A sweeping plan to reconstruct Gaza, which has been shared with Trump administration officials, features the names and logos of more than two dozen companies—some of which tell WIRED they had no knowledge they were named or involved.

The presentation outlining the plan was reportedly created by some of the businessmen who helped ideate what became the controversial nonprofit the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, which is currently leading aid distribution in Gaza, calling for the creation of a new entity called the Gaza Reconstitution, Economic Acceleration and Transformation (GREAT) Trust.

In the presentation, logos from Tesla, Amazon Web Services, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) appear alongside bullet points about the benefit “private industry investment” may have in Gaza in terms of building out “key infrastructure” like data centers and “gigafactories.” On one slide, the logos of several companies, including Ikea, appear alongside descriptions of large-scale “infrastructure rebuild” and “peacekeeping (optional)” in Gaza.

WIRED contacted the 28 companies shown alongside proposals for construction, security, and private-sector investment in postwar Gaza—sectors that would be among the first to mobilize if the plans were to be set in motion. Of the companies that responded, zero said they were aware of their names and logos being used in this proposal.

Eight of those companies replied to WIRED and said that they had not been in contact with anyone who developed the presentation or made even informal plans or agreements with them. Some had absolutely no knowledge they were named in this plan.

“This was surprising and new information for us,” Ikea spokesperson Arvid Stigland tells WIRED. “We have not approved the use of the Ikea logo in this context.”

“TSMC is not associated with this proposal and did not consent to the use of its logo,” a company spokesperson told WIRED.

InterContinental Hotels Group spokesperson Mike Ward tells WIRED that the company “has had no involvement in this document and is not pursuing any plans connected to it.”

Tesla, Amazon, and Constellis did not respond to requests for comment.

Of the security contractors mentioned in the presentation, only G4S responded to WIRED’s query. It denied any association with any current or future group called “the GREAT Trust.” “We have had no communications thus far and have no plans to participate in security services in Gaza,” a G4S spokesperson tells WIRED.

A person with knowledge of the presentation, who requested anonymity in order to speak freely, said that it was created as a form of market research, demonstrating which companies could contribute to redevelopment rather than which ones had discussed or agreed to anything.

The presentation—which was first cited in July by the Financial Times and was published in full the next month by The Washington Post—was developed by the same people who proposed what would become the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), the primary entity distributing food and medical aid in Gaza. Doctors Without Borders has accused the GHF, which was founded earlier this year, of attempting to bypass the UN’s existing systems for aid distribution. A former contractor for UG Solutions, which was hired to provide security for GHF, has also alleged that the foundation’s contractors shot at unarmed Palestinians. The GHF has claimed that no Gazan civilians were shot at by UG Solutions personnel.

Per the presentation, the GREAT Trust would lead a “US-led multi-lateral custodianship” over the Gaza strip. It says the GHF would play an essential role in hiring “private contractors to distribute aid security and build and operate temporary housing zones” in coordination with the Israel Defense Forces.

It’s unclear how Trump officials view the plans in the presentation, but the people who put it together appear to have significant sway inside Israel. Middle East Eye reported that the presentation was developed by Michael Eisenberg, cofounder and general partner at the venture capital firm Aleph; Liran Tancman, a tech entrepreneur and investor; and one other individual. (This person’s initials, “TF,” appear alongside Eisenberg’s and Tancman’s in the presentation, but TF has not been identified.) Eisenberg and Tancman are part of an informal network of businessmen who helped conceive and set up what became the GHF. Some people in this network, including Tancman, have joined the Coordination of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT), the primary Israeli agency overseeing aid deliveries in Gaza and the West Bank.

Eisenberg said that he could not comment on this story. Tancman also declined to comment; however, the presentation’s metadata indicates that it was created by someone with the username “lirant,” which corresponds with Tancman’s name.

A Gaza Humanitarian Foundation adviser, who requested anonymity because they do not have permission to speak with the media, said that they had not seen the presentation prior to WIRED sharing it with them. They added that they had never discussed the presentation with anyone at GHF, and they do not believe that the foundation itself played a role in developing it.

In a statement sent after publication, GHF denied any past or present involvement in the development of the presentation, and said that Eisenberg and Tancman are “not involved in operations” of the foundation.

The GREAT Trust Plan

Given the scale of the GREAT Trust proposal, if it becomes the favored option among decision makers, the GHF and the people connected to it could see their influence and reach in the region grow significantly.

The proposal calls for large-scale construction of data centers and “gigafactories,” as well as a train system that would appear to connect Gaza with Neom, the megacity Saudi Arabia is constructing on its west coast. It also pitches an “Elon Musk Smart Manufacturing Zone” for electric vehicles. Musk did not respond to WIRED’s request for comment.

The GHF was created in early 2025, having emerged from conversations between individuals such as Eisenberg, Tancman, and consultant Yotam HaCohen—who, like Tancman, is a part of COGAT. They were reportedly concerned that Hamas was stealing aid meant for civilians, but an analysis by a USAID agency found no evidence of this.

Through conversations with Israeli officials, GHF began to receive on-ground support from two American companies: Safe Reach Solutions, run by former CIA officer Philip Reilly, and UG Solutions, run by former Green Beret Jameson Govoni. Neither responded to requests for comment.

GHF is run by Johnnie Moore Jr., a former Trump official and evangelical Christian. It was originally headed by Jake Wood, a former Marine who founded Team Rubicon, an organization that deploys veterans to disaster zones. Wood resigned after about three months, claiming that he couldn’t oversee aid distribution at GHF while “adhering to the humanitarian principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality, and independence.”

Alternative Paths

The GREAT Trust presentation is not the only business-minded plan for redeveloping Gaza.

Former UK prime minister Tony Blair has been linked to the development of an alternative plan that was leaked to the Guardian and Haaretz. Among other things, the plan proposes creating a Gaza Investment Promotion and Economic Development Authority, which would be a “commercially driven authority, led by business professionals and tasked with generating investable projects,” according to various reports of the plan, but it does not mention any specific companies.

Another group called “Palestine Emerging”—made up of an international collective of business executives and consultants—also created a postwar Gaza blueprint. It does not get into detail about investments from businesses abroad but argues that there will have to be a “phased development strategy” in the short, medium, and long term in order to rebuild Gaza’s housing and economy. The blueprint also mentions that there were “about 56,000 businesses in Gaza” before October 7, 2023, which were subject to “historical constraints” that limited their success.

“These constraints include barriers to movement of people and goods from the West Bank and Gaza, restrictions on aquifer access, and limits on mobile communications standards,” reads one section focused on these constraints. “They also impose low-quota restrictions on banking activities (e.g., cash shekel transfers to Israeli banks).”

Compared to redevelopment, however, a much more immediate concern is increasing the amount of food and medical aid entering Gaza. For many months, Israel has been severely restricting the number of aid trucks allowed into Gaza. The Integrated Food Security Phase Classification, a UN-backed system for addressing hunger, said in July that a “worst-case scenario” is playing out in Gaza.

Under the current terms of the peace treaty, the number of aid trucks allowed to enter Gaza each day will increase to a maximum of 400—but only for the first five days after the treaty is finalized, though the number of trucks may increase in later stages. The GHF adviser estimated that just 20 trucks entered the strip on a typical day.

It’s not clear whether the GHF alone will be expected to bring in many more aid trucks per day or whether that responsibility will be distributed among multiple aid groups, according to the GHF adviser.

The primary barriers from an influx of aid, the adviser adds, are whether the prisoner exchange proceeds as planned and whether the Israeli military speedily approves new sites to distribute aid.

There have been delays in these sites being approved. Mike Huckabee, the US ambassador to Israel, announced in early August that GHF would soon increase its number of distribution sites from four to 16. Shortly after, the GHF adviser claims, the foundation had readied plans on how to open the sites, but they say GHF lacked permission from Israel to do so.

“The proof of concept had been done at that point,” they tell WIRED. “And we really thought it was going to grow, but it hasn’t.”

Update 10/14/25 5:20pm ET: This story has been updated to include a comment from the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation.