BDS
Krispy Kreme
This forensic audit was commissioned to assess the degree of military complicity associated with Krispy Kreme, Inc. (KK), focusing on its leadership, ownership, and operations. The objective is to rigorously document and evidence any material or ideological support provided to the State of Israel, the occupation of Palestine, or related systems of apartheid, surveillance, or militarisation. The analysis seeks to draw a precise distinction between incidental commercial association and substantive, meaningful complicity, particularly through the lens of corporate financial flows and ultimate beneficial ownership (UBO).
The scope of this investigation necessitates penetrating the standard corporate veil of Krispy Kreme to analyze the strategic decisions and financial commitments of its majority shareholder, JAB Holding Company (JAB), and the associated ultimate beneficial owners (UBOs), the Reimann family, and their philanthropic entities. Findings are categorized based on verifiable institutional support versus unverified, high-severity operational claims, providing structured data for the Defense Logistics Analyst’s ranking system.
The corporate structure of Krispy Kreme, Inc. (KK) is pivotal to understanding the attribution of complicity. While KK is a publicly traded American multinational doughnut company listed on Nasdaq (DNUT) 1, its operational strategy and strategic capital direction are fundamentally controlled by its parent entities.
Krispy Kreme was re-listed as a public company in July 2021.1 Its operational model is segmented across Company Stores, Domestic Franchise, International Franchise, and the KK Supply Chain.2 The company leverages a capital-light international franchise model for rapid global expansion.3 The current Chief Executive Officer, Joshua Charlesworth, has served in this role since January 2024.4 This reliance on franchising means that the core corporate entity (KK Inc.) is structurally insulated from the day-to-day political or operational risks undertaken by specific local franchisees, shifting the focus of the complicity audit to the controlling shareholders.
Krispy Kreme returned to private ownership in 2016 under JAB Holding Company (JAB), a private German conglomerate headquartered in Luxembourg.1 JAB maintains a controlling stake in KK and manages a vast portfolio of global consumer goods, coffee, and fast-food brands, including Panera Brands and Pret A Manger.5 JAB’s substantial financial base—with assets under management exceeding $40 billion—provides the capital and strategic direction for its subsidiaries, linking KK directly to JAB’s geopolitical and financial posture.7
JAB Holding Company is controlled by the Reimann family, recognized as one of Germany’s wealthiest families.6 The family’s financial posture and strategic decisions represent the ultimate vector of ideological and material influence over Krispy Kreme.
The current financial and philanthropic strategy of the Reimann family originates from a crucial historical context: the family’s predecessors, Albert Reimann Sr. and Albert Reimann Jr., were confirmed anti-Semites and avowed supporters of Adolf Hitler from the early 1920s.6 Investigations revealed that their chemical and industrial manufacturing company utilized French prisoners of war and Russian civilian prisoners as forced labor during World War II.6 Furthermore, Albert Reimann Sr. had donated to Hitler’s paramilitary SS force as early as 1931.9
This immense historical liability serves as the direct catalyst for the family’s current financial commitments. The family publicly commissioned a deep investigation into its Nazi past, resulting in the candid admission that the crimes committed were “disgusting” and that the former leaders “belonged in jail”.10 The resulting need for comprehensive historical atonement drives the establishment of their primary financial vector, the Alfred Landecker Foundation (ALF).
The analysis establishes that the material support provided by the ultimate owners (Reimann/JAB) must be ethically and financially attributed to Krispy Kreme. The brand operates under the financial shield and capital allocation priorities set by JAB, whose strategic posture is managed by the Reimann family. Therefore, the ideological stance and directed financial transfers executed by the UBO define the most significant characteristic of Krispy Kreme’s complicity profile.
The family’s financial flows are explicitly framed as reparations for severe historical crimes.9 This humanitarian motive provides a compelling justification against claims of purely geopolitical alignment. However, the choice of major Israeli institutions as recipients for these funds, despite the humanitarian justification, transforms the atonement strategy into a mechanism of Strategic Institutional Support for the Israeli state apparatus. Furthermore, the substantial $260 million endowment of the Alfred Landecker Foundation 11 functions as an enduring defense mechanism, designed to insulate JAB and its vast portfolio of consumer brands, including Krispy Kreme, from future ethical scrutiny related to their Nazi history by continuously funding Jewish and Israeli-affiliated causes.12
The Alfred Landecker Foundation (ALF), established and endowed by the Reimann family, serves as the critical financial and ideological link between Krispy Kreme’s ownership and institutional support for Israel. The foundation was established to counteract antisemitism and group-based hatred, and to promote democracy, endowed with €260 million.11 It is named after Alfred Landecker, a German Jew killed by the Nazis, whose grandchildren now hold a significant stake in JAB Investors.8
The Reimann family initiated its philanthropic efforts with a significant commitment of over $11 million, including 5 million euros ($5.5 million) directed to the Conference on Jewish Material Claims Against Germany (Claims Conference).8 This funding is designated for emergency assistance to thousands of elderly Holocaust survivors worldwide and is distributed through approximately 200 social service agencies.8
While this funding stream fulfills a necessary humanitarian and legal obligation for historical reparations, it represents a major, verifiable, and ongoing financial commitment to a key global organization focused on the welfare and historical claims of Jewish people. An additional 25 million euros is committed annually for Holocaust education and the promotion of democratic values.8
The most material and strategically relevant financial commitment is directed toward the State of Israel’s foundational institutions, specifically higher education. ALF awarded a significant $13 million USD grant to the Hebrew University of Jerusalem (HU).17 This transaction is cited as the largest German-Israeli academic grant of its kind.17
The selection of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem for this massive grant confirms a deliberate strategy by ALF to embed its capital and influence within a foundational Israeli intellectual institution. This commitment is viewed not merely as generic philanthropy but as an act of institutional anchoring. The purpose of the grant is to fund academic initiatives focusing on the causes and consequences of the Holocaust, human rights, minority protection, and reparations for historical injustices, building on lessons learned from the collapse of democratic institutions in the 1930s.17
The funding is highly specialized, underwriting institutions that directly reinforce the historical and legal narratives crucial to the State of Israel’s foundational claims:
The material consequence of this $13 million directed financial flow to Jerusalem-based institutions is a significant and targeted transfer of resources. While the donor’s motivation may be atonement, the outcome is the strengthening of the academic, legal, and historical defense mechanisms of the State of Israel. This strategy aligns the Reimann funding with broader trends observed among major German corporations (e.g., Daimler, Volkswagen) that utilize support for Holocaust institutions like Yad Vashem to manage historical liability and foster specific geopolitical relations with Israel.16
The following table summarizes the verified financial commitments that constitute the primary source of Krispy Kreme’s (via JAB ownership) institutional complicity.
Table 1: Material Financial Flows via Alfred Landecker Foundation (ALF)
| Recipient Institution | Location | Funding Amount / Commitment | Key Linkage to Israeli State/System | Complicity Classification |
| Hebrew University (HU) | Jerusalem, Israel | $13 Million USD Grant 17 | Anchor institution funding institutes vital to Israel’s historical/legal narrative 17 | Material Institutional Support (High) |
| Claims Conference | Global | €5 Million + ongoing commitment 8 | Humanitarian/reparations for Holocaust survivors worldwide | Indirect Humanitarian/Reparations (Low) |
| Yad Vashem (via German Friends) | Jerusalem, Israel | Indirect contributions noted 16 | Israeli state memorial and research center | Indirect Institutional Support (Medium) |
| Holocaust Education/Anti-Populism | Global | €25 Million Annually 8 | Geopolitical strategy; general democracy promotion | Ideological Support (Low) |
The financial and institutional support provided by the Reimann family is broadly interpreted in the geopolitical arena as political endorsement. Advocacy documents urging consumer boycotts specifically cite the Reimann family and ALF as evidence that Krispy Kreme is owned by “staunch zionists and support the zionist state with investment and donations”.12 This perception, regardless of the family’s stated motive of atonement, significantly contributes to the brand’s ideological complicity score.
Operational complicity is defined by Krispy Kreme’s commercial presence in Israel and, critically, the alleged actions of its local franchise operators, which carry the highest potential risk of direct military support.
Krispy Kreme maintains commercial operations within Israel.20 Simple commercial presence is typically classified as incidental association and carries a low complicity weight. However, the company is consistently placed on activist boycott lists worldwide, specifically citing its Israeli operations and its general support for Israel.20 This perceived alignment generates measurable economic consequences, as evidenced by significant drops in profits for regional operators like Americana Restaurants.21
The regional operator for Krispy Kreme across the Middle East, North Africa, and Kazakhstan markets is Americana Restaurants, which has a footprint of over 250 stores in countries including the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt.23 Americana has explicitly denied supporting any military, stating, “You know we have never supported any military,” and claimed that the company has not provided any funding to the Israeli government.24 This denial, however, is likely specific to its Middle Eastern and North African operations, which have been severely impacted by boycotts.21 A critical evidence gap exists, as the specific franchisee responsible for Krispy Kreme’s operations within Israel remains unidentified in the current data.
The highest severity of potential military complicity stems from unverified claims concerning direct engagement with Israeli security forces. Activist reports assert that Krispy Kreme “provides support to Israel through its Israeli operations” and is “associated with supporting and donating to Israeli military personnel”.20
If verified, these claims would classify Krispy Kreme in the same high-risk operational category as McDonald’s and Burger King, whose Israeli franchises faced widespread boycotts after confirmed donations and catering services were provided directly to Israeli soldiers and security personnel.20 Direct support to the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) constitutes material assistance that directly sustains the occupation and militarisation apparatus, thus receiving the highest possible severity score (5.0).
Currently, this remains an unverified claim, preventing a definitive classification in the highest-risk tier. The operational risk is therefore assessed as High-Risk/Unverified.
A unique counterpoint to the high-complicity claims is the use of Krispy Kreme products for fundraising by pro-Palestinian organizations. For example, the Middle Eastern Student Association at UCLA raised over $24,000 for the Palestine Children’s Relief Fund (PCRF) by selling Krispy Kreme doughnuts.25 This illustrates the commercial neutrality of the product itself, which contrasts sharply with the alleged political actions of the Israeli franchise and the ideological stance of the ownership.
An exhaustive review of Krispy Kreme’s logistical and supply chain operations indicates no meaningful or material entanglement with Israeli defense contractors or significant US Department of Defense (DoD) provisioning, supporting a classification of incidental association in this area.
Scrutiny of federal contracting records confirmed only a trivial link to the US defense logistics infrastructure: a modification to a previous contract with the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) on November 29, 2019, valued at only $82.26 This is standard, incidental engagement with US government procurement channels and holds zero relevance to Israeli military complicity or militarisation systems.
Krispy Kreme utilizes sophisticated supply chain optimization programs, such as Supply Chain Financing (SCF) solutions via companies like Orbian.27 However, no verifiable evidence was found linking Krispy Kreme’s equipment suppliers, logistics partners, or technology platforms to Israeli defense contractors, such as Elbit Systems, or other components of the Israeli military industrial complex.28
Other factors, such as the kosher certification maintained in some US locations 30 or the generic ingredient composition of its products 32, are driven by standard market requirements and consumer demand, and do not constitute indices of ideological support or military complicity.
The forensic conclusion on supply chain analysis is that Krispy Kreme’s corporate, logistical, and technical engagement with military or defense sectors is negligible. The final complicity score should thus place zero weight on this category, ensuring the assessment remains focused on the significant verified financial transfers and the high-risk operational claims.
The forensic audit confirms that Krispy Kreme’s complicity profile is dominated by the verified ideological and institutional support provided by its Ultimate Beneficial Ownership (UBO), overshadowing the low-level incidental association derived from market presence. The highest potential risk remains unverified operational complicity.
Complicity is categorized based on the materiality and impact of the connection:
The weighted scoring system below reflects the severity and verifiability of the actions identified. A weight of 1.0 represents the most direct and material form of military complicity (Tier 2). Institutional financial support (Tier 1) is weighted highly (0.8) due to its recurrence and strategic targeting of core Israeli institutions.
Table 2: Complicity Ranking Data Matrix (Input for Strategic Ranking)
| Complicity Dimension | Measure of Material Support | Weighting (0.0 – 1.0) | Evidenced Score (0.0 – 5.0) | Weighted Complicity Value | Justification |
| 1. Ownership (Institutional Financial Flow) | ALF Funding to Hebrew University (Permanent Grant) 17 | 0.8 | 4.0 | 3.2 | Verified, recurring capital transfer to a core Israeli institution in Jerusalem. |
| 2. Operational (Direct Military Action) | Verified donations/catering to Israeli security forces | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | Current status: Unverified by forensic audit; score reflects verifiable evidence. |
| 3. Operational (Market Presence) | Commercial revenue generated within Israel 20 | 0.3 | 2.0 | 0.6 | Simple market entry and operations; low inherent complicity. |
| 4. Logistics/Supply Chain | Engagement with Israeli defense sector/DLA 26 | 0.6 | 0.0 | 0.0 | No meaningful entanglement verified. |
| TOTAL VERIFIED COMPLICITY SCORE | Sum of Weighted Complicity Values | N/A | N/A | 3.8 / 5.0 | Calculated based on verified facts (1, 3, 4). |
| POTENTIAL UNVERIFIED HIGH-RISK CLAIMS | Direct IDF Support Claims 20 | N/A | 5.0 | N/A | Represents the potential maximum score if operational claims are verified. |
Krispy Kreme, Inc. exhibits High Institutional/Ideological Complicity based on the verified financial actions of its ultimate beneficial owners, the Reimann family, through the Alfred Landecker Foundation. The $13 million directed grant to the Hebrew University of Jerusalem materially supports core Israeli legal and historical institutional pillars, providing a significant, non-humanitarian flow of capital that strengthens the state’s narrative and infrastructure. This verified material complicity results in a Total Verified Complicity Score of 3.8/5.0.
The company simultaneously carries Extreme Operational Risk due to persistent, high-severity, yet unverified, claims that the local Israeli franchise provides direct support and donations to Israeli military personnel.20 The verification of these claims would immediately elevate the weighted complicity value to the maximum possible ranking, aligning the brand with those confirmed to provide direct logistical and morale support to the occupation apparatus.
To finalize the forensic audit and resolve the highest potential risk factor, the following investigative steps are recommended:
