Uber

Key Findings

• Economic: Uber retained group ownership of Uber Technologies Systems Israel Ltd. at 31 December 2024, invested in Tel Aviv-based Flytrex for planned U.S. Uber Eats drone-delivery pilots in September 2025, and announced a Munich-focused collaboration with Tel Aviv-headquartered Autobrains in June 2026.^{1, 2, 3}
• Political: Uber’s documented Israeli government engagement concerned historical market-entry and transport-regulation efforts; reporting does not establish regional-policy, settlement, or boycott lobbying.^{4, 5}
• Settlements: No public evidence identified of Uber, its Israeli entity, Flytrex, Autobrains, or Careem providing services in Israeli settlements, East Jerusalem settlements, West Bank settlements, or the occupied Golan Heights in the reviewed record.⁶
• Not found: No public evidence identified of an Uber contract, procurement relationship, or technology deployment for Israeli military, intelligence, police, prison, or other security bodies.^{7, 8}

Target Profile

Key Facts:

• Uber’s 2025 filing describes proprietary mobility, delivery, and logistics applications available in more than 70 countries.⁹
• Uber NL Holdings 1 B.V.’s 2024 annual report lists Uber Technologies Systems Israel Ltd., registered in Tel Aviv, as 100% held in 2023 and 2024.¹
• Uber stated in 2025 that it had no plans to launch service in Israel; reporting also described its 2023 closure of Israeli taxi-booking activity and a Tel Aviv driver-support centre.^{11, 12}

Executive Summary

Uber’s documented Israel/Palestine nexus is principally economic and commercial rather than military or security-related. The record establishes that the Uber group retained ownership of Uber Technologies Systems Israel Ltd. at 31 December 2024, although the reviewed materials do not establish that entity’s current workforce, revenue, operating function, tax position, office occupancy, or active commercial service.¹ Secondary registry material supports an active-company indication, but it is not an entity-specific official registry extract and is not sufficient to establish present operational scope.¹³

The strongest post-benchmark economic facts are Uber’s September 2025 strategic partnership and investment in Flytrex, a Tel Aviv-based drone-delivery company, for intended Uber Eats pilot markets in the United States; and its June 2026 announced collaboration with Tel Aviv-headquartered Autobrains for an approval-contingent Munich robotaxi programme.^{2, 3} The Flytrex investment amount, ownership percentage, governance rights, and Israeli operational contribution were not publicly disclosed. The Autobrains announcement establishes a commercial and technology relationship, but not a disclosed binding contract, equity investment, payment obligation, fleet size, operating launch, or work allocation to Autobrains’ Israeli team.^{2, 3}

Historic Israeli activity is also documented. Uber operated and pursued regulatory engagement in Israel during the 2010s; a 2017 Tel Aviv District Court injunction halted UberDAY and UberNIGHT pilot services, and Uber later suspended its Israeli taxi-ordering service in June 2023.^{4, 12} Reporting on leaked Uber Files records describes engagement with then-Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during a market-entry campaign, but the available record characterises this as commercial and transport-regulatory advocacy, not lobbying concerning settlements, regional policy, boycott legislation, or the present conflict.^{5, 14}

The reviewed record does not support allegations of Israeli military, intelligence, police, prison, settlement, or occupation-related service provision. No public evidence identified of a relevant Uber defence or security contract, military end-user relationship, weapons-related activity, Israeli data-centre or sovereign-cloud participation, or service operation in settlements or occupied Palestinian territory.^{6, 7, 8} Careem’s current Palestine-specific captain onboarding pages are web-accessible evidence of an onboarding channel, but do not establish active rides, volume, revenue, the responsible legal entity, or a quantified Palestine-specific economic contribution.¹⁵

On the fixed human-vetted V6.5 assessment, Uber receives a BRS score of 254, placing it in Tier D (Moderate Complicity). That outcome reflects the documented, post-benchmark Israel-linked corporate ownership and commercial relationships, together with the directness assigned to those relationships; it does not convert unverified allegations or report-scoped absences into affirmative findings.

Timeline of Relevant Events

Corporate Overview

Uber is a Delaware-incorporated public technology-platform company headquartered in San Francisco. Its disclosed operating segments are Mobility, Delivery, and Freight; the reviewed filings do not describe it as a physical-goods manufacturer or separately report Israel as a revenue geography.^{9, 19}

The group’s Israeli corporate footprint is unresolved in operational terms. Uber NL Holdings 1 B.V.’s 2024 annual report identifies Uber Technologies Systems Israel Ltd., registered in Tel Aviv, as wholly held at year-end 2023 and 2024.¹ Uber’s fiscal-2025 significant-subsidiary exhibit does not list that entity, but the exhibit is not a complete legal-entity register and does not establish dissolution, divestment, or loss of control.²⁰ Commercial registry presentations indicate an active entity and list Uber International Holding B.V. as shareholder information, but their data are explicitly secondary and not independently verified current registry evidence.¹³

Uber’s historic Israel-facing service footprint is clearer than its current one. Its 2015 materials and a Knesset report record activity and regulatory engagement, but 2023 reporting described cessation of taxi-booking service and closure of driver support. In 2025 Uber reportedly said it had no plans to launch in Israel, while its current Israel-facing webpages and legal portal remain available. Those webpages provide Israel-localised legal and support infrastructure, but do not establish active rides, delivery, freight, employment, office operations, or settlement activity.^{11, 12, 16, 21}

The two disclosed Israel-linked technology relationships are distinct from Uber’s historical local service operations. Flytrex is Tel Aviv-based and its partnership with Uber concerns civilian U.S. food and convenience delivery. Autobrains is founded and headquartered in Tel Aviv, with a Munich second headquarters, and its relationship with Uber concerns an announced Munich robotaxi programme. Public materials do not allocate Uber work, data processing, R&D, payments, or operational control to either company’s Israeli footprint.^{2, 3, 22}

Careem remains relevant to the Palestine record because Uber acquired its mobility, delivery, and payments businesses in 2020 and later increased its Careem Technologies ownership. Careem’s Palestine-specific captain pages are accessible, but the reviewed record cannot resolve the portal’s legal operator or establish active service delivery or economic scale.^{15, 17, 18}

Domain Summaries

Military: Military

Mechanism of Involvement

No public evidence identified of an Uber contract, tender, framework agreement, supplier listing, procurement award, or other documented relationship with the Israeli Ministry of Defense, IDF, Israeli intelligence agencies, Israel Prison Service, Border Police, or another Israeli security body.^{7, 8}

Uber announced a separate U.S. Army pilot involving authorised passenger rideshare access and base-entry credentials at six U.S. locations. This is verified U.S. military-adjacent transport activity, but does not establish Israeli military sustainment, cargo handling, procurement, or security-sector activity.²³

Uber’s Flytrex relationship is an investment and commercial integration for U.S. delivery pilots. The reviewed sources describe commercial last-mile delivery and do not identify a military-specified product, weapons integration, Israeli military end user, targeting function, export licence, or weapons effect.^{2, 24}

Counter-Arguments and Evidence Limits

Uber’s strongest defence is the absence of a documented Israeli military or security relationship in the reviewed corporate disclosures, public procurement materials, UN and civil-society documents, and focused reporting.^{7, 8, 25} The commercial Flytrex partnership does not itself demonstrate defence use, and assertions based solely on founders’ military backgrounds or social-media claims were not treated as verified evidence.^{2, 24}

These are bounded public-record conclusions, not proof that no undisclosed relationship could exist. The absence of text in a filing or on a public procurement landing page is filing- or search-scoped, rather than comprehensive proof of nonexistence.^{7, 8}

Named Entities and Evidence Map

Digital: Digital

Mechanism of Involvement

Uber operates large-scale mobility, delivery, and logistics applications and uses cloud and leased-data-centre infrastructure. Its privacy materials describe global processing, including on Uber servers in the United States, and collection of location, payment, device, communication, and certain biometric-verification information for stated service, safety, fraud-prevention, and development purposes.^{9, 26}

No public evidence identified that Uber workloads, personal data, drone telemetry, autonomous-vehicle sensor data, or model-training data are stored, routed, processed, or legally accessible through Israeli-controlled infrastructure. No public evidence identified that Uber operates or leases a data centre in Israel, participates in Project Nimbus, or supplies sovereign-cloud services to Israeli state institutions or military bodies.^{8, 26, 27}

The Autobrains collaboration involves autonomous-driving technology intended for a Munich programme; Uber describes Autobrains’ contribution as real-time decision-making software. However, the announcement does not disclose data rights, source-code terms, hosting, technical support allocation, fleet size, commercial terms, or work by the Israeli team. No public evidence identified that passenger robotaxi operations using Autobrains had commenced by September 2026.^{3, 22}

Counter-Arguments and Evidence Limits

The strongest defence is that the identified relationships are civilian, geographically non-Israeli in their announced applications, and not documented as involving Israeli state data systems, surveillance, intelligence, or military use.^{2, 3, 8} Uber’s Israel legal portal and historic entity evidence do not establish Israeli data residency, R&D activity, or access to Uber data.^{13, 21, 26}

This conclusion does not establish that Uber has no data processing anywhere in Israel; it reflects the absence of public evidence in the reviewed sources. Similarly, Autobrains’ Israeli headquarters establishes an Israeli technical footprint, but not an Israeli Uber programme workstream or data access.²²

Named Entities and Evidence Map

Economic: Economic

Mechanism of Involvement

The verified economic nexus is threefold. First, the Uber group retained 100% ownership of Uber Technologies Systems Israel Ltd. at 31 December 2024, though the entity’s operating function and financial contribution are not publicly established by the reviewed materials.¹ Second, Uber invested in and partnered with Tel Aviv-based Flytrex for planned U.S. Uber Eats drone-delivery pilots.² Third, Uber announced a commercial and technology collaboration with Tel Aviv-headquartered Autobrains for an intended Munich robotaxi programme.^{3, 22}

Neither relationship establishes activity in Israel or occupied Palestinian territory. Flytrex’s Uber-related pilots were announced for U.S. markets, and public disclosures do not establish investment size, equity percentage, governance rights, duration, delivery volume, or Israeli operational contribution.^{2, 24} The Autobrains programme is identified as Munich-focused and regulatory-approval contingent. Public sources do not establish a signed contract, investment, licence fee, payment flow, fleet number, active passenger service, or Uber-funded Israeli R&D.^{3, 22}

No public evidence identified of settlement-origin sourcing, settlement-linked procurement, Israeli government contracts, Israeli tax payments, Israeli revenue, profit repatriation, or a quantifiable Israeli workforce attributable to Uber’s current operations.^{6, 19}

Counter-Arguments and Evidence Limits

Uber’s strongest defence is that it exited the Israeli taxi-booking market in 2023 and reportedly had no plans to launch Israeli service in 2025.^{11, 12} Its Israel-localised pages are not proof of active operations. The disclosed Flytrex and Autobrains relationships are commercial links to Israeli-headquartered companies, but the announced work is U.S. drone delivery and a proposed German robotaxi programme, respectively.^{2, 3}

The retained Israeli subsidiary is a real group-ownership fact, but corporate ownership alone does not establish material local operations, revenue, employment, taxes, settlement participation, or a current local service. The absence of an official entity-specific extract limits conclusions about current legal and operating status.^{1, 13}

Named Entities and Evidence Map

Political: Political

Mechanism of Involvement

Uber’s documented Israeli political engagement is historical and commercial. A 2015 Knesset report records discussions concerning ridesharing regulation, insurance, and taxation. Reporting on leaked Uber Files materials states that Uber sought Benjamin Netanyahu’s support for market entry, and that Kalanick met Netanyahu in January 2016. ICIJ separately reported that Uber executives met Netanyahu during the company’s 2013–2017 global expansion period.^{5, 14, 16}

The reviewed sources do not establish that these contacts concerned settlements, occupation, military welfare, anti-BDS legislation, regional policy, or the current Israel/Palestine conflict. Kalanick resigned as Uber CEO in 2017 and left its board in 2019; the reviewed record identifies no continuation of the historic engagement after that departure.^{5, 10}

No public evidence identified of Uber donations to the IDF, Friends of the Israel Defense Forces, JNF/KKL, settlement organisations, reservist funds, or Israeli military-welfare bodies. No verified Israel/Palestine-specific Uber lobbying disclosure, corporate-PAC expenditure, anti-BDS intervention, or political-finance record was located in the bounded research.^{28, 29}

Counter-Arguments and Evidence Limits

Uber’s strongest defence is that its documented Israeli lobbying concerned entry into a regulated transport market, not geopolitical advocacy. Its current U.S. PAC and lobbying filings do not identify Israel, Palestine, BDS, settlements, or foreign-policy purposes.²⁹ No public evidence identified in targeted official-newsroom and social-channel searches of a company statement on Israel, Gaza, Palestinians, hostages, ceasefire, humanitarian relief, or civilian harm between 7 October 2023 and 7 September 2026.³⁰

Those findings are search-bounded. They cannot exclude deleted, unindexed, local-language, private, or otherwise unreviewed communications, nor do they establish the absence of private conduct by every principal. They also do not change the documented historic market-entry lobbying record.^{5, 30}

Named Entities and Evidence Map

Complicity Index Score

Method: V6.5.

• V_MAX: 2.91 Avg_OTHERS: 0.70
• BRS Score: 254 Tier: D (Moderate Complicity)

Economic is the maximum domain because the evidence establishes retained group ownership of an Israeli subsidiary and two post-benchmark commercial relationships with Tel Aviv-based companies, while leaving value, operational scale, and Israeli work allocation largely unresolved.^{1, 2, 3} Political reflects documented historical Israeli market-entry engagement but not verified conflict-, settlement-, or anti-BDS-specific advocacy.^{5, 16} The V6.5 method is scale-free and evidence-only: scores reflect vetted activity type, scale, and directness rather than allegations, reputational inference, or unverified claims.

Methodology Note

• This dossier relies only on the four supplied domain audits and their cited documentary record; each factual claim is limited to what those audits establish.
• Impact (I) assesses the evidenced activity type; Materiality (M) assesses documented scale; Proximity (P) assesses the directness of the relationship. The framework is scale-free rather than a measure of company size or public controversy.
• Assertions marked unverified, unresolved, report-scoped, filing-scoped, or search-bounded are retained with those limits or excluded from affirmative findings.
• Divested, exited, or historical operations are treated as mitigating context. Uber’s 2023 Israeli service exit is therefore distinguished from its continuing corporate ownership record and later Flytrex and Autobrains relationships.^{1, 2, 3, 12}
• Entity attribution is not transitive: a partner’s location, founders’ personal histories, a director’s outside role, or a subsidiary’s historic existence does not itself establish Uber conduct or responsibility.
• Settlement activity, if documented, would be assessed in both Economic and Political; no public evidence identified of relevant Uber, Flytrex, Autobrains, or Careem settlement operations in the reviewed record.⁶
• “No public evidence identified” means the specified audit checks found no supporting public documentation. It does not prove that no undisclosed activity exists.