House Ethics Committee Investigation of Rep. Nancy Mace (OCC Review 25-5681)
The Office of Congressional Conduct voted 6-0 to refer Rep. Nancy Mace to the House Committee on Ethics, finding substantial reason to believe she engaged in improper reimbursement practices; the Committee is continuing its review and has made no finding of a violation.
The Office of Congressional Conduct (OCC) voted 6-0 on November 18, 2025 to refer Rep. Nancy Mace to the House Committee on Ethics, finding "substantial reason to believe that Rep. Mace engaged in improper reimbursement practices" in her use of the Members' Representational Allowance (MRA) for lodging at a Washington, D.C., property she co-owned with her then-fiancé. The Ethics Committee has acknowledged the referral, extended its review twice, and as of March 2, 2026 continues a formal expanded review. The Committee has made no finding of a violation. Rep. Mace denies any wrongdoing; her counsel calls the OCC report "fundamentally flawed."
A "substantial reason to believe" finding is the OCC's referral threshold, the minimum showing required to advance a matter for further Committee review. It is not a finding that any law or House rule was violated.
The OCC report, as released
The OCC Report and Findings, OCC Review No. 25-5681, was transmitted to the House Committee on Ethics on December 1, 2025. Although the report bears a "CONFIDENTIAL, H. Res. 895" header (the standard confidentiality designation for OCC referrals), the House Committee on Ethics released it publicly on March 2, 2026, posting it to ethics.house.gov alongside a Chairman/Ranking Member press statement. The confidential marking reflects the document's procedural origin; the Committee's public release is the operative act, and the report is reproduced here as a public record.
Cover page. The document is marked "CONFIDENTIAL, H. Res. 895", the standard marking for OCC referrals under House Resolution 895, but the House Committee on Ethics released it publicly on March 2, 2026. The Recommendation states: "there is substantial reason to believe that Rep. Mace engaged in improper reimbursement practices." Board vote: AFFIRMATIVE 6 / NEGATIVE 0 / ABSTENTIONS 0. Presented by Omar S. Ashmawy, OCC Staff Director & Chief Counsel.
Page 5, the four individuals who refused to cooperate with the OCC's review: Rep. Mace, former chief of staff Daniel Hanlon, and former staffers Lorie Khatod and Richard Chalkey. Also listed: the applicable legal standards, 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (false statements), 18 U.S.C. § 641 (conversion of public money), 31 U.S.C. § 1301 (appropriations), and House Rule 23, cls. 1 & 2.
Page 8, ¶21-22. The OCC found that "Rep. Mace requested and received the maximum allowable reimbursement for each month she filed a reimbursement request form." In 2024, her requests exceeded the D.C. property's actual expenses in January, March, April, and May, the month-by-month comparison table shows the excess totaling $9,485.46.
Page 11, ¶30. The OCC reviewed correspondence with the former fiancé's accountant (anonymized as Witness 3), which "suggests that Rep. Mace was entitled to request $2,462.94 in monthly reimbursement, based on the 2022 costs of the DC Property." Mace requested the maximum allowable amount every month she filed; for four of those months her requests exceeded the $2,462.94 figure.
Page 12, ¶31-32. A former Mace staffer (Witness 1), in a verbatim OCC interview transcript: "So when I first started filling out these forms, the Congresswoman and the Chief of Staff would always talk about how it doesn't even come close to covering her living costs… So the max out was, according to them, accurate." ¶35 contains the OCC's recommendation that the Committee issue subpoenas to Rep. Mace, Daniel Hanlon, Lorie Khatod, and Richard Chalkey.
What the report found
The OCC's review covered Mace's MRA reimbursement requests for lodging at a Washington, D.C., property from January 2023 through May 2024. The report's principal findings, drawn verbatim from the public document:
The maximum-reimbursement pattern (¶21). "Rep. Mace requested and received the maximum allowable reimbursement for each month she filed a reimbursement request form."
The $9,485.46 excess (¶22). The OCC found that in 2024 Mace's "requests for reimbursement exceeded the total of the DC Property's expenses in January, March, April, and May," an overage the report put at $9,485.46. The report also identifies excess months in 2023: January, February, March, May, June, September, October, and November.
No documented payment (¶25). The OCC reviewed correspondence between Mace and the former fiancé's accountant (Witness 3) "suggesting that while she had received reimbursement from the House for her lodging expenses, as of October 5, 2023, she had not contributed the funds to the bank account associated with the DC Property." The report notes that utility bills were largely in the former fiancé's name and paid from the joint account.
Unable to determine the reason (¶28). "Because Rep. Mace refused to interview in this matter, the OCC was unable to determine how or why Rep. Mace decided to seek the maximum allowable reimbursement when it exceeded her expenses incurred."
The accountant's figure (¶30). Correspondence reviewed by the OCC "suggests that Rep. Mace was entitled to request $2,462.94 in monthly reimbursement, based on the 2022 costs of the DC Property. Rep. Mace requested the maximum allowable reimbursement for every month she filed a reimbursement form; for four of those months, her reimbursement requests exceeded the aforementioned $2,462.94."
The staffer's testimony (¶31). A former Mace staffer, Witness 1, told OCC investigators in a verbatim interview transcript: "So when I first started filling out these forms, the Congresswoman and the Chief of Staff would always talk about how it doesn't even come close to covering her living costs. And so when they checked over, I made sure that they never went over her current living costs. So the max out was, according to them, accurate."
Refusal to cooperate (¶12, ¶34). "The following individuals and entities refused to cooperate with the OCC's review: Rep. Mace; Daniel Hanlon; Lorie Khatod; and Richard Chalkey."
Subpoena recommendation (¶35). "The Board recommends that the Committee on Ethics issue subpoenas to: Rep. Mace; Daniel Hanlon; Lorie Khatod; and Richard Chalkey."
Applicable law. The OCC identified potential violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (false statements to the government), 18 U.S.C. § 641 (conversion of public money or property), 31 U.S.C. § 1301 (purpose of appropriations), and House Rule 23, cls. 1 & 2.
Mace's response
Rep. Mace denies the allegations and has not been found to have violated any law or House rule. Her counsel, William M. Sullivan Jr., characterized the OCC report as "fundamentally flawed" in a December 17, 2025 response letter, asserting that it "appears to incorporate unverified assertions and materials that may have originated from, or been influenced by, Rep. Mace's former fiancé", citing what Sullivan characterized as "a documented history of abusive and retaliatory conduct" by the former fiancé. That characterization is Mace's defense position.
On March 6, 2026, Mace told The Daily Signal: "this is probably retaliation for Epstein, let's be honest" and "When you fight the swamp, the swamp fights back." She also asserted to ABC News 4 that she "incurred over $100,000 in lodging expenses in DC and received approximately $29,000 after taxes in reimbursements."
Mace's office also publicly questioned the OCC's lead investigator, Omar S. Ashmawy, citing what it characterized as a personal matter reported in 2015 as settled; that characterization is attributed to Mace's office and is not independently confirmed here.
Procedural timeline
| Date | Event | |------|-------| | ~May 21, 2025 | OCC opens preliminary review (Review No. 25-5681) | | Jun. 17, 2025 | OCC second-phase review begins | | Jun. 21, 2025 | OCC second-phase review continued | | Jul. 22, 2025 | OCC extends review period | | Aug. 18, 2025 | OCC review period ends | | Nov. 18, 2025 | OCC Board votes 6-0 to refer; "substantial reason to believe" finding | | Dec. 1, 2025 | OCC Report transmitted to the House Committee on Ethics | | Jan. 16, 2026 | Ethics Committee acknowledges referral; announces initial extension; next step by Mar. 2 | | Mar. 2, 2026 | Ethics Committee publicly releases OCC report; announces continued and expanded review | | Ongoing | Committee review continuing; no finding of a violation as of date of this entry |
Sources & Related Coverage
The filing itself: OCC Report and Findings, Rep. Nancy Mace, OCC Review No. 25-5681 (PDF, 13 pages), publicly released by the House Committee on Ethics, March 2, 2026.
Official sources:
- OCC Report, ethics.house.gov (PDF)
- Ethics Committee Chairman/Ranking Member Statement (Mar. 2, 2026)
- Ethics Committee Extension Statement (Jan. 16, 2026)
News coverage:
- The Washington Post (Mar. 3, 2026)
- Roll Call (Mar. 2, 2026)
- Washington Examiner (Mar. 2, 2026)
- WIS-TV (Mar. 2, 2026)
- Newsweek (Mar. 3, 2026)
- Spectrum News (Mar. 3, 2026)
- The Daily Signal (Mar. 6, 2026)
- ABC News 4 (Jan. 16, 2026)
- The Post and Courier
Related dispatches:
- OCC Board votes 6-0 to refer Rep. Mace (Nov. 18, 2025)
- Ethics Committee extends review (Jan. 16, 2026)
- Ethics Committee releases OCC report (Mar. 2, 2026)
- Mace calls ethics probe retaliation (Mar. 6, 2026)
See also: House Ethics Investigation, Maceopedia wiki hub · Incident: The House Ethics reimbursement investigation
Related Dispatches
Court appoints former Judge Kristi Harrington as third-party neutral to sort the 11,000+ disputed files in Mace's Google Drive
On June 16, 2026, Judge Donald B. Hocker appointed Kristi Harrington, a Charleston attorney and former South Carolina Circuit Court judge, to serve as a 'third-party neutral' in Assignment Desk Works, LLC v. Alexis Berg (Charleston County Court of Common Pleas, No. 2025-CP-10-2671), one of the cluster of cases tied to Rep. Nancy Mace and her former fiance, Patrick Bryant. Harrington's task is to review the more than 11,000 electronic files in what the court calls 'Mace's Google Drive,' files that both Mace and Bryant claim to own, and decide which, if any, must be turned over in discovery. The court split her fees between the two camps, warned the volume could make the process 'very cost-prohibitive,' and entered the order over Mace's objection. The order makes no finding on privilege, admissibility, ownership, or wrongdoing; the underlying allegations remain contested and unproven.
Gretchen Carlson, who helped write the Speak Out Act, files a sworn declaration backing Alexis Berg
On June 8, 2026, Alexis Berg's counsel filed a reply brief in Assignment Desk Works, LLC v. Alexis Berg (No. 2025-CP-10-2671) arguing that the federal Speak Out Act makes the non-disparagement clause ADW is suing on judicially unenforceable, because the dispute before the court involves sexual-assault allegations. Attached was a sworn declaration from Gretchen Carlson, the former Fox News anchor whose 2016 case helped inspire the Act, who states she has met with Berg and that 'this is exactly the situation we fought to address,' and offers to testify. ADW argues the Act does not apply. The motion is undecided; the underlying allegations are contested and denied.
Mace: ethics probe is 'probably retaliation for Epstein, let's be honest'
Four days after the House Ethics Committee publicly released the OCC report, Rep. Nancy Mace told The Daily Signal the investigation was likely retaliation for her push to release the Epstein files and attacked the OCC's presenting official by name.
House votes 357-65 to block Mace's push to release congressional harassment settlement records
Rep. Nancy Mace's H.Res. 1100 sought to force the release of records on taxpayer-funded sexual-harassment settlements paid on behalf of House members. The House voted 357-65 on March 4, 2026 to refer the resolution back to the Ethics Committee, shelving it. Mace's own office was later subpoenaed in May 2026 by the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights, which disclosed over $300,000 in settlements.
Ethics Committee releases OCC report: Mace billed the max, exceeded actual costs by $9,485.46
The House Ethics Committee publicly released the OCC's full report finding substantial reason to believe Rep. Nancy Mace claimed the maximum allowable lodging reimbursement every month she filed, exceeding the D.C. property's actual expenses by $9,485.46 across four months in 2024. Mace, her former chief of staff, and two other former staffers all refused to cooperate. The OCC recommended subpoenas for all four.
House Ethics Committee extends Mace reimbursement review, sets March deadline
The House Committee on Ethics announced it was extending its review of Rep. Nancy Mace's lodging reimbursement practices, with a next step due by March 2, 2026. Mace said she had spent over $100,000 in D.C. lodging costs and received far less in reimbursements.
Bryant's counsel to Berg's attorney: 'Describing in detail what I contend is confidential before the Order is in place would defeat the very purpose of having a confidentiality order'
On December 22, 2025, Patrick Bryant's attorneys at Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani filed a seven-page opposition to Berg's motion for a blanket confidentiality order in Berg v. Bryant, Case No. 2025-CP-10-03124. The brief argues that the photographs and recordings Berg now seeks to seal were already made public by Rep. Nancy Mace, with Berg's consent, during Mace's February and May 2025 congressional speeches. Bryant's counsel agrees that Berg's medical and therapy records should be confidential, but opposes a blanket designation. Attached as Exhibit A is a 23-page compilation of counsel emails documenting a six-week dispute over what, if anything, required protection. All allegations in the underlying litigation are disputed and contested; Bryant denies the claims against him; Berg, Mace, and all named parties deny Bryant's allegations; no matter has been adjudicated.
OCC Board votes 6-0 to refer Mace over reimbursement practices
The bipartisan Office of Congressional Conduct voted unanimously to find 'substantial reason to believe' Rep. Nancy Mace engaged in improper reimbursement practices, referring the matter to the House Ethics Committee.
Mace's own motion shows she signed a quitclaim deed to her ex-fiancé on Feb. 13, 2025, three days after accusing him of crimes on the House floor
Mace's June 27, 2025 motion to enforce her settlement with Brendan (Patrick) Bryant documents that she executed a quitclaim deed transferring the beach house to him on Feb. 13, 2025, days after her Feb. 10 floor speech, while their property settlement was still being carried out.
Mace's own defamation complaint puts her House-floor accusations, and the men's furious replies, into the public record
Suing Eric Bowman for defamation on May 12, 2025, Mace's complaint confirms she 'identified four individuals' from the House floor and reproduces, verbatim, the very accusations she calls false, including claims she steered VA contracts and 'destroy[ed] innocent men with zero evidence, zero charges.'
Ten months before accusing him from the House floor, Mace sued her ex-fiancé to split the beach house they owned together
On April 2, 2024, Mace filed a partition action against Brendan (Patrick) Bryant to divide or sell a jointly owned Isle of Palms beach house. Her own complaint records that she and the man she would later accuse of crimes each held 'an undivided one half' interest in the property.
Mace fundraises in the Capitol Rotunda on live TV; ethics watchdog files complaint
On October 4, 2023, Rep. Nancy Mace appeared on Fox Business from inside the U.S. Capitol Rotunda and told viewers she was fundraising off the political moment in real time. Federal law bars soliciting campaign contributions in any room or building occupied in the discharge of official duties. An ethics watchdog filed a complaint with the OCE the next day.