Billionaire midterm spending in 2026 set records that campaign finance researchers have not seen in a midterm cycle. Outside groups spent about $2 billion through the end of September, according to the Brennan Center for Justice, and a small group of the wealthiest donors supplied a large share of it. Voters have now cast their ballots, so the question for wealthy families and the advisers who serve them is practical: who paid for what, and what do those donors want from policy in 2027?
This article sets out the reported figures behind billionaire midterm spending, the industries behind the biggest checks, and the limits of what donations can prove. Totals will keep changing as post-election filings arrive, so every number below carries its source
Billionaire Midterm Spending Hits a Record
Independent expenditures by super PACs and other outside groups reached about $2 billion through September 2026. The Brennan Center calculates that this is up 51% from the last midterm cycle after adjusting for inflation. It also cites The New York Times in reporting that dark money, meaning spending by groups that do not disclose their donors, has passed $1 billion.
Fast Company’s review of the results puts super PAC spending above $2 billion as well, more than 50% higher than in earlier cycles. A CNBC analysis of megadonors reached a similar conclusion about the cycle’s scale and its mix of donors, finding that Republican megadonors dominated and that crypto and AI money surged.
The money was also concentrated. A few dozen donors and committees drove a large part of the total, which is why the list of top donors matters more than the headline figure.
The Biggest Donors Behind Billionaire Midterm Spending
The table below uses amounts reported by the Anadolu Agency’s November 4 factbox, which draws on OpenSecrets, The New York Times, Fortune, Forbes, and The Washington Post, alongside the Brennan Center’s figures. Most amounts come from filings through mid-October.
| Donor | Reported amount | Side or cause |
|---|---|---|
| Elon Musk | At least $366 million (Brennan Center); about $446 million in outside spending (OpenSecrets) | Republicans |
| Richard and Elizabeth Uihlein | $150 million | Republican and conservative groups |
| Marc Andreessen and Ben Horowitz | About $115 million | Brennan Center counts it as Republican giving; Anadolu lists both parties |
| Jeff Yass | $109 million | Republicans |
| George Soros and family | About $102–103 million | Democrats |
| Michael Bloomberg | About $84 million | Primarily Democrats |
| Miriam Adelson | About $68 million | Republican-aligned groups |
| Paul Singer | About $54 million | Republicans |
Two notes on reading the table. First, sources measure different things. Musk shows two figures because one counts money he gave to help Republicans and the other counts outside spending tracked by OpenSecrets. Second, the Washington Post keeps a running list of the biggest individual donors of the cycle, which is useful if you want to check a name that is not here.
For context, the Brennan Center notes that Musk’s total exceeds both his own $290 million in 2024 and the previous midterm record of $179 million, set by George Soros in 2022.
How the Money Split by Party
Republican-aligned groups outspent Democratic-aligned ones by a wide margin. Among the top 20 spending groups, which account for half of all independent expenditures, the Brennan Center finds that Republican spending is more than double Democratic spending. In 2014 the two sides were nearly even.
Democrats still had large donors. Soros and his family gave about $103 million, and Bloomberg about $84 million, both mainly to Democratic efforts. The difference lay in how much money flowed through the biggest outside groups and the party-linked committees.
Party-affiliated super PACs spent $494 million through September, roughly ten times their 2014 level. Two Republican-linked groups accounted for $280 million of that. The tilt matters for readers who follow policy risk, because the largest donors usually have specific priorities, and their preferred party now holds an advantage in the spending race. It does not tell you how any given race ended.
Crypto and AI Money Moves to the Center
The most distinctive feature of this year’s billionaire midterm spending was the weight of two industries. According to Fast Company, the crypto-funded group Fairshake spent about $154 million and backed 87 candidates, 77 of whom won or led. Leading the Future, backed by Andreessen Horowitz, Greg Brockman, and Joe Lonsdale, spent $34.8 million, and more than 86% of its candidates won or led. Public First, which is funded by Anthropic, spent $24.4 million, and eight of its 11 candidates won or led.
The Brennan Center adds that OpenAI and Anthropic together directed more than $55 million to primary races.
The record was not one-sided. In New York, Public First spent roughly $13 million backing Alex Bores while Leading the Future spent about $8 million opposing him, and Bores lost his primary to Micah Lasher. Fairshake spent $19.7 million against Sherrod Brown, and Brown won. Fast Company’s conclusion is that AI-linked groups won most of their races, about the same rate as crypto, even though crypto spent far more.
Public attitudes were more cautious than the results suggest. A September Pew survey, cited by Fast Company, found that 56% of Democrats and 46% of Republicans were concerned about AI’s impact, and more than 100 Democratic operatives signed a letter urging candidates to reject AI-company money. Fast Company also notes that the ads these groups paid for rarely discussed AI policy at all.
The Rules Changed Under the Spending
Two developments shaped how the money moved. In June, the Supreme Court’s decision in NRSC v. FEC removed limits on how closely parties can coordinate with their candidates. By the end of August the Senate Republican committee alone had spent $48 million in coordinated spending, out of $63 million across all four congressional party committees.
At the same time, federal oversight was thin. The Federal Election Commission lacked a quorum for most of the 2026 cycle, with only two of its six seats filled. Without a quorum it cannot investigate, impose penalties, or write new rules. The Federal Election Commission still publishes filings, so the data is available, but enforcement was limited while the largest sums moved.
What Wealthy Families Should Watch in 2027
What follows is analysis, not a prediction. Donors who spend at this scale usually care about a short list of issues: how AI is regulated, how crypto is treated, tax policy, and oversight of political money itself. Families with business or investment exposure in those areas have reason to follow committee agendas and early legislation in 2027.
There is also an internal question for families. Political giving is public, and large donations can create reputational and conflict-of-interest questions inside a family and its businesses. A short written policy on who may give, how much, and through which entities can prevent disputes later. Our Family Office Outlook 2027 covers governance decisions of this kind, including decision rights and conflicts of interest. Families that run an office also have to decide whether to track policy risk in-house or through advisers, and our guide to single versus multi-family office costs shows what that capability can cost.
Speak with legal counsel before setting any political-giving policy, because contribution rules vary by entity type and jurisdiction.
What the Numbers Cannot Tell You
Donations are not votes, and billionaire midterm spending does not prove influence. Several points deserve caution.
- Many backed candidates were already favored. A high win rate for a donor-backed group can reflect candidate selection as much as persuasion.
- Definitions differ. “Outside spending,” “contributions,” and “total giving” are not interchangeable, so figures from different outlets will not always match.
- Totals are incomplete. Anadolu notes that full figures await post-election reports, and amounts for individual donors may rise or be revised.
- Policy outcomes are not guaranteed. A donor’s stated preference does not tell you what Congress or an agency will do.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who spent the most on the 2026 midterms?
Elon Musk is the largest reported donor. The Brennan Center puts his giving at no less than $366 million, while OpenSecrets figures cited by Anadolu show about $446 million in outside spending. The gap reflects different measures.
How much did outside groups spend?
About $2 billion through the end of September 2026, which the Brennan Center says is up 51% from the last midterm cycle, adjusted for inflation.
Did AI and crypto money succeed?
According to Fast Company, mostly yes by win rate: Fairshake’s candidates won or led in 77 of 87 races, and Leading the Future’s more than 86% of the time. But several large bets lost, including the New York race involving Alex Bores.
Where can I check the data myself?
The Federal Election Commission publishes campaign filings, and OpenSecrets tracks donors and outside spending.
This article is for general information and is not political, investment, tax, or legal advice. Figures are as reported by the sources linked above through November 4, 2026, and totals may change as new filings are published.
