Funding profile
Tim Scott
Republican · Senator from South Carolina
Career totals · 4 elections · 2014–2028
$91.2 million
raised by Scott’s campaigns, everything from 2014 to 2028 added together.
12%
of it came from organized groups rather than from people giving on their own: at least $10.9 million from PACs, plus donations that organizations collected and directed.
$3.4 million
was spent about Scott by outside groups. These are ads for or against them that their campaign cannot control, and none of it is part of the money above.
Every number on this page comes from Federal Election Commission filings, read on August 24, 2026. An election still under way keeps raising money, so its figure will have grown since. Check Scott on FEC.gov
Where the money came from
Everything Scott’s campaigns have reported raising, split by who gave it.
- Individual donorsMoney given by people, in their own name.82%$75.2 million
- Political action committeesOrganized groups: company-run committees, unions, trade associations.12%$10.8 million
- Other sourcesParty transfers, the candidate's own money, loans and smaller categories.6%$5.2 million
Money bundled through organizations
Not every “individual” donation arrives on its own. An organization can collect checks from its members, already earmarked for Scott, and deliver them in a bundle. The law counts that as individual money, but the organization still chose where it went.
$86,000
reached Scott this way, <1% of everything they raised from individuals. Each donation came from a real person. The organization picked who got it.
- Senate Conservatives FundA PAC founded by former senator Jim DeMint that bundles donations for conservative Senate candidates, often in Republican primaries.$44,000
- NORPACA New Jersey-based pro-Israel PAC that bundles member donations for candidates of both parties.$30,000
- SBA Pro-Life AmericaThe candidate fund of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, which backs candidates who oppose abortion.$7,600
- AIPACThe American Israel Public Affairs Committee's political arm. It backs candidates of both parties it considers strong supporters of the U.S.-Israel relationship.$4,700
We can only count the organizations we have measured, so the real figure could be higher than this, never lower. Bundling is legal and widely used, and appearing here is not evidence of wrongdoing.
Who gave the most
Committee contributions from the 2024 and 2026 election periods, grouped by how the FEC classifies each giver. This covers a slice of the career total, and giving to a campaign is legal and ordinary.
- Corporation51%$579,000
- Trade association20%$230,000
- Labor union<1%$3,000
- Membership organization3%$31,000
- Co-operative<1%$2,500
- Corporation without capital stock2%$28,000
- Unclassified23%$258,000
Which industries
- Banking & finance60% · $70,000
- Retail & consumer13% · $15,000
- Other28% · $33,000
The FEC records that a committee is a corporation; it does not record its industry. Those labels are ours, kept in a published list anyone can check. Where we have not labeled a giver we say “Other” rather than guessing.
Largest committee givers
- 1Winred$155,000
- 2Credit Union National Association, Inc.The trade association for credit unions.$20,000
- 3Structured Finance Coalition Political Action Committee (Structured Finance PAC)$15,000
- 4Asian American Hotel Owners Association$15,000
- 5The Capital Group Companies, Inc.$15,000
Show all 10 giversShow fewer
- 6Small Business Investor Alliance PAC$15,000
- 7Experian North America, Inc Political Action Committee (Experian PAC)$13,000
- 8Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association$10,000
- 9Ernst & Young Political Action Committee$10,000
- 10Ryan LLC Political Action Committee (Ryanpac)$10,000
“Unclassified” means the FEC records no organization type for that committee, which usually means a leadership PAC. We show it as unclassified rather than guessing which industry it belongs to.
Money spent about this member
Outside groups, usually super PACs, may spend without limit on ads for or against a candidate, as long as they do not coordinate with the campaign. Scott has no legal control over any of it.
This is not a donation. Nobody gave this money to Scott. It was spent on advertising about Scott, and money spent against a candidate is plainly not funding them. So it never gets added to the figures above.
$3.4 million
has been spent for or against Scott by outside groups. $3.3 million supported Scott; $3,567 opposed Scott.
Largest outside spenders
Summed across 4 elections, using the Commission's aggregated totals so amended filings and 24-hour notices are not double-counted.
Spent supporting
$3.1 millionAds urging people to vote for this member. Still not their money, and they cannot direct how it is spent.
- NATIONAL VICTORY ACTION FUND$1.1 million
- OPPORTUNITY MATTERS FUND, INC.$1 million
- ELBERT GUILLORY'S AMERICA$261,000
- OPPORTUNITY MATTERS FUND ACTION$250,000
Show all 8 groupsShow fewer
- HONORING AMERICAN LAW ENFORCEMENT PAC$196,000
- LAW ENFORCEMENT FOR A SAFER AMERICA PACA super PAC founded and largely funded by Elon Musk that supported Donald Trump in 2024.$132,000
- AMERICAN ENERGY ACTION FUND$102,000
- Committee not named in the filing$100,000
Spent opposing
$0Ads urging people to vote against this member. This money was spent to defeat them.
Nothing on file.
Election by election
The career figures above are the sum of these elections. Each row links to the Commission’s page for that election, where the numbers match line for line.
| Election | Raised | From PACs | Outside spending | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2028in progress | $24.2 million | $907,000 4% | $100,000 | FEC |
| 2022 | $54 million | $4.4 million 8% | $3.2 million | FEC |
| 2016 | $6.2 million | $2.9 million 46% | $71,000 | FEC |
| 2014 | $6.9 million | $2.6 million 38% | $27,000 | FEC |
Raised is everything the campaign took in for that election. From PACs is the slice of it given by political action committees. Outside spending is what other groups spent on ads about the race, for and against—it is not part of “Raised”. An election marked in progress is still raising money, so its figures are not final.
We never publish the names of individual donors, and anything we cannot source stays off the page. The methodology explains every such choice.