Which brands publicly ended partnerships with Candace Owens and when?

1. What the record in these sources actually shows

The documents and articles in the search results concentrate on Owens’ recent controversies: her public conspiracy claims about Charlie Kirk’s death and allegations about Emmanuel and Brigitte Macron, plus a Delaware lawsuit and reporting on her media business, but they do not report any corporate partners publicly terminating deals with her in the materials provided ^{[1] [2] [3]}.

2. The biggest commercial story present: legal and reputational pressure, not announced brand exits

Fortune and other outlets portray Owens’ commercial exposure through the Macron defamation suit and broader scrutiny of her business model; Fortune reports a 219‑page complaint in Delaware alleging a campaign of humiliation and notes the potential commercial fallout, but the piece does not catalogue specific brands that have severed ties with her ^[2]. The Macron complaint and related reporting frame legal risk as the central threat to her revenue streams, not publicized brand terminations ^[2].

3. What the Macron case implies about commercial relationships

The Macron plaintiffs chose a major Delaware civil claim and a legal team with high‑profile precedent, which sources say could threaten Owens’ media revenue and ad relationships; however, the available reporting stops short of showing named corporate partners publicly announcing contract terminations in response ^[2].

4. Other controversies that might prompt brand distancing — reported, but not linked to specific corporate pullouts

Multiple articles document episodes that commonly trigger corporate distancing: repeated unverified allegations (e.g., the Macron/assassination claims), inflammatory public rhetoric, and disputes with conservative peers after Charlie Kirk’s death ^{[3] [1] [4]}. Those behaviors increase reputational risk for partners, but the supplied sources do not show companies issuing public statements ending partnerships ^{[1] [3] [4]}.

5. Timeline and context that reporters emphasize

Reporting traces Owens’ rise with Turning Point USA, the deterioration of relationships after Charlie Kirk’s death in September 2025, and a surge in allegations and legal exposure through late 2025; these narratives explain why advertisers, platforms or partners might reassess ties, yet none of the supplied pieces lists brands that have publicly terminated deals with Owens ^{[1] [5] [2]}.

6. Alternative viewpoints and limitations of the available reporting

Some sources characterize Owens as a lucrative media entrepreneur whose controversies are the core of her brand, implying commercial resilience despite reputational attacks ^[2]. Others present her claims as unsubstantiated and harmful, which would argue for partner exits on ethical or risk grounds ^{[3] [6]}. The key limitation: the provided search results do not include corporate press releases, advertising trade reporting, or brand statements confirming terminated partnerships — so factual claims about specific brands ending relationships are not supported in these documents (not found in current reporting) ^{[2] [3] [1]}.

7. How to verify which brands, if any, severed ties (actionable next steps)

To answer the original question definitively, consult (a) corporate press releases and advertiser lists, (b) advertising‑industry trackers and ad‑placement logs, and (c) trade reporting (Ad Age, Adweek), none of which appear in the supplied sources. The documents here do not supply those facts and therefore cannot confirm specific brand terminations (not found in current reporting) ^[2].

8. Bottom line for readers

The materials provided document major reputational and legal pressure on Candace Owens but do not show named brands publicly ending partnerships with her. Any definitive list of such brands would require additional sources — corporate statements or industry reporting — that are not included among the supplied documents ^{[1] [2] [3]}.