Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton's recent financial disclosures have sparked concerns among ethics experts, who believe they may violate federal ethics laws. According to reports by ProPublica and The Texas Tribune, Paxton listed ownership of seven homes but claimed to earn no income from them, despite evidence suggesting several were rented out. Federal law requires public officials to report all income, and unreported earnings could be a legal violation. Paxton also failed to disclose mortgages for three condos at a Utah golf resort, which federal law mandates be listed if they are not personal residences. Additionally, he reported the value of a vacant plot of Texas land as up to $50,000, but his business partner said it has been worth about $1 million for years. Federal disclosure laws require that properties be listed at their fair market value, not just an estimated or lower figure. These discrepancies raise questions about the accuracy of Paxton’s financial reporting and complicate voters’ ability to assess his financial situation as they consider supporting him in the upcoming U.S. Senate election. Ethics experts have suggested that the inconsistencies may be due to either oversight or an intentional effort to obscure his financial holdings and income sources. Paxton’s net worth has increased significantly, from a range of negative $1.9 million to $11.1 million a year ago to between $1 million and $27 million in the most recent filing. This growth was not due to acquiring more assets but rather to the increased value of several properties. He also omitted listing seven properties worth approximately $5.2 million, including the Utah condos for which he did not disclose mortgages. These properties are co-owned with his estranged wife, state Sen. Angela Paxton, and are held in a blind trust managed by a family friend. Federal rules do not require candidates to report personal homes or properties from which they do not earn income, even if they are worth millions. However, ethics experts argue that the lack of transparency could harm public trust and make it harder to identify potential conflicts of interest. Paxton’s financial disclosures have further fueled concerns about his financial practices, especially as he runs for the U.S. Senate against Democratic state Rep. James Talarico, who has a much lower reported net worth and has not included his personal residence in his asset list. Paxton's pivot to real estate appears to be a way to supplement his salary as attorney general. However, recent rental listings for six of the properties he disclosed but said he did not earn income from suggest otherwise. Tenants confirmed living in some of these properties, and the Oklahoma lodge he owns is listed online as a short-term rental for up to $1,200 a night. Paxton purchased another condo at the resort in 2025, which he listed as both an asset and a liability. The land records show he obtained a $640,000 mortgage for it. The resort offers a program for investors to lease units, but it declined to say if Paxton's properties are part of it. The most significant changes between Paxton’s 2025 and 2026 financial reports were the valuations of the Oklahoma lodge and a plot of land outside Fort Worth. He appears to have shifted from reporting the properties’ assessed values, set by local county officials, to higher market estimates. Federal rules require that properties be valued at their fair market value, not just the assessed amount. Paxton’s initial use of lowball values appears to contradict federal guidelines, which require that filers adjust property values to reflect market conditions. While the Senate Ethics Committee allows the use of recent tax assessments, filers must adjust to market value if the assessment is lower. In these cases, valuations must be reported as specific dollar figures, not ranges. On both his annual reports as a Senate candidate, Paxton listed ranges for the value of each property he disclosed. Last year, he reported the Oklahoma lodge as worth between $100,001 and $250,000, but its estimated market value is more than $1.5 million. This year, he valued the property at between $1 million and $5 million. Likewise, Paxton valued a 42-acre plot of undeveloped land in Johnson County, south of Fort Worth, at between $15,001 and $50,000 last year. The county assesses the property as farmland worth $20,008, but its market value is estimated at $2.9 million. This year, Paxton’s disclosure said the property was worth between $1 million and $5 million. Paxton bought the property in 2006 with a group of investors, including Rob Orr, with whom he served in the Texas House of Representatives. Orr, who manages the investment, said in an interview that Paxton’s 20% stake is worth about $1 million. The group bought the plot to hold until growth in the Dallas-Fort Worth area made it attractive for redevelopment. Orr said the group is negotiating a sale to a developer. Paxton’s move to significantly revalue his assets without explanation is “very strange,” said Margaret Dylus-Yukins, senior counsel for ethics at the nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center. Dylus-Yukins, who previously worked analyzing financial disclosures for the U.S. Office of Government Ethics, said the agency would ask filers to explain major changes in writing. She warned that when public officials seem to be manipulating their disclosure forms and the Senate Ethics Committee does not address these issues, it can erode trust in both the committee and the candidate.