Dark Money Explained

What is dark money in politics?

Dark money is political spending designed to influence elections by groups that do not disclose their donors. The money reaches voters through television ads, digital campaigns, mailers, and policy advocacy, but the people who paid for it remain hidden.

The term covers a specific legal category, not a moral judgment. OpenSecrets defines dark money as political spending where the original donor is not disclosed to voters. The most common dark money groups are 501(c)(4) “social welfare” nonprofits, which can spend on elections without naming their funders.

Four Legal Turning Points Created the Dark Money System

Donor disclosure was required for most of the 20th century. Citizens United legalized unlimited corporate spending in 2010. The IRS stopped policing the nonprofits that channel the money. Super PACs added layers that hide the original donor. Four turning points built the system.

1. Pre-2010 Donor disclosure required
2. 2010 Citizens United
3. 2015+ IRS stopped policing nonprofits
4. 2024 $1.9B in hidden political spending

: Pre-2010 — Donor disclosure required (Voters knew who funded political ads). 2010 — Citizens United (Unlimited corporate spending legalized). 2015+ — IRS stopped policing nonprofits (Zero groups lost tax-exempt status). 2024 — $1.9B in hidden political spending (Record dark money. Both parties.).

1. Disclosure as a principle

For most of the 20th century, campaign finance law was built on a simple idea: voters should know who pays for political influence. Federal law required candidates and parties to disclose their donors. The system was imperfect, but the principle was clear.

2. Citizens United opened the floodgates (2010)

The Supreme Court ruled in Citizens United v. FEC that corporations and unions could spend unlimited amounts on independent political expenditures. The decision treated political spending as protected speech and created a wave of spending that existing disclosure rules could not track.

In the first cycle after the ruling, dark money accounted for 44% of all outside spending, roughly $127 million. By 2024, that figure had grown to $1.9 billion.

3. The IRS stopped enforcing

The primary vehicle for dark money is the 501(c)(4), a tax-exempt “social welfare” nonprofit that can spend on politics as long as it is not the organization’s “primary activity.” The IRS has never defined what “primary” means or how the percentage should be calculated. The de facto rule is 49.9% of spending can go to politics.

ProPublica found that thousands of complaints have been filed since 2015 alleging that 501(c)(4) groups are abusing the rules. The IRS has not stripped a single organization of its tax-exempt status for breaking political spending rules during that period.

The one time a court looked closely at the standard, it fell apart. On September 30, 2025, a federal judge in Washington ruled in Freedom Path v. IRS that the “primary activity” test is unconstitutionally vague, because the agency never fixed what counts as political activity or how much is too much. The decision binds only the parties and is likely to be appealed, but it puts a court behind what watchdogs had argued for years, that a standard the agency cannot define is one it cannot enforce.

4. Super PACs and shell companies added layers

Once super PACs became legal, donors could route money through multiple layers. A donor gives to a nonprofit. The nonprofit transfers to a super PAC. The super PAC buys ads. The voter sees the ad but cannot trace the money back to its source.

1. Hidden funders Undisclosed donors 2023-2024 ↓ $304M given to
2. 501(c)(4) nonprofit Future Forward USA Action 2024. Pro-Harris group. Donors not disclosed. ↓ $266M transferred to
3. Super PAC Future Forward (super PAC) Summer-fall 2024. Original donors hidden. ↓ spent on
4. What voters saw Pro-Harris TV, digital, and mail ads Through November 2024. Voters could not trace who paid.

Largest single dark money pipeline in 2024. Source: Brennan Center / OpenSecrets

Both Parties Built Dark Money Pipelines

Each major party has a network of nonprofits that fund affiliated super PACs. Neither has voted to dismantle the system.

The Democratic pipeline spent more in 2024. One dollar out of every six in trackable dark money went to Future Forward, the super PAC supporting Biden and then Harris.

1. Hidden funders Fewer than 100 undisclosed donors 2024. Gifts ranged from $2,500 to $35 million. ↓ $275M given to
2. 501(c)(4) nonprofit Securing American Greatness Created March 2024 by Taylor Budowich, who also ran MAGA Inc. ↓ $62M transferred to
3. Super PAC MAGA Inc Fall 2024. Pro-Trump advertising. ↓ spent on
4. What voters saw Pro-Trump TV, digital, and mail ads Through November 2024. Same mechanism, different candidate.

Source: Issue One; Brennan Center; OpenSecrets

The Arabella Advisors network, which operates five Democratic-aligned nonprofits, reported $1.51 billion in revenue in 2024. On the Republican side, Elon Musk spent more than $290 million backing Trump, though most of it ran through his own America PAC, a super PAC that does name its donors.

The four main super PACs fighting for control of Congress raised $71 million from allied dark money groups in 2025 alone. Through June 2026 that total reached $197.7 million, and about three of every four of those dollars went to the two Republican-aligned groups. Every Senate vote on the DISCLOSE Act has split along party lines.

Dark Money Grew 15x in 14 Years

Dark money in federal elections grew from $127 million in 2010 to $1.9 billion in 2024. A 15x increase in 14 years. The Brennan Center called the 2024 cycle “the most secretive since Citizens United.”

Hidden political spending in federal elections

Period	Value
2010 (first cycle after Citizens United)	$127M
2024 (record high)	$1.9B
Change	15x increase

The growth accelerated with each cycle. Dark money more than doubled by 2012, passed $1 billion in 2020, and nearly doubled again in 2024.

Dark money grew every cycle after Citizens United (2010)

Category	Value
2010	$M127
2012	$M309
2020	$M1000
2024	$M1900

Hidden political spending in federal elections, millions. Source: OpenSecrets, Brennan Center.

Direct ad spending by dark money groups peaked in 2012 ($309 million reported to the FEC). Since then, the primary channel has shifted to contributions from dark money nonprofits to super PACs, which eclipsed direct spending in each of the last three cycles.

“$1 out of every $6 in dark money that we can track was funneled to Future Forward.”

Brennan Center for Justice, New Study Shows Runaway Influence of Dark Money, 2026

300 billionaires and their families contributed 19% of all federal election donations in 2024, totaling over $3 billion. More than $35 million went to apparent “false flag” ads in swing states, built to look like support for one candidate while attacking that candidate.

Dark Money Shapes Governance, Not Just Elections

Dark money networks build party machinery, fund think tanks, staff policy pipelines, and finance litigation.

At Trump’s 2025 inauguration, AP reported that some of the most coveted seats were reserved for tech executives who had invested heavily in the campaign. Zuckerberg, Bezos, Pichai, Cook, and Musk were all positioned prominently. AP called the arrangement “a departure from customary practice.”

The 2026 midterms are already being shaped by dark money. Both parties are building the same nonprofit-to-super-PAC pipelines to fight for control of Congress. Through June 2026, their four main congressional super PACs had drawn $197.7 million from allied dark money groups, and Republican-aligned groups held roughly three of every four of those dollars.

The DISCLOSE Act Has Been Blocked for 16 Years

The DISCLOSE Act (S.3991) would require organizations spending on elections to disclose donors who give more than $10,000. It would close the shell company loophole, expand foreign money prohibitions, and require disclaimers on digital political ads, including payments to social media influencers.

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse reintroduced the bill in March 2026 with every member of the Senate Democratic caucus signed on. Not one Republican has co-sponsored it, and every Senate vote on it has split along party lines.

Only 2 of 50 states, New York and Connecticut, directly require 501(c)(4) groups to name their political donors. A few others, including Arizona, California, and Washington, have broader campaign-disclosure laws that reach some of the money moving between groups. Arizona voters passed one such law in 2022, and the state supreme court upheld it in June 2026, rejecting the main challenge while letting a single free-speech claim continue in a lower court. Most states still require nothing.

Requires donor disclosure

No disclosure requirement

Source: Brennan Center for Justice

501(c)(4) Donor Disclosure by State

State	Status	Detail
New York	Requires 501(c)(4) donor disclosure	Donors disclosed when a nonprofit makes political expenditures above state thresholds
Connecticut	Requires 501(c)(4) donor disclosure	Narrower regime focused on organizations functioning as conduits for election-related spending
Arizona	No 501(c)(4)-specific donor rule	The voter-passed Prop 211 law, upheld by the state supreme court in 2026, makes major spenders in state elections trace and disclose original donors above $5,000
Alabama	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Alaska	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Arkansas	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
California	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Colorado	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Delaware	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
District of Columbia	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Florida	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Georgia	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Hawaii	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Idaho	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Illinois	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Indiana	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Iowa	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Kansas	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Kentucky	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Louisiana	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Maine	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Maryland	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Massachusetts	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Michigan	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Minnesota	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Mississippi	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Missouri	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Montana	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Nebraska	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Nevada	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
New Hampshire	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
New Jersey	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
New Mexico	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
North Carolina	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
North Dakota	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Ohio	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Oklahoma	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Oregon	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Pennsylvania	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Rhode Island	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
South Carolina	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
South Dakota	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Tennessee	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Texas	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Utah	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Vermont	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Virginia	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Washington	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
West Virginia	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Wisconsin	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them
Wyoming	No 501(c)(4) donor disclosure requirement	Dark money groups can spend on elections in this state without revealing who funds them

Not all undisclosed spending is dark money

Dark money is a specific legal category. Not every political donation that lacks full transparency qualifies.

• Small individual donations are not dark money. A $25 donation to a candidate’s campaign is not disclosed by name (federal law requires disclosure above $200), but it is not dark money. It goes directly to a regulated campaign.
• Lobbying is not dark money. Registered lobbyists file quarterly spending reports. The money is disclosed. See our lobbying explainer.
• Super PAC spending is not automatically dark money. Super PACs must disclose their donors. The spending becomes dark money only when the donor is a nonprofit or shell company that does not disclose its own funders.
• Issue advocacy by nonprofits is a gray area. A 501(c)(4) that runs ads about policy issues without naming candidates may not be “dark money” under the strict legal definition, even if its donors are hidden. The distinction matters for regulation and enforcement.

The test is not “was the spending large?” or “do I disagree with the position?” The test is: can voters trace the money to its original source? If not, it is dark money.

Frequently asked questions

Is dark money illegal? No. It is legal under current law. The spending vehicles (501(c)(4) nonprofits, super PACs) are legal entities. The IRS has enforcement authority but has not revoked a single organization’s tax-exempt status for breaking political spending rules.

Do both parties use dark money? Yes. In 2024, Democratic-aligned dark money reached about $1.2 billion and Republican-aligned about $664 million. The pro-Harris nonprofit Future Forward USA Action spent $304 million. The pro-Trump group Securing American Greatness routed $67 million to Trump super PACs. Neither party has voted to end the system.

What is the DISCLOSE Act? A bill (S.3991) requiring organizations spending on elections to disclose donors above $10,000. It would close shell company loopholes and require disclaimers on digital political ads. It has been introduced every Congress since 2010 and has never passed. Every Republican senator has voted to block it.

What is the difference between dark money and a super PAC? Super PACs must disclose their donors. Dark money enters when the donor to a super PAC is itself a nonprofit or shell company that does not disclose its own funders. The super PAC reports the nonprofit’s name. The person behind the nonprofit remains hidden.

How do I find out who funds political ads in my area? OpenSecrets tracks federal political spending. FollowTheMoney.org tracks state-level spending. When you see a political ad, search the sponsoring organization on either site.

What you can do

1. Tell your senators to pass the DISCLOSE Act (S.3991). Name the bill number. Ask for a specific vote. $1.9 billion in hidden money shaped the 2024 election. Voters have a right to know who is paying. Use the letter and call script below.

2. Track who funds your elections. Search any political ad sponsor at OpenSecrets or FollowTheMoney.org. When you see an ad, look up who paid for it.

3. Support state-level disclosure reform. Campaign Legal Center, Common Cause, and Issue One work on disclosure laws in states where federal reform stalls. Only 2 states require 501(c)(4) donor disclosure.

4. Vote for candidates who support disclosure reform. Ask candidates directly whether they support the DISCLOSE Act. Their answer tells you where they stand on transparency.