Mark Carney has 514 stocks in America. true or false

Checked on February 3, 2026
Disclaimer: Factually can make mistakes. Please verify important information or breaking news. Learn more.

Executive summary

The specific claim that "Mark Carney has 514 stocks in America" cannot be confirmed by the available reporting and appears to be false or at least unsubstantiated: multiple credible sources that published Carney’s disclosures report different totals for his holdings and repeatedly show counts well north of 514 or state aggregated totals without isolating a precise U.S.-headquartered-stock count [1] [2] [3]. The public record instead documents several different totals (e.g., 569, 574, 567) and a large share of holdings headquartered in the United States, but none of the provided sources supports the exact figure "514" [1] [2] [3].

1. The raw disclosures: large, detailed lists — but no 514 figure

Ethics filings and the published appendix list hundreds of individual holdings moved into a blind trust and enumerate many U.S.-listed companies by name, yet the official files and media reporting that analyzed them do not present the figure "514" as an authoritative count; instead, reporters cite totals such as 569 entries moved into a blind trust and long lists of U.S. corporations appearing in the appendix [1] [4]. CBC and other outlets emphasized the presence of Brookfield-related options and extensive U.S. exposure, but did not endorse a 514-US-stocks claim [5] [6].

2. Conflicting tallies in the press: 569, 574, 567 — pick a number, pick an agenda

Different outlets and political actors have publicly cited different totals: theBreaker reported "569 stocks divested into a blind trust" [1], the Conservative Party released a statement referencing "574 separate stock holdings" with 91% headquartered in the U.S. [2], and other summaries and aggregations published by mainstream services put overall invested organizations at numbers like 567 [3]. Those discrepancies show that counting methodology — whether counting pooled funds, share classes, options, or individual company names — changes the headline number and undermines confidence in an exact "514" tally [1] [2] [3].

3. What is being counted matters: shares, options, pooled funds and headquarters

The filings include unexercised Brookfield options worth multimillions, pooled funds and direct shareholdings, and the public appendix lists company names without quantities or values — meaning that whether an item is treated as a "stock" can vary by reporter and by political commentator [7] [4]. The Conservative Party framed holdings as "stock holdings" including pooled funds [2], while the CBC and Financial Post highlighted large Brookfield options as distinct instruments rather than simple share counts [5] [7].

4. Political context and incentives behind particular numbers

Opponents and partisan actors have incentives to emphasize either the scale of U.S. exposure (to suggest conflicts or foreign influence) or to minimize scrutiny, so public statements citing specific counts should be read against partisan motives — the Conservative news release used 574 to press for divestment [2], while journalistic outlets concentrated on listing names and options rather than producing a single canonical U.S.-stock count [1] [6].

5. Verdict: the statement "Mark Carney has 514 stocks in America" — false or unproven

Given the absence of any source in the provided reporting that identifies the figure 514, and the presence of multiple different totals and counting methods , the claim that he "has 514 stocks in America" is not supported by the available evidence and should be treated as false or at least unverified; the reliable conclusion is that Carney holds hundreds of investments with substantial U.S. exposure, but the exact number 514 is not documented in the cited material [1] [2] [3].

Want to dive deeper?
How many individual U.S.-headquartered companies are listed in Mark Carney’s official ethics appendix, and how were pooled funds counted?
What are the rules under Canada’s Conflict of Interest Act for blind trusts and recusal when a prime minister holds stock options?
How have different media outlets and political parties counted Mark Carney’s holdings, and what methodologies produced divergent totals?