NYT reviews KPMG confidential report: $12.26 billion in Venezuelan oil revenue flowed into U.S.-controlled escrow account
A confidential KPMG report reviewed by The New York Times shows that from January 3 of this year, the day of the U.S. military intervention that toppled Nicolás Maduro, through the end of September, the “Venezuela Custody Account” set up by the U.S. Treasury Department received a cumulative $12.26 billion in deposits, mainly from Venezuelan natural resource export revenue, with crude oil sales accounting for the vast majority.
The account was originally set up in Qatar and moved to Citibank in New York at the end of January. The report shows that the vast majority of the funds were returned to Venezuela shortly after receipt, with about $11.7 billion used through foreign-exchange auctions at Venezuelan commercial banks to support the bolívar exchange rate. As of September 30, the account balance was about $170 million, and it generated about $12 million in interest during the period.
Each transaction had to be jointly approved by officials from the U.S. State Department and Treasury Department, and could be disbursed only after it was confirmed to meet financial integrity standards. After the Venezuelan central bank submitted an application, U.S. officials released the funds on that basis. Commodity traders Trafigura and Vitol together contributed 61% of the account’s deposits; the account also received smaller amounts of revenue from mineral and fertilizer sales, including about $100 million deposited by Trafigura to purchase Venezuelan gold. The report was prepared by KPMG at the request of the U.S. government.
Original source:
Title: U.S. received $12 billion in Venezuelan oil revenues, secret report shows Publisher: Tyler Pager and Anatoly Kurmanaev, The New York Times (reprinted by The Philadelphia Inquirer) Publication date: 2026-11-10 URL: https://www.inquirer.com/news/nation-world/veneuela-oil-natural-resource-revenues-us-receive-disburse-kmg-report-rubio-20261110.html Source type: media report Verification status: I actually read the key full-text passages for this report (as of 2026-11-10); the content is consistent with the way multiple English-language media outlets have paraphrased it, and the original NYT link is https://www.nytimes.com/2026/11/10/world/americas/us-venezuela-oil-trump.html Supporting content: supports all core facts in the body, including the $12.26 billion in deposits, the establishment and relocation of the account, the return use of the funds ($11.7 billion used for foreign-exchange auctions), the balance and interest, the approval mechanism, Trafigura/Vitol’s share, and the source of the report.
ABAB AI Insight
After the U.S. military intervention on January 3, the U.S. quickly established the “Foreign Government Deposit Funds” framework in Executive Order 14373, issued on January 9, explicitly defining the relevant funds as Venezuelan sovereign property, to be held by the United States in custody, and prohibiting creditors from attaching them. Secretary of State Marco Rubio had previously said publicly on multiple occasions that large amounts of oil revenue during the Maduro era were eroded by corruption and middlemen; the KPMG report provides the most detailed officially commissioned record of the post-intervention fund flows, showing that although the money quickly flowed back, the U.S. retained the final decision on each disbursement.
The capital path is clear: buyers of crude oil and other resources, initially led by Trafigura and Vitol, which had obtained U.S. licenses, deposited the proceeds into an account controlled by the United States; after the Venezuelan central bank submitted an application, the funds were sent back for foreign-exchange auctions following joint review by the State Department and Treasury Department. This structure gave the United States veto power over the use of the revenue while maintaining the legal phrasing that the funds still belonged to Venezuela. Trafigura and Vitol were invited by the U.S. government in January and received licenses, taking charge of initial marketing and logistics, and thus playing a dominant role in the restart of exports, accounting for 61% of the deposits through the end of September.
Similar to the escrow-account mechanism for Iranian oil in the 2010s, buyer payments went into a third-party-controlled account and were then released under conditions, in order to maintain trade under sanctions or political intervention. The difference is that the Venezuelan case took place after direct military intervention and regime change, and the account was set up directly by the U.S. Treasury Department and audited by KPMG, rather than under a multilateral arrangement; Congress had repeatedly requested the audit results before the report was disclosed, but the relevant documents remained unpublished.
This disclosure changed expectations about transparency: after the midterm elections, Democrats will control both chambers of Congress in January next year, and they have already publicly pledged to strengthen oversight of Venezuela policy. Independent estimates partially corroborate the rapid return of funds and their use to support the exchange rate, but the report did not disclose the final beneficiaries of the foreign-exchange auctions; earlier reporting by The New York Times showed that large amounts of U.S. dollars ultimately flowed to a small number of agricultural and consumer-goods companies, while small and medium-sized enterprises still had difficulty obtaining foreign exchange. Although the funds flowed back, U.S. control over the timing and recipients of disbursements gives Washington substantial leverage over Venezuela’s fiscal revenue.
ABAB News · Laws of cognition
Rapid return of funds does not mean giving up control; approval authority still remains in the hands of the custodian.
Traders that obtain exclusive early marketing licenses often capture the largest share of subsequent revenue flows.
An executive order can simultaneously assert sovereign ownership of the funds and retain veto power over disbursements.