← Markets

Will the US acquire part of Greenland in 2026?

Davos Vol. $10,521,511 210 traders

Yes5%
No96%
$10,521,511 Vol. Davos
Will the US acquire part of Greenland in 2026?
5% ▼ 3

Recent trades

23
  • 0x53f9…80b7 SELL Yes $0.35 1h ago
  • 0x53f9…80b7 SELL Yes $0.36 1h ago
  • 0xac4a…bf1e SELL Yes $4.05 1h ago
  • 0xac4a…bf1e SELL Yes $25.00 2h ago
  • 0xd640…480c SELL No $230.79 2h ago
  • 0x53f9…80b7 SELL Yes $0.41 3h ago
  • 0xac4a…bf1e SELL Yes $4.35 3h ago
  • 0x53f9…80b7 BUY Yes $4.99 3h ago
  • 0xac4a…bf1e SELL Yes $25.00 3h ago
  • 0x28b8…5e00 BUY Yes $2.00 4h ago
  • 0x5375…c1a1 SELL Yes $371.90 4h ago
  • 0x5375…c1a1 SELL Yes $1407.31 4h ago
  • 0xe581…5d56 SELL No $17.73 8h ago
  • 0x28b8…5e00 BUY Yes $2.00 12h ago
  • 0x3258…5650 SELL Yes $75.04 12h ago
  • 0x1129…6703 SELL No $0.98 14h ago
  • 0x1129…6703 BUY No $1.00 16h ago
  • 0x3f6d…a962 SELL No $87.00 Jul 28
  • 0x9702…ca89 SELL Yes $7.50 Jul 27
  • 0x9c70…eaf8 SELL No $3.36 Jul 27
  • 0x9702…ca89 BUY Yes $5.00 Jul 27
  • 0x90e1…4fdd BUY No $5.00 Jul 27
  • 0x28b8…5e00 BUY Yes $2.00 Jul 27

This market will resolve to “Yes” if the United States acquires control of any land territory that is part of Greenland by December 31, 2026, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to “No”. Only the transfer of sovereignty, or the acquisition of primary or exclusive jurisdiction or control qualifies. 1. Transfer of Sovereignty: This will qualify if a binding agreement or legal instrument results in a defined area of Greenland coming under the formal sovereignty of the U.S. (e.g., incorporated as a U.S. state, territory, possession, or other U.S. political classification), even if the effective date occurs after the market deadline. 2. Acquisition of Primary or Exclusive Jurisdiction or Control: This will qualify if a binding agreement or legal instrument establishes a defined area in Greenland in which the U.S. has primary or exclusive jurisdiction or control over the territory, such that the ordinary legal authority of Denmark and Greenland do not apply,except by U.S. permission. Such agreements or instruments will qualify even if the effective date occurs after the market deadline. 3. Use of Force: If the U.S. acquires primary or exclusive jurisdiction or control over a defined area of Greenland through force, this will also qualify. An announcement will qualify only if it is accompanied by or consists of a binding agreement or legal instrument (e.g., enacted legislation, a signed treaty, the signed text of an agreement, or an executive action implementing such an agreement) that unambiguously creates a transfer of sovereignty, or primary or exclusive jurisdiction or control, even if this transfer or acquisition takes effect after the market deadline. Non-binding statements, negotiations, proposals, frameworks, or MOUs will not alone qualify. Basing rights, access agreements, SOFA-type arrangements, COFA-type arrangements, commercial concessions, or other permissions to use land (including leases) will not alone qualify. Any qualifying U.S. jurisdiction or control in Greenland that existed at market creation will not count as new qualifying control. Examples of qualifying events include but are not limited to treaty or piece of legislation that makes any portion of Greenland a U.S. territory or possession, even if the handover date for such territory or possession is later); or, a Guantánamo-style arrangement establishing a defined zone in Greenland under exclusive or primary U.S. jurisdiction and control, where Denmark and Greenland’s ordinary legal authority does not apply except by U.S. permission. The primary resolution source for this market will be official information from the governments of the United States, Denmark, and Greenland; however, a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.

Comments

0xFE5dEB4BAEBf247469599446a4d485AB71c65941-1773446299588 Jul 13

polymarket perps, last few spots: 01kivwd2

Voidofhype May 12

A White House official told the BBC the administration was very optimistic the talks were headed in the right direction. Denmark has previously expressed a willingness to discuss additional American military bases on the island, and its foreign ministry confirmed talks with the US were taking place. "There is an ongoing diplomatic track with the United States. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs will not go into further detail at this time," a spokesperson said. US officials have floated an arrangement in which the three new military bases would be formally designated as US sovereign territory, according to one source with knowledge of the negotiations. The bases would be in southern Greenland and primarily focus on surveillance of potential Russian and Chinese maritime activity in an area of the northern Atlantic between Greenland, Iceland and the United Kingdom known as the GIUK Gap, the officials who spoke to the BBC said.

cadencede Apr 25

i dont understand the resolution, does a 99-year lease or military basing agreement count as 'acquiring part of Greenland'? i asked my agent at preftrade and it said: “If it requires actual sovereignty transfer, 14¢ feels high. Denmark has been explicit they won't sell. If a long-term arrangement counts, 14¢ might actually be low given the pace of US pressure.” i bought no!!

gakov Apr 9

How can people still buy yes??

B2-AIR Apr 2

Trump's Greenland framework announced at Davos in January is a negotiating position dressed up in diplomatic language - Greenland's government has said repeatedly and publicly that the island is not for sale, and Denmark has NATO cover to resist any coercive annexation. A security arrangement giving the US expanded basing rights is the realistic ceiling here, not actual acquisition. The 16% YES feels at least 10 points too high.

grandmasterprescriber Mar 24

no chance, have their hands full elsewhere

whumpa Mar 22

I forgot I have bets on this. Are people still betting on this lol

rugtastic Feb 10

No could be 99 to 1 and it would still be undervalued

BidenHenHao Feb 5

I think there’s zero chance this happens by year-end because the 2009 Self-Government Act gives Greenlanders, not Denmark, the final say—and they’ve already said no. Any move to buy them out would trigger a constitutional crisis in Copenhagen and a total meltdown within NATO. At most, we’ll see a new defense or mining lease, but actual "acquisition" is a pipe dream for 2026.

guacamole.nz Feb 7

The ham fisted approach did not work. Only way to do it now is by diplomatic means. First you got to wait a little to calm this thing down. Then you can start to cohecre and bribe Danish and greenlandic officials, slowly building political support within the country. Once you have gained some trust you explain how much better everything will be. Once the pie in the sky is clearly visible you bring it to the vote. I'd say it's doable in about 3 years. Very ambitious timeline. Just at the very end of the term.

WashedTrader Feb 2

It’s going to happen. All it takes is for US to build another base lol.

2017 Feb 2

Fill my order then lmfaoo u should really read the rules goycattle

Zenith-Nadir Feb 2

100%

Chromalts Feb 3

No, this is not about military operations on land, its about sovereignty of the land. No military base ever includes the agreement to own the land, they get to place their buildings and resources there, but a military base would never be imbued the powers to sovereign the land. This is not going to happen. and it definitely, categorically cant happen by just building a military base.

rontro28 Feb 2

Sh1t here we go again... robbing dumb american money to finance my european kid's transgender operation and his/her/their future marriage to a muslim immigrant

rontro28 Feb 2

Gambling away my potential here because our feminised western culture has stolen all my hope. Islam is a much stronger, brutal and male ideology. It will inevitably fuck away feminism.. western humanism was just a fluke in history of mankind. The more violent ideology always wins against a weak feminine society.

DarkEntries Mar 5

How's that going for you now?

SuckMyDicck Feb 2

Greenland is important to us gov in many aspects, most of people don't even realize how important it is I think US will make a deal as long as Trump

Chromalts Feb 3

If its so important, then why did Trump back down from the idea? He faced off with all of EU and his bluff got called. If you play poker and make outrages bets and somebody forces you to play the bets to the end and you then fold. Well then your strategy failed but also nobody is gonna think you were serious to begin with. By fol

Chromalts Feb 3

By folding, Trump directly told everyone, what he said about the importance of owning Greenland wasnt true. If there actually was any importance there, then why fold?

SuckMyDicck Feb 11

That's the skill how Trump does his business, e.g talk & apply sanctions back and forth. I don't know folding or not, but I firmly hold the belief he will do it. at least it's 40% chance or more.

Swatika Feb 1

After the Epstein files being released and a lot of concern going around Trump's presidency, I doubt a deal will be made

FermentedGoblin Feb 1

The odds have not changed since the release: https://polymarket.com/event/trump-out-as-president-before-2027

poliknomi Feb 1

"I think it's pretty well agreed to. I mean, they want us to do it (European leaders). I think we're going to make a deal"

semaphore Jan 31

hooptie's comment will drain your wallet

protonmail Jan 31

100% yes. Who can give me some be

predictiongodd Jan 31

Can someone tip me some money please? Gonna spend on food ^^

marketpredictor-411 Jan 31

who wants to loan $ to me I got inside knowledge. cant use my own cause ill get thrown in jail

ItsTroyeBaby Jan 31

My dog is cancer, pls donate 1usd😭

FermentedGoblin Jan 30

Trump has bought many properties during his life, he made most his money in real estate. He loves land and he wants the US to own Greenland. He wants to be known as the great president that got the US more land. His ego is whats most important to him, he wants that americans even in decades from now look at the map and think of the great American President that got them Greenland. On the other hand Europe cant really deny his request. They have made themselves very dependent on the US during the Ukraine War. They have now a very powerful Enemy at their doorstep and need the us for Energy, Trade and Security.

That.Black.Guy Jan 30

Really, vibes??!! You will lose your shirt in the long-term if you keep betting this way.

FermentedGoblin Jan 30

Its not vibes. This bet depends completely on human decisions. What motivates the people that are involved? What are their cards?

Splattt2 Jan 30

Trump laundered money with casinos for the mob in Jersey and condos in miami for oligarchs and then became a celebrity and sold everything he could put his name on. He has never been a good business man. He would have made more money taking everything he inherited and putting it into the s&p500.

cal-dairy Jan 31

may netanyahu cure your blindness 🥰

guacamole.nz Feb 2

Cool Story bro

chessbot Jan 30

Tip me a dollar if hate people who ask for tips in Polymarket comment field

0xD3AEE675c8273B171f0DC32843DA2aA08ecd7DC1-1766976431289 Jan 30

oh

DonaldinhoTrumpito Jan 29

Tough break for Yes holders : [link removed] As expected, Donaldinho was full of shit :^)

colorwheel Feb 1

you think some woman will determine the outcome of this contract?

0xa65467bBCe9A0A566E316CF2FA5b4Eb31d65538d-1768738723232 Jan 29

Sou lindo

Etanol Jan 30

feio

DonaldinhoTrumpito Jan 28

Bye Max, and thank you for your service !

cal-dairy Jan 28

Jesus Christ thats alot of shares 😭

bbetsbetterthany Jan 26

the us does not have a single territory in europe that has us sovereignty or where us law replaces national law all us bases in europe are host-nation bases under nato or bilateral agreements with no transfer of sovereignty

Bbrosa Jan 27

True. Even if the political will existed in Denmark and Greenland to transfer sovereignty to the United States, it would be a very protracted process. It is, in practice, completely impossible to accomplish by 2026.

FermentedGoblin Jan 30

Trump said several times that he wants the bases in Greenland to have US sovereignty.

FonkeyMonkey Jan 25

Can someone spot me a dollar please, i wont beg again

imtoasty Jan 28

get a job man

Etanol Jan 25

An American military base in Greenland does not count as a transfer of sovereignty and does not resolve the issue with a "YES" in this market.

Tsja Jan 25

This is so easy. Of course the US acquires control of any land territory in Greenland where the US bases are. Even in Europe where the US bases are, are in full US control.

bbetsbetterthany Jan 26

nope!! there is currently NO place in europe where the us has full sovereignty. the military bases such as the ones in germany do not fall under this statement.

Bbrosa Jan 27

Anything similar to the basing rights the US has in Europe would resolve as a NO according to the rules. "Basing rights, access agreements, SOFA-type arrangements, COFA-type arrangements, commercial concessions, or other permissions to use land (including leases) will not alone qualify".

0x6302CDd858D440062adE35c3902F12594265E715-1768310752269 Jan 28

If It’s so easy why don’t you but a bigger position? Sincerely curious; what doubt is holding you back? Is it the certainty of it actually happening in 2026?

HopeDisLasts Jan 25

Is there the same for Canada?

lulumon Jan 25

I believe in Trump

lulumon Jan 25

I believe in Trump

HexagonSun Jan 25

Sovreignty over military bases would turn this into yes or?

SomalianSheister Jan 25

Yeah it would.

guacamole.nz Jan 25

Timeframe to do this lawfully is extremely tide. Get this trough Danish and Greenland parliament is hard given how unpopular it is. Whoever votes this into law commits political suicide

Bbrosa Jan 25

It would take years even if there were a politcal will in Denmark.