It’s a political row that’s been simmering since the summer, and as the autumn leaves fall across Scotland, the bill at the heart of the matter remains unpaid: £26 million for policing and security during US President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance’s recent visits. The Scottish and UK governments are at loggerheads over who should pick up the tab, with each side pointing fingers and citing precedent, policy, and principle. The dispute has become a test case for how the UK handles the costs of high-profile international visits to its devolved nations—and the outcome could shape future diplomatic engagements for years to come.
President Trump’s four-day trip to his golf courses in Ayrshire and Aberdeenshire in July 2025 was, by any measure, a high-security affair. Just weeks after two assassination attempts on the president, security was ramped up to levels rarely seen in Scotland. According to figures published by the Scottish government and cited by BBC Scotland News, the cost to Police Scotland for Trump’s visit alone soared to about £20 million, with peak daily deployments exceeding 4,000 officers. The following month, Vice President JD Vance spent several days in Ayrshire, adding another £6 million to the policing bill. By October, the provisional total for both visits stood at £24.1 million, though some government sources have rounded it up to £26 million to account for additional operational expenses.
The Scottish government, led by Finance Secretary Shona Robison, insists that the UK Treasury should reimburse these costs. Robison wrote to Chief Secretary to the Treasury James Murray in mid-October, arguing that the visits “imposed substantial operational and financial burdens on Scottish public services, particularly Police Scotland.” In her letter, seen by BBC Scotland News and Sky News, she highlighted a 2018 precedent: “There is a clear previous precedent, where the UK government has supported policing costs for visits to devolved nations by foreign dignitaries.” She warned that a refusal to reimburse would “not only strain devolved budgets but also set a troubling precedent for future high-profile visits.”
The UK government, however, is holding firm. Their argument is simple: both the president’s and vice president’s visits were private, not official UK government business, and policing is a devolved responsibility. As James Murray told broadcasters, “These visits by the president and the vice president were private visits to Scotland and of course policing is a devolved matter to the Scottish government.” He added, “The UK government only pays for security costs when the visit is an official visit on the back of a formal invitation and that wasn’t the case this time.”
That distinction is crucial. In 2018, Trump’s visit to Scotland was part of an official state visit, with a formal invitation from the UK government, and the Treasury picked up the tab. This time, no such invitation was issued, and UK ministers say the rules are clear. But the Scottish government isn’t convinced. Robison’s letter points out that, official invitation or not, “any visit by a sitting president and vice president will always constitute a high-profile event.” She adds: “It is important to note that these visits were not initiated by the Scottish government, nor were they part of devolved policy initiatives.”
The White House itself muddied the waters somewhat by describing Trump’s 2025 Scotland trip as both a “private” and “working” visit. While the president did enjoy several rounds of golf and opened a new course, there was plenty of official business too. Trump hosted EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen at Turnberry, where they sealed a trade deal. He met with UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and First Minister John Swinney, discussing issues like whisky tariffs. Trump and Starmer even traveled together on Marine One to the president’s other course in Balmedie, Aberdeenshire. Trump was greeted by then-Secretary of State for Scotland Ian Murray as he stepped off Air Force One at Prestwick Airport. It’s little wonder, then, that Scottish Public Finance Minister Ivan McKee told BBC Radio’s Good Morning Scotland that it was “stretching the bounds of credibility to say that this was just a private holiday trip.”
McKee has been outspoken in his criticism of the UK government’s stance. “The visits were part of UK government international relations, with the prime minister formally meeting the president in two locations in Scotland during his visit,” he said, as reported by Sky News. “It is completely unacceptable to expect the Scottish government to foot the bill for what were clearly not private visits, as the UK government is claiming.” He went further, suggesting that the UK government’s refusal to pay is inconsistent: “The UK government never tires of telling us that we can’t afford to be independent… but they expect us to be able to pay for the visits of international dignitaries.”
The Scottish Police Federation (SPF), representing rank-and-file officers, has also weighed in. SPF chair David Threadgold told BBC Scotland News that Police Scotland does not have the budget to cover such unexpected, high-profile events on top of their day-to-day responsibilities. “My working assumption was the costs of Trump and Vance’s visits would have been met by the UK government,” he said. Threadgold warned that removing more than £20 million from Police Scotland’s budget would “have a really damaging impact on our ability to deliver across this country.”
So why was the bill so high? Several factors contributed. Security levels were unprecedented, not only because of the assassination attempts but also because the trip was confirmed late, requiring expensive last-minute shift changes and overtime. The visits took place at the height of summer, when many officers were on leave, necessitating the drafting of police from other UK forces—at extra cost for travel, accommodation, and logistics. Despite all this, the visits passed without major incident, a success for Police Scotland but a financial headache for government bean-counters.
For now, the standoff continues. The UK government says the rules are the rules, and without an official invitation, Scotland must pay. The Scottish government says the visits were diplomatically significant and that forcing Scotland to absorb the costs is both unfair and unsustainable. Both sides have dug in, and as of October 22, 2025, no compromise is in sight.
The outcome of this dispute will set a precedent for how the UK manages the costs of future visits by foreign leaders to its devolved nations. If nothing else, it’s a reminder that, in politics as in golf, who pays for the round can be as contentious as who wins it.
