September to 31 December 2025, $5.78 million from January to March 2026 and $693,429 from April to June 2026, with no further contributions. ProPublica puts all-time expenditures at $6.8 million.
The July-to-September report, which the Times says carries the two returns, did not appear on ProPublica’s page when we read it on 17 October.
Where Meta’s Money Went
The Times says Meta’s money was spent primarily in Democratic and Republican primaries. It reports that the committee transferred about $3.2 million to its Democratic affiliate and about $4.1 million to its Republican affiliate, with the Republican group particularly active in Texas and the Democratic group in Illinois.
In California, the Times reports, Meta’s entity spent more than $9 million through September in state politics, not counting the refund, including about $1.2 million to support Xavier Becerra, the Democratic nominee for governor.
Meta’s spokesman told the Times: “More than 90 percent of the candidates we supported won their primaries, and we are now focused on supporting candidates in the general election.” He added: “We will continue to make adjustments as we evaluate the best ways to support candidates we hope will be great partners in supporting America’s technology leadership.”
As we read it, the filings and the Times describe two different measures of the same effort: money committed ($45 million to the committee, $20 million to the California group) and money spent ($6.8 million by the committee through June, per its IRS reports, and more than $9 million by the California entity through September, per the Times).
As we read it, the gap between those two measures is where the refunds came from: the Times says the committee returned $22 million in July and August, and the California group $3 million, out of money that had been committed but not yet spent.
As we read it, the company’s own explanation is the one on record: its spokesman called the refunds “adjustments” and said Meta is now focused on the general election, and he declined to say why the money came back.
Meta spokesman, to The New York Times, 16 October 2026
“More than 90 percent of the candidates we supported won their primaries, and we are now focused on supporting candidates in the general election”
Three Implications
CANDIDATES IN STATE RACES The Times reports that Meta’s money went mainly to Democratic and Republican primaries, with its affiliates active in Texas and Illinois, and that Meta says it is now focused on the general election.
READERS OF THE IRS FILINGS The committee’s July-to-September Form 8872 report, which the Times says shows the two returns, is the document that will give the dates and amounts; it was not yet on ProPublica when we read it.
AI POLICY IN THE STATES The Times places the refunds against a public that has become skeptical of AI and other AI industry donors reassessing their political efforts.
The framework describes the layer this spending is aimed at: “The governance layer sits at the intersection of capability, regulation, national security, access control, and geopolitical alignment.”
As we read it, companies are approaching that layer by different routes in the same week: Meta through funding state candidates, which the Times says it has now trimmed by $25 million, and Anthropic through its own draft federal bill. The framework was published in June 2026, is about Anthropic, and does not discuss Meta’s political spending.
What Is Not Established
Neither Meta nor the Times says why the refunds were made; the spokesman declined to answer that question. The exact dates and the split of the two returns are not given in what we read, and the third-quarter IRS report was not yet visible on ProPublica.
We did not open the California state filing ourselves; the $3 million refund is as the Times reports it. We did not contact Meta.
Business Engineer Framework
Inside Anthropic’s Permission Layer
A Business Engineer analysis of the governance layer of the AI stack: who sets the rules, permissions and boundaries around frontier intelligence.
The Times reports that Meta took back $25 million of the $65 million it had set aside for its midterm political effort, $22 million of it from the American Technology Excellence Project, whose IRS filings show a $45 million contribution from Meta in September 2025.
Meta’s spokesman called the refunds “adjustments” and said the company is now focused on the general election.
A note on sourcing. This piece is based on the New York Times report of 16 October 2026 (read in full through a syndicated copy), the American Technology Excellence Project’s IRS Form 8872 reports as mirrored by ProPublica’s 527 Explorer, and Theodore Schleifer’s post on X, all read on 17 October 2026. Figures attributed to the Times are its reporting. We did not open the California state filing and did not contact Meta. The references to our earlier reporting link to our own pieces.
Gennaro Cuofano is a CRO and tech executive who has worked in AI since late 2015, starting with bringing NLP, natural-language generation, voice and chatbot products to the marketing industry. His background is in law and finance: he holds a Master's degree in Law and an International MBA with an emphasis on corporate finance (LUISS Business School and the University of San Diego, 2012), and worked as a financial analyst at a real-estate investment firm in San Diego and as an assistant controller. His work focuses on business model strategy, business engineering and, more broadly, structural analysis: how companies make money, read from their own filings. He created FourWeekMBA and leads research there and at The Business Engineer, his newsletter on AI and business strategy, with over 95,000 subscribers and more than 1,000 published analyses. His writing has also appeared on Entrepreneur, HackerNoon and Search Engine People. Find him on LinkedIn and Substack. See how we source.
Scroll to Top
Discover more from FourWeekMBA
Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.
