Has Zohran Mamdani filed public financial disclosures or statements of economic interest—what do they reveal?

1. What the filings that reporters cite actually say

Reporting based on Mamdani’s state and municipal disclosure forms repeatedly identifies one principal, declared asset: several acres (commonly described as four acres) of land in Jinja, Uganda, which disclosures have valued between roughly $150,000 and $250,000 ^{[1] [2] [6]}. Outlets including Forbes, LiveMint and The Financial Express summarize those filings and calculate a modest net worth around $200,000, and they note he lives in a rent‑stabilized Astoria apartment and does not own a car — facts drawn from the same disclosure materials ^{[1] [2] [3]}.

2. Inconsistencies reporters flagged between multiple filings

Several outlets point to at least one discrepancy across Mamdani’s filings: a state disclosure previously suggested ownership as early as 2012, while a later city conflict‑of‑interest filing listed an acquisition date of 2016, an inconsistency that has become a focus of critics and coverage ^{[4] [2] [7]}. Some reports also highlight differences in how small securities or retirement holdings were reported across years, which opponents have used to question the accuracy of the forms ^[7].

3. How journalists and outlets have interpreted net worth and liquidity

Business and news outlets have uniformly characterized Mamdani’s financial profile as modest for a major‑city mayoral candidate: estimated net worth around $200,000, a legislative salary (about $142,000 as an assemblyman cited by some reporting) and the potential mayoral salary jump to roughly $258,750–$260,000 if elected ^{[4] [8]}. Some pieces note that mandatory disclosure regimes do not require reporting of ordinary checking/savings balances or family trust assets, so net‑worth estimates from the forms can understate other wealth that isn’t legally required to be disclosed ^[5].

4. Political context and how findings have been deployed

Both critics and allies have used the disclosures in political messaging. Supporters and profile pieces present Mamdani’s modest filings as evidence he lives like the constituents he vows to serve ^{[4] [3]}. Opponents and some conservative outlets emphasize the inconsistencies in dates and small reported cash amounts to question his transparency or truthfulness, and some commentary links those discrepancies to attacks around public funding or donations ^{[7] [5]}. Major business reporting also shows wealthy donors and super PAC spending against him, which has amplified scrutiny of his finances in the campaign narrative ^{[9] [10]}.

5. What reporting does not settle — limits of available documents

Available reporting does not provide full forensic reconciliation of every line on every disclosure form; outlets note discrepancies but do not uniformly conclude intent to deceive, and they emphasize legal limits on what filings require ^{[7] [5]}. Sources do not produce independent property records from Uganda or bank statements in U.S. accounts in the cited material; therefore, assertions about unreported family trusts or undisclosed assets are not made in these articles and remain unconfirmed in current reporting ^[5].

6. Bottom line for readers weighing these facts

The record as summarized by multiple outlets shows Mamdani filed the standard public disclosures that reporters reviewed and that those filings list a Ugandan landholding as his chief asset and imply a comparatively modest net worth around $200,000 ^{[1] [2] [3]}. Journalists have identified inconsistencies in dates and low reported liquid balances that critics seize on, but the published stories also note legal disclosure limits and stop short of definitive proof of malfeasance in the sources provided ^{[7] [5]}. If you want a conclusive, document‑level determination about any alleged omissions or errors, available reporting does not mention a completed independent audit or official ethics finding in the sources cited here ^{[7] [5]}.