How much have America, Britain and the rest paid Ukraine in aid since the Russian invasion? And do they have any hope of getting money back in return?
These are big questions, and they’re likely to dominate much of the discussion in the coming months as Donald Trump pressurises his Ukrainian counterparts for a deal on ending the war. So let’s go through some of the answers.
First off, the question of who has given the most money to Ukraine rather depends on what you’re counting.
If you’re looking solely at the amount of military support extended since 2022, the US has provided €64bn, compared with €62bn from European nations (including the UK).
But now include other types of support, such as humanitarian and financial assistance, and European support exceeds American (€132bn in total, compared with €114bn from the US).
Divide Europe into its constituent nations, on the other hand, and none of them individually comes anywhere close to the US quantity of aid.
More on Donald Trump
Related Topics:
That being said, simple cash numbers aren’t an especially good measure of a country’s ability to pay.
Look at US support as a percentage of gross domestic product and it comes to 0.5% of GDP. That’s almost precisely the same as the aid from the UK.
Looked at through this prism, it’s other countries which are clearly the most generous: Denmark, Estonia and much of the Baltics providing around 2% of their GDP – a far bigger amount versus their ability to finance it.
Still, compare the aid this time around with previous amounts spent in other conflicts and they are nowhere close.
Lend-Lease during WWII, aid during the Vietnam and Korean Wars, and even the first Gulf War, involved significantly bigger outlays than currently being spent on Ukraine.
That goes not just for the US but also for the UK, Germany and Japan, all of which provided more aid to the Kuwaitis and other affected nations during the first Gulf War.
Even so, it’s clear that the US and others have put significant resources towards Ukraine.
President Trump has been talking recently about recouping $500bn from Ukraine in the form of revenues from mining rare earth metals.
This is, on the face of it, slightly odd. Rare earth metals represent an obscure corner of the periodic table and play a small if important role in electronics and military manufacturing.
The entire market is small – making it essentially implausible that, even if Ukraine suddenly produced the majority of the world’s supply, the president could expect that amount of revenue back in return.
More to the point, while there are a couple of rare earth deposits in Ukraine, they have languished, unexploited, for years. They are so expensive to mine no-one has worked out how to extract the elements and make a profit at the same time.
And even if you presumed they could do, Ukraine would still be a relative minnow in global rare earths production.
Assuming, as one probably should, that Donald Trump didn’t just mean rare earths, but was talking more broadly about “critical minerals” (the two are different things, but let’s not get too pedantic here), there are also one or two other promising mine sites in the country.
There is an old, shuttered alumina plant seized from Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska. There is a large lithium resource which could, if all went well, be the single biggest lithium mine in Europe.
Yet even taking this into account, Ukraine would still be a relatively small player in global lithium. Not nothing – but not world changing either. Certainly not enough to generate the hundreds of billions of dollars Mr Trump is seeking.
Then again, Ukraine has other resources at its disposal too: vast seams of coal in the Donbas, large iron ore reserves in the south of the country.
Both of these are in or close to Russian occupied areas – which might, from the Ukrainians’ perspective, actually be the point. Old fashioned as this stuff is, it does actually generate significant revenue. It might be Donald Trump’s best hope for some payback.
Donald Trump has warned that all goods from Japan and South Korea will face tariffs of 25% from 1 August.
The announcement, via his Truth Social platform, marks the restart of the threatened “liberation day” escalation that was paused in April, for 90 days, to allow for negotiations to take place with all US trading partners.
The president showed off copies of letters to the leaders of both Japan and South Korea informing them of the tariff rates. Those duties will come on top of sector-specific tariffs – such as 50% rates covering steel – already in force.
He warned the rates could be adjusted “upward or downward, depending on our relationship with your country”.
Country-specific tariffs had been due to take effect from Wednesday this week but Mr Trump had earlier revealed that nations would start to get letters instead, setting out the US position.
The letters sent to Japan and South Korea cited persistent trade imbalances for the rates and included the sentence: “We invite you to participate in the extraordinary Economy of the United States, the Number One Market in the World, by far.”
He ended both letters by saying, “Thank you for your attention to this matter!”
The European Union – the biggest single US trading partner – is among those set to get a letter in the coming days.
Mr Trump has also threatened an additional 10% tariff on any country aligning itself with the “anti-American policies” of BRICS nations – those are Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa and whose members also include Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates.
The UK, bar a massive shock U-turn, should be exempt.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:49
What does the UK-US trade deal involve?
The country was the first to be granted a trade deal, of sorts, in May and the Trump administration has claimed many others had been offering concessions since the clock ticked down to 9 July.
The UK is not expected to face any changes to its current 10% rate due to the trade truce, which came into effect last week.
While UK-made cars aerospace products face no duties under a new quota arrangement, it still remains to be seen whether 25% tariffs on UK-produced steel and aluminium will be cancelled.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
5:08
Can the UK avoid steel tariffs?
They could, conceivably, even be raised to 50%, as is currently the case for America’s other trading partners, because no agreement on eliminating the rate was reached when the government struck its deal in May.
It all amounts to more uncertainty for the UK steel sector.
A No 10 spokesman said on Monday: “Our work with the US continues to get this deal implemented as soon as possible.
“That will remove the 25% tariff on UK steel and aluminium, making us the only country in the world to have tariffs removed on these products.
“The US agreed to remove tariffs on these products as part of our agreement on 8 May. It reiterated that again at the G7 last month. The discussions continue, and will continue to do so.”
China and Vietnam have also secured some US concessions.
The dollar strengthened but US stock markets lost ground in the wake of the letters to Japan and South Korea being made public, with the broad-based S&P 500 down by 1%.
Stock markets in both Japan and South Korea were closed for the day but US-traded shares of SK Telecom and LG Display were down 7.5% and 5.8% respectively.
Shares in Elon Musk’s Tesla have reversed sharply over renewed concerns about his focus on the company’s recovery as he plots against Donald Trump.
Shares in the electric car firm plunged by more than 7% at the start of trading on Wall Street – taking about $71bn (£52bn) off its market value.
The stock has often come under pressure since Musk started his association with the president, latterly helping bring down federal government costs through a new department known as DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency).
But it is now suffering as their political relationship has soured.
Musk has publicly opposed the so-called “big, beautiful bill” – Mr Trump’s flagship tax cut and spending plans that received Congressional approval last week – since he left his DOGE role.
Musk wrote in a post on his X platform on 30 June: “It is obvious with the insane spending of this bill, which increases the debt ceiling by a record FIVE TRILLION DOLLARS that we live in a one-party country – the PORKY PIG PARTY!!”
More on Donald Trump
Related Topics:
Once the bill was passed, he created a poll on X, asking people if they would want him to launch the America Party.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:32
Musk v Trump: ‘The Big, Beautiful Breakup’
He wrote on 4 July: “Independence Day is the perfect time to ask if you want independence from the two-party (some would say uniparty) system!”
The vote ended with 65.4% in favour of creating the party.
The formation of the America Party was announced the following day.
“By a factor of 2 to 1, you want a new political party and you shall have it! When it comes to bankrupting our country with waste & graft, we live in a one-party system, not a democracy.”
“Today, the America Party is formed to give you back your freedom,” Musk posted.
Trump responded on his Truth Social account: “I am saddened to watch Elon Musk go completely ‘off the rails,’ essentially becoming a TRAIN WRECK over the past five weeks.
“He even wants to start a Third Political Party, despite the fact that they have never succeeded in the United States – The System seems not designed for them.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:25
Trump threatens to ‘put DOGE’ on Musk
Trump has previously threatened to go after Tesla‘s government subsidies and contracts through the DOGE department to save “big” as their relationship deteriorated.
Such threats have also pressured the share price at Tesla.
It has suffered throughout Trump 2.0 and, in fact, has trended lower since last December – shortly after Mr Trump’s election win was confirmed.
The possibility of tariff hits to the business, followed by actual tariff disruption, along with a consumer and investor backlash against Musk’s previous DOGE role have contributed to a 35% decline on the December peak.
The very absence of Tesla’s CEO dragged on the shares.
Tesla sales suffered globally as the trade war ramped up due to the imposition of tariffs by a government he supported, until the public row between him and the president began in early June.
Musk had only just renewed his 100% focus on Tesla and his other business interests by that time.
Tesla sales were down during the presidential election campaign last year and continued to decline, on a quarterly basis, during the first half of 2025.
Neil Wilson, UK investor strategist at Saxo Markets, said of the company’s share price woes: “Investors are worried about two things – one is more Trump ire affecting subsidies and the other more importantly is a distracted Musk.
“Investors had cheered Musk stepping back from frontline politics but are now worried he’s going to sucked back in and take his eye off Tesla.”
Post Office scandal victims are calling for redress schemes to be taken away from the government completely, ahead of the public inquiry publishing its first findings.
Phase 1, which is due back on Tuesday, will report on the human impact of what happened as well as compensation schemes.
“Take (them) off the government completely,” says Jo Hamilton OBE, a high-profile campaigner and former sub-postmistress, who was convicted of stealing from her branch in 2008.
“It’s like the fox in charge of the hen house,” she adds, “because they were the only shareholders of Post Office“.
“So they’re in it up to their necks… So why should they be in charge of giving us financial redress?”
Image: Nearly a third of Ms Hamilton’s life has been dominated by the scandal
Jo and others are hoping Sir Wyn Williams, chairman of the public statutory inquiry, will make recommendations for an independent body to take control of redress schemes.
The inquiry has been examining the Post Office scandal which saw more than 700 people wrongfully convicted between 1999 and 2015.
More on Post Office Scandal
Related Topics:
Sub-postmasters were forced to pay back false accounting shortfalls because of the faulty IT system, Horizon.
At the moment, the Department for Business and Trade administers most of the redress schemes including the Horizon Conviction Redress Scheme and the Group Litigation Order (GLO) Scheme.
The Post Office is still responsible for the Horizon Shortfall scheme.
Image: Lee Castleton OBE
Lee Castleton OBE, another victim of the scandal, was bankrupted in 2007 when he lost his case in the civil courts representing himself against the Post Office.
The civil judgment against him, however, still stands.
“It’s the oddest thing in the world to be an OBE, fighting for justice, while still having the original case standing against me,” he tells Sky News.
While he has received an interim payment he has not applied to a redress scheme.
“The GLO scheme – that’s there on the table for me to do,” he says, “but I know that they would use my original case, still standing against me, in any form of redress.
“So they would still tell me repeatedly that the court found me to be liable and therefore they only acted on the court’s outcome.”
He agrees with other victims who want the inquiry this week to recommend “taking the bad piece out” of redress schemes.
“The bad piece is the company – Post Office Limited,” he continues, “and the government – they need to be outside.
“When somebody goes to court, even if it’s a case against the Department for Business and Trade (DBT), when they go to court DBT do not decide what the outcome is.
“A judge decides, a third party decides, a right-minded individual a fair individual, that’s what needs to happen.”
Image: Pic: AP
Mr Castleton is also taking legal action against the Post Office and Fujitsu – the first individual victim to sue the organisations for compensation and “vindication” in court.
“I want to hear why it happened, to hear what I believe to be the truth, to hear what they believe to be the truth and let the judge decide.”
Neil Hudgell, a lawyer for victims, said he expects the first inquiry report this week may be “really rather damning” of the redress claim process describing “inconsistencies”, “bureaucracy” and “delays”.
“The over-lawyeringness of it,” he adds, “the minute analysis, micro-analysis of detail, the inability to give people fully the benefit of doubt.
“All those things I think are going to be part and parcel of what Sir Wynn says about compensation.
“And we would hope, not going to say expect because history’s not great, we would hope it’s a springboard to an acceleration, a meaningful acceleration of that process.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
11:28
June: Post Office knew about faulty IT system
A Department for Business and Trade spokesperson said they were “grateful” for the inquiry’s work describing “the immeasurable suffering” victims endured.
Their statement continued: “This government has quadrupled the total amount paid to affected postmasters to provide them with full and fair redress, with more than £1bn having now been paid to thousands of claimants.
“We will also continue to work with the Post Office, who have already written to over 24,000 postmasters, to ensure that everyone who may be eligible for redress is given the opportunity to apply for it.”