South Korea’s Lobbying Efforts in the U.S. Revealed

Recent disclosures regarding lobbying activities have highlighted South Korea’s extensive efforts to influence U.S. officials, particularly in light of the challenging environment American tech companies face in the Korean market. It’s an interesting, almost ironic situation when you consider the vast amounts South Korea has invested in lobbying—$363 million over the past decade.

A new report details that more than $236 million of that amount came from state entities, which funded lobbying firms, strategic influence operations, and direct communication with American lawmakers.

This report, created by Brody Mullins—a recognized expert in lobbying who previously worked for the Wall Street Journal and won the 2023 Pulitzer Prize for Investigative Reporting—relies on data from OpenSecrets. According to the findings, South Korea ranks among the top 10 foreign governments lobbying in the United States, standing alongside nations like Saudi Arabia and China. Surprisingly, last year South Korea outspent several major U.S. corporations, including Amazon and Google, on lobbying efforts.

All this spending is happening as South Korea confronts increasing demands from Washington on national security and trade issues. Recent calls have urged Seoul to contribute naval forces to secure the Strait of Hormuz and to invest significantly in various U.S. initiatives.

What’s striking is how this vast lobbying effort contrasts with the experiences of American tech firms in South Korea. For instance, Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) has criticized the country’s treatment of the American company Coupang, describing it as “unprecedented persecution.” Neil Mehta, founder and managing partner of Greenoaks, which holds over $1.1 billion in Coupang stock, echoed these concerns, arguing that actions by the Korean government have cost them substantial amounts.

Coupang recently became South Korea’s second-largest private employer after Samsung, but it has not been without issues. The company faced a significant data breach affecting approximately 33 million customers, triggering lawsuits and investigations.

The report highlights an inconsistency in how Korean officials present lobbying expenditures to the public. While officials claimed the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy (MOTIE) spent around $3.4 million on lobbying from 2022 to 2025, FARA records indicate the actual spending was closer to $5.4 million. Mullins points out that these figures far exceed what Korean authorities have communicated to the public.

Since 2021, Seoul has employed 29 entities and over 180 registered foreign agents to navigate Washington’s lobbying landscape, including several well-known firms. These firms have provided access to influential former officials and lawmakers from both political parties in the U.S.

There’s a notable concern regarding South Korea’s struggle to maintain influence, especially with their growing relationship with Beijing. Former Representative Chris Stewart suggests that this could raise questions about how those ties may affect mutual interests. He emphasizes the need for Congress to scrutinize how South Korea’s approach could potentially undermine U.S. alliances.

Lobbyists have reportedly granted South Korea entry into some inner circles of Washington. For instance, one lobbyist maintained regular contact with the National Security Council on behalf of South Korea. Yet, Mullins observes that this investment hasn’t yielded the expected results—documented contacts with U.S. officials have been surprisingly low given the amount spent. For example, just two contacts were recorded over six months, costing Korea about $60,000 each.

Additionally, Korean officials have voiced frustrations over their inability to arrange meetings with key lawmakers, especially in light of recent investigations into how American companies have been treated in Korea. Representative Lee Ki-heon described this lack of access as “shameful.” Following the release of the committee report, officials claimed it was biased due to their limited access to discussions.

However, lobbying records counter these claims, showing multiple contacts were made with committee staff and that meetings were held to discuss relevant issues. There seems to be a disconnect between the amount spent on lobbying and how effective those efforts have been in achieving Korean goals.

It’s curious—and perhaps concerning—that for all the money South Korea has invested in lobbying and connections, they struggle to gain traction in conveying their positions effectively, especially regarding trade and national security. This raises an important question for Korean leaders about whether the issue lies in access or, perhaps more importantly, in the trustworthiness perceived by U.S. officials.