Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What investigations have targeted Paula White and when did they occur?
Executive Summary
Two waves of formal scrutiny touched Paula White: a long-running U.S. Senate Finance Committee probe of televangelist ministries that included her ministry from about 2007 through 2011 (with reporting and public attention continuing afterward), and a later records request about her contacts with the Department of Justice during the Trump era in 2020. The Senate probe raised questions about financial practices and uncovered reported transactions — including payments to relatives and luxury property acquisitions — but resulted in no criminal charges or penalties; the 2020 matter is a FOIA-driven records inquiry, not a criminal investigation [1] [2] [3].
1. How a high-profile Senate probe put White in a broader televangelist spotlight
A multi-year inquiry led by Senator Chuck Grassley’s Senate Finance Committee targeted six high-profile televangelists and their organizations, including Paula White’s Without Walls International Church, beginning publicly in late 2007 and effectively running through 2011. The investigation focused on whether tax‑exempt donations were being diverted for personal benefit, including questions about excessive compensation and use of ministry assets, and it culminated in a public report and press coverage that emphasized transparency concerns [4] [1]. The committee’s work sought documentation on salaries, related-party transactions and the personal use of church-owned items; some ministries cooperated while others resisted full disclosure, and the inquiry’s public impact persisted even after the panel did not refer criminal charges [5] [1].
2. What the Senate findings and media reviews actually reported about finances
Senate materials and journalistic summaries documented a pattern of transactions tied to Without Walls and allied entities: payments to extended family members, substantial compensation figures for church leadership, and purchases or down payments on high‑value properties including a Trump Tower condominium and a waterfront mansion. Reported figures include millions in compensation to relatives and multi‑million dollar property transactions, and media reviews detailed ministry receipts and expenditures in the mid‑2000s [6] [2] [1]. The committee identified financial practices that raised governance and tax‑exemption questions, but the record shows no subsequent criminal referral or tax penalties specifically arising from those findings; the public record frames the outcome as a policy and transparency admonition rather than a prosecution [7] [4].
3. Disagreement, cooperation and limits of the Senate’s authority
The probe revealed divergent responses from targeted ministries: some supplied documents and engaged with the committee, while others declined broader cooperation. Grassley framed the investigation as a review to encourage voluntary reform and to assess whether tax rules were being misapplied, but critics argued the Senate lacked the enforcement mandate of the IRS and that such reviews risked invading religious liberty or chilling nonprofit operations [5] [1]. The result was a public spotlight and recommendations rather than legal sanctions; reporting across 2010–2011 notes that the inquiry “escaped penalty” outcomes for the pastors involved, underscoring that congressional oversight and criminal enforcement operate on different tracks [4] [1].
4. Subsequent developments tied to White’s ministry and personal legal posture
Separate but temporally related events include the 2014 bankruptcy filing by Without Walls International Church, a fact that entered public accounts of the ministry’s financial trajectory, and contemporary reporting that Paula White’s financial connections and public roles drew further scrutiny after she entered a White House faith advisory role under President Trump. No post‑Senate criminal charges linked directly to the earlier committee inquiries appear in the public record, and the ministry’s bankruptcy is a civil, not criminal, matter [7] [8]. Journalistic timelines assembled through 2025 reiterate the Senate probe’s findings about asset use and compensation but maintain the same bottom line: financial questions surfaced, yet the committee did not pursue penalties [2] [8].
5. A modern records request and the difference between oversight and investigation
In 2020 a public-interest group submitted a Freedom of Information Act request seeking Department of Justice Civil Rights Division communications with Paula White and affiliated organizations, logged as an open FOIA matter (DOJ‑CRT‑20‑1585). This is a transparency inquiry into government contacts, not an assertion of wrongdoing by White; FOIA and congressional oversight requests frequently surface where private ministry leaders intersect with political appointees or federal actors [3]. The FOIA’s existence demonstrates continuing public and media interest in White’s public roles and contacts, but it does not change the established fact that the Senate’s earlier probe produced no criminal charges and that the 2020 FOIA pertains to records access rather than prosecution [3] [1].
Conclusion: The factual record assembled from congressional reports, media summaries and public filings shows a sustained pattern of oversight and public questions about Paula White’s ministry finances—most prominently in the 2007–2011 Senate Finance Committee review—and later transparency‑seeking actions such as FOIA requests in 2020. Those inquiries produced public findings and scrutiny but did not result in criminal charges or penalties tied to the Senate probe [1] [2] [3].