Anthony Fauci's fortune doubled to $15 million between early 2019 and 2023, watchdog finds: ‘During worst of COVID lockdowns'
Dr. Anthony Fauci's fortune doubled — hitting about $15 million ($23 million AUD) — between early 2019 and the end of 2023 over the course of the pandemic, including 'during the worst of the draconian COVID lockdowns,'' according to records obtained by a watchdog group.
Fauci's net worth was about $7.6 million in January 2019 before COVID-19 hit and surged to about $15 million by the end of 2023, 141 pages of financial-disclosure forms obtained by watchdog group Open The Books revealed.
The doctor, who previously helmed the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, officially left the government at the start of 2023, later than previously known.
His first year of retirement was especially lucrative — when he earned more than $3.5 million alone, the records show.
'Dr. Fauci's assets soared during the worst of the draconian Covid lockdowns while families and small businesses struggled through school closures and lost income,' Open the Books CEO John Hart said in a statement.
'Now it's clear the cash kept coming during his first year of 'retirement.' He was rubbing elbows with groups like [America's Health Insurance Plans] flanked by taxpayer-funded security — even as his wife remained the top bioethicist at [the National Institutes of Health].'
Fauci, 84, earned the highest salary for a government bureaucrat before his retirement, taking in $480,654 during his final year. He worked in public service for more than five decades.
The Daily Caller first reported on Open the Books' findings.
Despite announcing plans to retire at the end of 2022 and testifying before a congressional panel that he stepped down from his government role at that time, Fauci's 'Application for Immediate Retirement' shows that his date of final separation was actually Jan. 6, 2023.
'I came back to the NIH in 1972, and I started off as a senior investigator to a section head in one of the labs to the chief of the laboratory of immunoregulation in 1980, a position I held until I stepped down at the end of 2022,' Fauci testified to the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic last year.
Fauci had corresponded with NIH officials in late 2022 and was told that his retirement would become official in early January of 2023, according to an email obtained by the watchdog.
Retirements from government often face delayed processing because of an arcane paper filing system that the Department of Government Efficiency has since worked to reform. Where did Dr. Anthony Fauci's earnings come from?
The financial disclosures do not fully explain the source of that money but provide some hints, showing multiple six-figure tranches of payments he pocketed throughout 2023 that totaled $1.15 million.
The payments include $100,000 in April 2023, $100,000 that May, $100,000 in June, $150,000 in September and $700,000 in November of that year.
While the disclosures do not explain why or from where he received those funds, it is known that he has delivered various speeches to special interest groups during that time, including to the National Association of Chain Drug Stores in April 2023 and the American Health Insurance Plans in June of that year.
Additionally, Fauci participated in events for World Quant, an asset management firm; Japan Medical Congress, and Eminent Series, for four events.
Around March 2023, Fauci also sold his book to Penguin Random House for $5 million, as Page Six reported at the time. The autobiography, 'On Call: A Doctor's Journey in Public Service,' hit bookshelves in June 2024.
That move coincided with revelations from a congressional memo that he 'prompted' a paper that dismissed the COVID lab leak theory.
Last week, the White House rolled out a new covid.gov webpage to promote the lab leak theory that posits that COVID-19 came from a lab in Wuhan, China. The website faults Fauci and promotes Trump.
' 'The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2' publication — which was used repeatedly by public health officials and the media to discredit the lab leak theory — was prompted by Dr. Fauci to push the preferred narrative that COVID-19 originated naturally,' the website noted.
Meanwhile, Fauci also landed a gig at Georgetown University as a distinguished university professor in July 2023.
Beyond speaking engagements, Fauci notched $50,000 from Columbia University's Calderone Prize and $40,000 from the National Academy of Medicine's Lienhard Prize.
His wife, Dr. Christine Grady, served in the NIH's bioethics department until this month. She earned a salary of about $243,749 in 2023.
Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has largely pushed out NIH employees who were close to Fauci, a central figure in his 2021 book about the 'global war on democracy and public health.'
Fauci had served as the head of the NIAID, one of the 27 institutes that make up the NIH, from 1984 until 2022.
After his retirement, Fauci benefited from taxpayer-funded security provided by the US marshals, something President Trump has since taken away from him.
The cost of that clocked in at about $15 million between January 2023 and September 2024, according to a report from Open the Books and journalist Jordan Schachtel last year.
'They all made a lot of money. They can hire their own security, too,' Trump said in January after yanking funding away for Fauci's and other former officials' security.
Fauci's lawyer has not responded to a Post request for comment.
Originally published as Anthony Fauci's fortune doubled to $23 million between early 2019 and 2023, watchdog finds: 'During worst of COVID lockdowns'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Age
2 hours ago
- The Age
‘There is more to someone than their data': The dating filter behind an online gender war
Dr Michael Flood, a professor specialising in masculinity at the Queensland University of Technology, says that shorter men 'experience considerable stigma and shame in relation to their height,' and that studies show 'genuine penalties to their professional lives, their working lives and their dating lives'. Loading 'The long and short of it is that being tall is prized in stereotypical masculine norms,' says Flood. 'Taller men are perceived as more masculine, more competent, more successful.' The professor says a number of studies show height affects men's involvement in society, including a study which showed teachers perceived shorter male students as less capable than taller ones, and another that found taller men are 'more likely to become corporate leaders' because of an assumed competence associated with their height. Flood says that the stigma associated with height is part of a 'growing pressure on boys and men' to meet traditional masculine stereotypes, with other factors like muscularity forming a 'rigid bodily ideal' that affects male self-esteem and dating habits. 'It may be frustrating to be instantly discarded on the basis of height. However, being instantly discarded is a pretty routine process on dating sites, and I would say in general, the bodily standards applied to women are much stricter and harsher than the bodily standards applied to men. Think of 'dad bods'. That's a positive term for a slightly overweight, middle-aged man. There's no female equivalent.' The 2022 ABS National Health Survey found the average height for adult men was 174.8 centimetres, or 5′9. For women, it was 161.5 centimetres, or 5′4. Analysis of the 2017-2018 National Health Survey found that 62.4 per cent of Australians incorrectly reported their height, with men over-reporting their height by 2.2 centimetres on average, while women over-reported by 1.6 centimetres. Similar analysis was not performed in 2022 as all height data was self-recorded due to COVID concerns. Sex and relationship expert Georgia Grace agrees that while men are subject to rigid and sometimes 'uncomfortable' standards, they pale in comparison to those applied to women. 'Speaking with a lot of straight women, being discriminated against because of their body, because of their weight, or their height, or the colour of their hair, or the size of their boobs, that's not new to them. Men are held to certain aesthetic and beauty standards, but by no means are they interrogated [equally to] women.' Loading In her role as a counsellor, Grace says that many of her male clients do not feel comfortable talking about body image issues. 'Everyone is familiar with the vulnerabilities that come with dating. We feel like a mirror is held up to the things that we're most insecure about. When you're really wanting to find someone, to connect with them, to find someone who you're also attracted to, it can feel so challenging and so hard and so vulnerable. 'A lot of people do feel insecure about the way they look, or they do feel vulnerable, or they do feel like there are these impossible standards and these sorts of new hoops that they're having to jump through, but I think it's really important for people to remember that that's a universal experience.' Grace believes the 'patriarchal systems' men are socialised in force them to conform to certain bodily standards, but bar them from discussing their struggles with expressing masculinity. 'So a lot of men are feeling down about themselves, but also isolated and unable to speak to other men about this vulnerability.' A spokesperson for Tinder says the height filter was employed as 'part of a broader effort to help people connect more intentionally,' while describing the filter as a test that may not become a permanent feature of the app. A similar feature is available on other dating apps like Hinge and Bumble. Salvaggio says that he does not use filters beyond the standard age and location filters. He says this was not to cast a wide net, but rather because he believes 'there is more to someone than all of their data'. 'When you add too many filters, you cut off the opportunity to meet someone great just because they don't match every single box that you have in your head.'
Sydney Morning Herald
2 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
‘There is more to someone than their data': The dating filter behind an online gender war
Dr Michael Flood, a professor specialising in masculinity at the Queensland University of Technology, says that shorter men 'experience considerable stigma and shame in relation to their height,' and that studies show 'genuine penalties to their professional lives, their working lives and their dating lives'. Loading 'The long and short of it is that being tall is prized in stereotypical masculine norms,' says Flood. 'Taller men are perceived as more masculine, more competent, more successful.' The professor says a number of studies show height affects men's involvement in society, including a study which showed teachers perceived shorter male students as less capable than taller ones, and another that found taller men are 'more likely to become corporate leaders' because of an assumed competence associated with their height. Flood says that the stigma associated with height is part of a 'growing pressure on boys and men' to meet traditional masculine stereotypes, with other factors like muscularity forming a 'rigid bodily ideal' that affects male self-esteem and dating habits. 'It may be frustrating to be instantly discarded on the basis of height. However, being instantly discarded is a pretty routine process on dating sites, and I would say in general, the bodily standards applied to women are much stricter and harsher than the bodily standards applied to men. Think of 'dad bods'. That's a positive term for a slightly overweight, middle-aged man. There's no female equivalent.' The 2022 ABS National Health Survey found the average height for adult men was 174.8 centimetres, or 5′9. For women, it was 161.5 centimetres, or 5′4. Analysis of the 2017-2018 National Health Survey found that 62.4 per cent of Australians incorrectly reported their height, with men over-reporting their height by 2.2 centimetres on average, while women over-reported by 1.6 centimetres. Similar analysis was not performed in 2022 as all height data was self-recorded due to COVID concerns. Sex and relationship expert Georgia Grace agrees that while men are subject to rigid and sometimes 'uncomfortable' standards, they pale in comparison to those applied to women. 'Speaking with a lot of straight women, being discriminated against because of their body, because of their weight, or their height, or the colour of their hair, or the size of their boobs, that's not new to them. Men are held to certain aesthetic and beauty standards, but by no means are they interrogated [equally to] women.' Loading In her role as a counsellor, Grace says that many of her male clients do not feel comfortable talking about body image issues. 'Everyone is familiar with the vulnerabilities that come with dating. We feel like a mirror is held up to the things that we're most insecure about. When you're really wanting to find someone, to connect with them, to find someone who you're also attracted to, it can feel so challenging and so hard and so vulnerable. 'A lot of people do feel insecure about the way they look, or they do feel vulnerable, or they do feel like there are these impossible standards and these sorts of new hoops that they're having to jump through, but I think it's really important for people to remember that that's a universal experience.' Grace believes the 'patriarchal systems' men are socialised in force them to conform to certain bodily standards, but bar them from discussing their struggles with expressing masculinity. 'So a lot of men are feeling down about themselves, but also isolated and unable to speak to other men about this vulnerability.' A spokesperson for Tinder says the height filter was employed as 'part of a broader effort to help people connect more intentionally,' while describing the filter as a test that may not become a permanent feature of the app. A similar feature is available on other dating apps like Hinge and Bumble. Salvaggio says that he does not use filters beyond the standard age and location filters. He says this was not to cast a wide net, but rather because he believes 'there is more to someone than all of their data'. 'When you add too many filters, you cut off the opportunity to meet someone great just because they don't match every single box that you have in your head.'
Perth Now
a day ago
- Perth Now
Anti-vaxxers need an injection of common sense
The teachers were already hoarse from shouting, coping the best they could with a gaggle of kids even more excitable than usual. 'Make a line and be quiet, knuckleheads!' growled Mr Woods. We were a squirming, '70s vaccination line, until scrawny Sean's turn. He staggered forward, put both arms behind his back and promptly threw up on the nurse and her trolley of medical paraphernalia. The class fell quiet at last — a pause before the deafening cheers. Public health is rarely glamorous. As with seatbelts, pool fences and speed limits, when your job is to prevent something happening, the credit is only theoretical. The most exciting outcome is a downward trend on a graph. This gives rise to survivor bias, which leads to people removing effective safety measures — precisely because they are working. Begrudgingly I went for blood tests the other day to prove my immunity, for the hospital administration. They wanted to see my vaccination card from the day Sean threw up, but Mum had filed it under 'not my problem' decades ago. As a nurse expertly drew my blood, I thought of Edward Jenner — not Kim Kardashian's uncle, but the 18th-century physician. A thoughtful scientist, Jenner heard that milk maids who contracted cowpox did not suffer from the similar, but far more severe disease of smallpox. He grabbed a school kid, infected them with cowpox, then later smallpox — ah the good old days — and voila, the kid was fine. 'We are getting through COVID-19 so far with much better outcomes than the rest of world, because we delayed infection until after vaccination' says Andrew Miller. Credit: Adobe Stock / Mia B/ - stock.a Jenner had invented vaccination, and just like that — anti-vaxxers. With every medicine, there can be side effects and problems, but his initiative has saved more humans from death and disability than any other medical intervention, by a long shot. There are 27 main vaccines available for preventable diseases in Australia and together they form one pillar of our good fortune. Our children rarely die early, and some cancers — such as cervical — are in rapid decline. We are getting through COVID-19 so far with much better outcomes than the rest of world, because we delayed infection until after vaccination. It is dark news indeed that Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jnr has replaced the world-recognised experts of the US Advisory Committee for Immunisation Practices with an oddball assortment including anti-vaxxers and public health sceptics. Among them, Professor Martin Kulldorff, co-author of the infamous 'let-it-rip and see who survives' Great Barrington Declaration plan for COVID-19. Also, Vicky Pebsworth, a nurse who asserts that much of the chronic disease burden in the US was caused by vaccination. Then there is Dr Robert Malone, who weighed in on the April measles death of unvaccinated eight-year-old Texan Daisy Hildebrand, minimising the danger of the virus and spreading debunked claims about the MMR vaccine. Malone claims that it was botched treatment, not measles, that led to her death. The problem for Australia is that vaccine hesitancy is contagious online, and it's easier to not get a jab than to bother. Normal people are busy and just want the best for their kids. Our slothful governments are not investing enough money, ingenuity and passion in public health promotion. To maintain herd immunity, where those few who cannot be vaccinated are protected because almost everyone else is, we need coverage of over 95 per cent of the population with MMR vaccine. Our fortunate population has little experience of children dying from infectious diseases, so can be prompted to wonder if vaccines are strictly necessary, or worse, if they might be causing more harm than good. With well-resourced misinformation it would not be hard to give measles the comeback nobody needs. Jenner might have dared dream that 200 years after his invention we could have eliminated most plagues. Unfortunately, that would have accorded too much wisdom to our species. Yet may we hope, as there are many countries like ours watching on in horror as the US sabotages its own future. Let their misfortune be no wasted lesson for us.
