Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, the Republican nominee for U.S. Senate, appears to have violated federal ethics law in significant ways when filing recent disclosures of his assets and liabilities, a review by ProPublica and The Texas Tribune found.
Paxton reported owning seven homes but said he earned no income from any of them during reporting periods. Yet all but one was listed for rent during those times, and some current residents and neighbors at those addresses confirmed that the properties were rented. Receiving rental income and not reporting it is a violation of federal disclosure law, three ethics experts told ProPublica.
Additionally, Paxton did not disclose mortgages for three condos at a Utah golf resort that federal law requires him to list as liabilities if they are not personal residences. He also valued an undeveloped plot of Texas land at up to $50,000 on last year's filing, but his business partner said Paxton's share has been worth about $1 million for years. Federal financial disclosure law requires property to be listed at fair market value.
What the Right Is Saying
Paxton's campaign has dismissed the investigation as politically motivated. Madison Cercy, a spokesperson for his campaign, said Paxton "has had a long and successful career outside of public service, including running his own small business as a lawyer." She called ProPublica's reporting "nothing more than a bad attempt to manufacture controversy where none exists."
Paxton declined to be interviewed and did not answer detailed questions about how he filled out the disclosure forms. His campaign has not addressed specific allegations regarding undisclosed rental income or property valuations.
Before entering public office, Paxton worked at a Dallas-area law firm and was a corporate attorney for JCPenney. His state financial disclosure for 2001 listed assets totaling no more than $170,000, according to ProPublica and Tribune analysis. By 2015, his household net worth had grown to $5.4 million based on records lawmakers subpoenaed following his impeachment.
Conservative commentators have characterized the scrutiny as a coordinated Democratic attack aimed at undermining Paxton's candidacy ahead of the general election.
What the Left Is Saying
Government ethics advocates say the apparent errors and omissions obscure the extent of Paxton's income streams, assets, and debt, making it difficult for voters to evaluate his finances as they consider supporting him in November's election.
Craig Holman, a government affairs lobbyist for the nonpartisan good-government group Public Citizen, said the disclosure gaps reflect either "pure sloppiness on Paxton's part or a deliberate effort to conceal some of his investments and property holdings."
Texas ethics and campaign finance lawyer Andrew Cates noted that at a time when voters feel anxious about their own personal finances and dislike politicians getting rich in office, transparency would be prudent. "If it were me trying to get people's vote, I would err on the side of transparency rather than not," Cates said.
Progressive groups argue that an incomplete picture of Paxton's finances could prevent watchdogs from evaluating potential conflicts of interest if he wins the Senate seat. The apparent omissions are part of a pattern over three terms as attorney general where Paxton withheld financial information that could explain how he became a multimillionaire and acquired more than a dozen properties across five states while earning a state salary of $153,750.
What the Numbers Show
In his new federal disclosure filed in August after receiving a three-month extension, Paxton reported a net worth between $1 million and $27 million. That range represents a significant increase from the negative $1.9 million to $11.1 million net worth he reported a year ago, before securing the Republican nomination.
The spike was driven not by acquisition of new assets but by reported increases in property valuations on several existing holdings.
Paxton's report omitted listing as assets seven properties worth approximately $5.2 million collectively, including Utah condos for which he did not disclose mortgages. He co-owns all known real estate holdings with his estranged wife, state Sen. Angela Paxton. The eight properties he did report are held by a blind trust managed by a family friend.
The valuation discrepancy on the vacant Texas land spans from $50,000 reported in 2025 to between $1 million and $5 million listed this year—a difference of up to $950,000 at the lower bound. Federal rules do not require candidates to report personal homes or properties from which they don't earn money as assets.
The Bottom Line
Ethics experts say voters should expect more clarity before the November election. If Paxton wins, an incomplete picture of his finances could prevent congressional watchdogs from evaluating potential conflicts of interest during his Senate tenure.
Paxton's campaign has not indicated plans to amend the disclosure or provide additional documentation. The ethics experts consulted by ProPublica and The Texas Tribune said reporting violations can result in civil penalties but rarely lead to criminal prosecution without evidence of intentional concealment.