Greatest investor? All you need to know about Nancy Pelosi's networth and investments amid insider trading allegations
Karoline Leavitt
has weighed in on the controversy surrounding former House Speaker and current California Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi's wealth. Speaking to the press, Leavitt said, 'She makes, I think, $174,000 a year, yet she has a net worth of approximately $413 million. In 2024, Nancy Pelosi's stock portfolio grew 70%, outperforming every single large hedge fund that year and even more than doubling the returns of Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway.'
So, what is Nancy Pelosi's actual net worth?
According to a previous report by the New York Post, Pelosi and her venture capitalist husband Paul Pelosi could have a combined net worth of around $413 million—an increase from $370 million in 2023. However, the report also notes that 'Pelosi's exact net worth is not known because lawmakers are only required to disclose in ranges.'
Explore courses from Top Institutes in
Please select course:
Select a Course Category
Management
MCA
Others
Design Thinking
Project Management
Data Science
PGDM
Leadership
Finance
Product Management
Cybersecurity
CXO
Data Science
Healthcare
Public Policy
Degree
Technology
others
healthcare
Data Analytics
MBA
Skills you'll gain:
Duration:
11 Months
IIM Kozhikode
CERT-IIMK General Management Programme India
Starts on
undefined
Get Details
Skills you'll gain:
Duration:
10 Months
IIM Kozhikode
CERT-IIMK GMPBE India
Starts on
undefined
Get Details
Skills you'll gain:
Duration:
9 Months
IIM Calcutta
CERT-IIMC APSPM India
Starts on
undefined
Get Details
Skills you'll gain:
Duration:
10 Months
IIM Kozhikode
CERT-IIMK GMPBE India
Starts on
undefined
Get Details
Market analytics firm Quiver Quantitative, which tracks daily stock values to estimate figures, placed the couple's 2024 net worth at $257 million, up $26 million from the previous year.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Unleash Your Creativity with Adobe - The Ultimate Design Partner
adobe.com
Undo
The discrepancy in these estimates stems from a number of undisclosed or difficult-to-value assets. The Post report highlighted that Pelosi's actual wealth could be significantly higher when accounting for holdings in a Napa Valley winery, ownership in a political data and consulting firm, and a stake in a Bay Area Italian restaurant.
A large portion of the couple's wealth reportedly comes from stock investments and timely trades, primarily conducted in Paul Pelosi's name. As of 2024, Quiver Quantitative estimates their stock holdings at $133.7 million, including shares in major tech firms like Apple, Amazon, Google, and Nvidia.
Live Events
Despite the controversies, Pelosi has consistently claimed she is not involved in her husband's investment decisions. She also supports a proposed bill to ban stock trading by members of Congress.
'The American people deserve confidence that their elected leaders are serving the public interest — not their personal portfolios,' Pelosi said.
Stock trading by lawmakers has long been a bipartisan issue, especially as many have seen their wealth grow while in office. During the COVID-19 pandemic, it emerged that several members of Congress traded stocks based on privileged information before it became public. Existing insider trading laws don't always apply to the kinds of briefings and updates lawmakers receive.
The proposed legislation would immediately prohibit elected officials—including the president—from buying stocks. It would also bar them from selling stocks for 90 days after the law is enacted. However, full divestment from covered investments would only be required at the start of the official's next term—effectively exempting a term-limited president from this requirement.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
5 minutes ago
- The Hindu
A.P. BJP spokesperson Vinusha Reddy selected for IVLP
BJP State spokesperson Vinusha Reddy has been selected as the Indian delegate for the prestigious International Visitor Leadership Program (IVLP), a professional exchange programme funded by the U.S. Department of State. The IVLP, established in 1940, is a foundational exchange programme designed by the U.S. to introduce emerging global leaders to their American counterparts and to U.S. society and culture. She was officially selected and invited by the U.S. Embassy in New Delhi to attend the programme. Ms. Vinusha Reddy made the announcement in the presence of former Rajya Sabha member and senior leader T.G. Venkatesh, Adoni MLA P.V. Pardhasaradhi in Kurnool on Monday. The 2025 IVLP will be held from August 9 to 30 on the theme 'Women in Politics and Civil Society'. Emerging leaders from 20 nations across different regions like Japan, Germany, Poland, Argentina, South Africa, Taiwan, Ukraine, Bulgaria, Singapore, Iraq, Palestine and Lebanon will also attend the programme, which includes civic engagement across multiple cities in the U.S.. Ms. Vinusha Reddy will visit Washington D.C., Boston, Massachusetts, Manchester and Concord, New Hampshire, Columbia, South Carolina, and Salt Lake City, Utah. The programme includes meetings with U.S. policymakers, women leaders, and civil society organisations to discuss initiatives promoting equal pay, fair treatment, and women leadership in political and civic spheres. The IVLP alumni in India include the present Prime Minister Narendra Modi and also former Prime Ministers Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Indira Gandhi. 'I am truly humbled to be selected for this global programme. It reflects India's growing leadership in promoting women's participation in governance under the visionary leadership of Prime Minister Modi. I thank the BJP for giving me a platform, mentoring, and offering opportunities at every step since I joined the party. It reflects the way BJP nurtures new voices, especially women leaders, and promotes our global engagement rooted in Indian values,' Ms. Vinusha Reddy said.
Economic Times
5 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Pakistan's Asim Munir crafts a new gambit against India
Synopsis Tensions escalate in South Asia as Pakistan, under Field Marshal Asim Munir, considers a multi-front strategy against India. Renewed US support emboldens Pakistan, potentially involving Bangladesh and India's northeast. Pakistan's military spokesman signals intentions to strike deeper within India, starting from the east. Agencies Asim Munir In a region long accustomed to fraught borders and historical enmities, a potentially dangerous new front is emerging in South Asia. At the center of this shifting strategic chessboard is Field Marshal Asim Munir, Pakistan's army chief and the de facto ruler of the country. Bolstered by renewed American support and emboldened by shifting geopolitical currents, Munir appears to be recalibrating Pakistan's strategy toward India.A recent interview with The Economist of a spokesperson for Pakistan's military provided a telling glimpse into this strategy. Lieutenant General Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry told The Economist that in a future conflict, 'we'll start from the East,' a remark that can be interpreted as a signal of intentions to open a new front against India through the eastern corridor, where the regime change in Dhaka has significantly altered the security landscape."Field Marshal Munir wants to bring it to the negotiating table," The Economist wrote. "Narendra Modi, India's prime minister, is determined to resist and has vowed to respond to any more terrorist attacks with further military action. Asked how Pakistan would react to that, its military spokesman says it would begin by striking deeper within India. 'We'll start from the East,' he says. 'They also need to understand that they can be hit everywhere.' The Field Marshal's grip on power may have increased since May. But so too have the risks of a bigger clash between South Asia's nuclear strongmen." A new axis in Dhaka Until early 2025, India enjoyed a relatively stable and cooperative relationship with Bangladesh under the leadership of Sheikh Hasina. Her administration had proven to be a bulwark against Islamist extremism and a reliable partner in cross-border security coordination. However, her ouster last year, followed by the rise of hardline Islamist factions, has undone years of diplomatic new political leadership in Dhaka has signaled a softening stance toward Pakistan, reviving old Islamist solidarity rhetoric and quietly reactivating links with Pakistan's intelligence services. Signs of renewed cooperation between radical groups in Bangladesh and Pakistan's deep state have emerged in the form of arms trafficking, madrassa activism and movement of operatives in the Chittagong Hill Tracts and border areas adjacent to India's northeast. While the statement from Pakistan's military spokesman could be dismissed as rhetorical bravado, the regional shifts suggest it may represent a broader strategic calculation that aims to surprise and overwhelm India by exploiting vulnerabilities in the east. Munir's strategic plan Field Marshal Munir's actions over the past year reveal a deliberate attempt to re-anchor Pakistan's position in global geopolitics. His overtures to the United States have begun yielding tangible results. His June 2025 luncheon with US President Donald Trump at the White House, followed by Pakistan awarding its highest civilian award upon General Michael Kurilla of CENTCOM, indicates a strategic reset in US-Pakistan relations. Kurilla had earlier called Pakistan as a "phenomenal partner in counterterrorism". Trump's mocking criticism of India -- including the imposition of new tariffs and the farcical suggestion that US companies would drill for oil in Pakistan which Pakistan can sell to India -- has emboldened Munir's camp. For a Pakistani military used to leveraging superpower patronage, this signals a return to relevance. Munir is now clearly positioning himself as a regional player who can assist Washington's objectives in Iran, the Islamic world, and possibly even in normalising relations between Muslim countries and patronage gives Munir both the diplomatic cover and strategic confidence to challenge India in unconventional ways, and perhaps even consider an expansion of conflict zones beyond Kashmir. India's eastern theatre The logic behind opening a front in the east is grounded in Pakistan's need to offset India's superior conventional power. By involving Bangladesh or using its territory to facilitate proxy operations, Pakistan could stretch Indian military resources and force the Indian leadership to divide its focus and assets between two fronts. The northeastern states of India, already dealing with porous borders, demographic sensitivities, and sporadic insurgencies, present exploitable cultural and linguistic proximity in the border regions of West Bengal, Assam, and Tripura allows operatives to move with a level of deniability not available in the west. Unlike the heavily militarised Line of Control, the eastern frontier is not bristling with weapons and surveillance to the same degree. For Pakistan, this opens an opportunity for deniable attacks, possibly through sleeper cells or cross-border militants supported by Bangladesh-based jihadi is not merely a tactical shift but a strategic evolution toward hybrid warfare, incorporating disinformation, cyber-operations and irregular warfare in areas where India's response infrastructure is still catching up. The shadow of Operation Sindoor India's most recent military operation, Operation Sindoor, was a significant departure from its earlier doctrine of strategic restraint. In response to coordinated terror attacks, Indian forces launched missile strikes deep into Pakistani territory, targeting nine terror camps and disabling nearly a dozen air bases. The action demonstrated both technological superiority and a willingness to escalate beyond the conventional limits of conflict the deterrence effect of Operation Sindoor appears to be limited. The Pakistani establishment, particularly Munir, seems to have interpreted it as a warning shot rather than a constraint. This may have catalysed Pakistan's shift toward asymmetric warfare, with the goal of circumventing India's conventional dominance. Indian intelligence agencies are reportedly taking the eastern threat seriously. Surveillance has increased, with military intelligence and border forces in Assam and Meghalaya placed on alert. Diplomatic engagement with key regional allies, especially ASEAN countries and Gulf states, has been strengthened to deny Pakistan broad-based Islamic world support in the event of another confrontation. Munir's pursuit of a multi-front strategy against India, involving not just Kashmir but potentially Bangladesh and India's vulnerable northeast, marks a dangerous evolution in South Asian geopolitics. His confidence is rooted in a reinvigorated relationship with the US, domestic consolidation of power and the perception that India may be overstretched or distracted. But this is a high-risk gamble. For India, the imperative is to preempt such moves with strategic foresight, integrated intelligence operations and a recalibrated eastern defense posture.
Time of India
18 minutes ago
- Time of India
What Harvard's $500 million rejection means for the future of higher education in the US
Harvard's $500 million settlement rejection could make a huge change in the American education system. In a dramatic standoff with the Trump administration, Harvard University has rejected a $500 million federal settlement offer, choosing legal resistance over compliance. The move is more than a high-profile rebuke; it's a watershed moment for the future of higher education in the United States, with ripple effects likely to touch every major university, student, and research institution across the country. A clash over more than funding The proposed deal wasn't just financial support. It came with strings attached: compliance with political directives involving diversity initiatives, admissions policies, and increased federal oversight. Many institutions, facing immense pressure, accepted similar deals. But Harvard took a different path, insisting that academic freedom and institutional autonomy are not up for negotiation. By turning down the $500 million offer, Harvard is betting on the courts and public opinion to defend its values. The university has already secured preliminary injunctions allowing limited research funding to resume, but the long-term outcome remains uncertain. Why Harvard's stand matters Harvard's decision sets a precedent that could shape how other institutions respond to political pressure in the years to come. 1. Strengthening legal resistance Rather than settling, Harvard has chosen to fight. This legal path could establish protections for universities that resist government overreach tied to federal grants. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Use an AI Writing Tool That Actually Understands Your Voice Grammarly Install Now Undo If the courts uphold Harvard's stance, it could insulate campuses from future political interference. 2. Sending a message to peers Other top universities that accepted settlements are now under scrutiny. Harvard's high-profile defiance may embolden students, faculty, and trustees across the country to resist similar pressures and challenge deals they see as compromising academic integrity. 3. Reframing public debate Harvard has turned a behind-closed-doors negotiation into a public battle over the soul of higher education. The resulting media coverage, campus protests, and political commentary have reignited national conversations about who controls America's universities—and at what cost. The cost of defiance Choosing principle over funding has immediate consequences. Research projects remain stalled, hiring freezes are in place, and international students face visa uncertainty. Some faculty have warned of long-term damage to academic competitiveness if the standoff continues. Moreover, universities nationwide are feeling the aftershocks. Fearing similar action, many are reviewing their diversity and admissions programs, even in the absence of direct federal threats. Broader implications for students and scholars Harvard's decision affects more than just elite academia. It could redefine how students, both domestic and international, experience US education. For international students, the case raises concerns about the stability of visa pathways and the political conditions tied to enrolment. For American students, it calls into question how much autonomy their institutions will have in shaping educational content, campus policies, and student life. A turning point for academic freedom At its core, Harvard's refusal to settle is a stand for the principle that universities should be governed by academic leaders and not shaped by political directives from Washington. Whether that principle holds will depend on the outcome of court battles and continued public scrutiny. But regardless of the legal result, this moment marks a turning point. It's a reminder that higher education is not just about degrees and research—it's about values, governance, and the future of democratic institutions. TOI Education is on WhatsApp now. Follow us here . Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
