paid

Elizabeth Holmes was once celebrated as the world’s youngest self-made female billionaire, with an estimated fortune of $4.5 billion. Today, the disgraced Theranos founder is serving a federal prison sentence for defrauding investors and owes hundreds of millions of dollars in restitution.

Suffice it to say, she has a complicated relationship with money.

That tension runs through “You Can See Everything,” Nathan Fielder and Lance Oppenheim’s hit documentary about Holmes and her longtime partner, Billy Evans, an heir to a wealthy San Diego hotel family.

In the nearly three-hour, wildly unpredictable film, a reenactment staged by Fielder depicts Evans pushing for a share of the documentary’s profits, sparking a dispute with the filmmakers over whether paying their subjects would compromise the project’s integrity. Holmes, meanwhile, maintains that money has never been her primary motivation. As Fielder probes the couple’s finances, he struggles to determine how much Holmes knows about Evans’ dealings — and where their financial interests begin and end.

Here’s what “You Can See Everything” reveals about Holmes and Evans’ finances, and what it leaves unanswered. Warning: Major spoilers ahead.

Did Holmes and Evans get paid to participate in the documentary?

No. But for a time, compensation was on the table.

The film was financed by A24, which gave Fielder and Oppenheim unusual freedom to pursue the project without any deadline or obligation to turn what they captured into a finished film. As Fielder recalled during a Q&A following the film’s secret premiere at the Telluride Film Festival in September, the studio told them that if nothing came of it, “you can just throw everything away.”

In one of the film’s pivotal sequences, Fielder stages a reenactment, based on his recollections, of a meeting with Evans, Holmes, Oppenheim and two A24 executives. Amanda Seyfried, who won an Emmy for portraying Holmes in Hulu’s “The Dropout,” plays her again, while Christopher Abbott takes on the role of Evans. After Holmes leaves to check on the couple’s children, Evans raises the question of compensation.

“I do know that there is potential for this movie to also make a lot of money,” Evans says. “And I feel strongly that if this movie were to make money, that we should be entitled to some of it.”

Fielder objects, arguing that payment could cast doubt on the couple’s motives and suggest they had influence over the finished film. Evans insists that compensation is nonnegotiable.

According to Fielder, A24 ultimately agreed to a profit-sharing arrangement, though the documentary doesn’t disclose its terms.

Holmes works on a laptop at the rented beachfront home in Del Mar, Calif., where she lived with her partner, Billy Evans, and their two children before entering prison, in a scene from “You Can See Everything.”

(A24)

But shortly before entering prison, Holmes tells Fielder on camera, “Obviously I’m not making any money or having any economic interest in this whatsoever.” Fielder is left wondering whether she’s genuinely unaware of the deal Evans negotiated or merely pretending not to know.

The real Evans later acknowledges withholding some details from Holmes, explaining that she had enough on her mind.

In the end, a title card reveals that Evans decided to forgo compensation.

Is it unusual for documentary subjects to get paid?

Generally, yes — at least in documentaries that follow traditional journalistic standards.

Paying subjects can create conflicts of interest, raising questions about their motives and credibility. Those concerns are particularly acute with someone like Holmes, who was convicted of defrauding investors through an elaborate web of deception.

“The optics are terrible,” Fielder warns Evans.

Evans counters that documentary subjects have been paid before, citing reports of a lucrative Netflix deal involving Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. Oppenheim dismisses the comparison, saying their series isn’t a conventional documentary.

The distinction isn’t always clear-cut. In 2019, competing documentaries about the disastrous Fyre Festival took different approaches to paying its disgraced organizer, Billy McFarland. The filmmakers behind Hulu’s “Fyre Fraud” acknowledged paying him for footage and other rights. But Chris Smith, director of Netflix’s “Fyre,” refused McFarland’s demand for payment, arguing that it would be unethical for him to profit after defrauding so many people.

Fielder says he considered abandoning the project rather than accepting Evans’ demands. Instead, he decided the negotiations might reveal something about how Holmes and Evans operate.

As Fielder later confides to Seyfried, “Either this is fully sincere and she actually has no clue about the deal Billy made, or she honestly might be the most manipulative person that’s ever lived.”

How much money does Holmes owe?

A lot.

In 2023, a federal judge ordered Holmes and former Theranos President Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani to pay more than $452 million in restitution to investors and companies defrauded by Theranos. The two are jointly responsible for the judgment, meaning the same losses cannot be collected twice. A federal appeals court upheld the order in 2025.

Holmes speaks at the Fortune Global Forum in 2015, when her blood-testing startup Theranos was valued at billions of dollars and she was celebrated as one of Silicon Valley’s most successful entrepreneurs.

(Jeff Chiu / Associated Press)

Holmes has maintained that she has little money left. In a court appearance shown in the documentary, she insists, “I don’t have any money,” explaining she is deeply in debt from legal fees associated with her criminal case.

During Fielder’s prison visit, as reenacted in the film, she tells him, “I don’t have the option to care about money. I owe hundreds of millions of dollars of restitution. Every dollar I make, they take from me.”

Would any profits from the documentary have gone toward Holmes’ restitution?

Not necessarily.

Although Holmes and Evans have two children together and refer to each other as husband and wife, Holmes told People in 2025 that they were not legally married. Evans isn’t personally responsible for her restitution debt simply because they’re a couple.

The government can seek payment from assets belonging to Holmes, but the documentary doesn’t disclose who would have received money under the proposed profit-sharing deal or whether Holmes would have had any financial interest in it. So it’s unclear whether any proceeds could have gone toward her restitution.

The proposed profit-sharing arrangement could have been lucrative. “You Can See Everything” grossed $15.6 million in its opening weekend and more than $20 million in its first five days. Those figures represent ticket sales, not profits, but illustrate the potential value of such an arrangement. And with the film still expanding into more theaters and generating strong buzz, its box-office haul is poised to grow further.

How are Holmes and Evans supporting themselves?

The documentary doesn’t fully answer that question either.

Before Holmes entered prison, the couple lived with their two children — son William, now 5, and daughter Invicta, 3 — in a luxurious rented home near the beach in Del Mar, north of San Diego. Evans comes from a wealthy family whose hotel business includes the Bahia Resort Hotel, the Catamaran Resort Hotel and Spa and the Lodge at Torrey Pines. But in an Oct. 1 statement, Evans Hotels said he is neither an employee nor a shareholder in the company.

In the film, Fielder asks Evans whether Holmes might have been attracted to his family’s money. Evans grows visibly uncomfortable and shuts down the conversation when Fielder presses him about the extent of the family’s wealth.

Evans also has a biotech start-up, Haemanthus, which is developing laser-based technology to analyze biological samples, an undertaking with echoes of Holmes’ failed blood-testing company. According to Wired, the company has reported raising as much as $20 million in funding but has yet to release a product.

How much Evans personally earns from the venture — or whether his family helps support the couple — remains unclear.

In a later scene, Seyfried asks Evans who’s bringing in money while Holmes is in prison. He says she earns 30 cents an hour at the federal prison in Texas where she’s serving her sentence.

And what about his own income?

“I’ve got my own business,” he replies.

De Miguel had been at Tenerife for just over a season, having joined in the summer of 2025 from Castellon. The striker helped the team gain promotion to the second division.

The Spanish forward began his career with Leganes at youth level in the Madrid suburbs, playing for a string of teams, including Unionistas de Salamanca, before signing for Castellon in 2023.

Arsenal boss Mikel Arteta said at a news conference the incident was “heartbreaking”.

“To see a colleague lose his life in such a manner, it’s beyond any words that I can put today,” said the Spanish coach.

Other sports stars, including retired Spanish tennis icon Rafael Nadal, Argentine great Lionel Messi, and Portugal legend Cristiano Ronaldo also left messages on Instagram.

“There are no words. My condolences and lots of strength to all his family and friends,” wrote Inter Miami forward Messi.

Nadal expressed a “terrible sadness” at De Miguel’s passing “from the bottom of my heart”.

“A tragedy. No words,” Ronaldo wrote.

“Lots of strength to the family. May he rest in peace.”

Former Barcelona defender Gerard Pique, who co-owns Andorra, said: “I am sorry with all my soul. Rest in peace, Jesus.”

De Miguel’s Tenerife team-mates also paid tribute on social media.

Midfielder Juanjo Sanchez said: “You let me into your heart, and you earned a place in mine, as we shared moments of laughter every single day and took walks barefoot after our training sessions.

“I cannot let this moment pass without highlighting what a wonderful person you are. You never had an unkind word or a sour expression for anyone, and you always displayed exemplary conduct, despite all the challenges you faced.

“You will always be with me, my friend.”

Striker Enric Gallego described De Miguel as “one of the best people” he has met, in an emotional statement.

“Thank you for everything we experienced together – for your camaraderie, your character, your humanity and the exemplary attitude you always showed,” he said.

“I feel very fortunate to have shared a locker room with you. I’m going to miss you so much.”

Forward Fran Sabina said: “There is no explanation or words that make sense of something like this.

“You were an important person in my life.

“We were lucky enough to share unforgettable moments, laughter, stories and experiences that today become memories that I will cherish forever in my heart.

“Thank you my friend. Thank you for every moment lived, for every shared experience, for the laughter, for your affection and, most of all, for this sincere friendship that we had.

“The appreciation we had was mutual. And that’s something neither time nor your absence can ever change.”

As California decides whether to slap billionaires with a special tax, the Golden State’s swarm of social media stars is chiming in — and increasingly getting paid to influence voters.

Unlikely influencers, from foodies to mothers to retirees, are weighing in on Proposition 40, a one-time 5% tax on the assets of the state’s roughly 200 billionaires and on other ballot measures created to cancel it.

Campaigns try to team up with and sometimes compensate key content creators, as their endorsements often hit harder than traditional political ads.

Between cheery Instagram videos about budget-friendly trips to a playground, a Halloween house and zoo with her kids, Bartley Chavez posted a video opposing Proposition 40 to her more than 47,500 followers.

“Look, I’m all for trying new things. A new recipe? Sure. A crazy haircut? Go for it. A quirky movie with the kids. Why not? But when we’re talking about California jobs, our family’s financial future, and the state’s economy, that’s not something I want to experiment with,” she says in the October video.

The video’s caption states the campaign opposing Proposition 40 paid her to post.

Getting political online does come with risks. In the video’s comments, one Instagram user said they unfollowed Chavez’s account, and another called her a “sell out.” Others backed her position. Chavez didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Los Angeles author and political influencer Leigh McGowan has built an audience of more than 3.5 million followers on different platforms with her no-nonsense takes on politics and other issues. She was already a supporter of the wealth tax when the Proposition 40 campaign started to pay for some of her posts.

“No one is punishing the rich. They are doing just fine,” she said in a sponsored video on Instagram. “We are simply asking them to pay an outstanding one-time tax that’ll help the rest of us.”

Campaigns have been paying attention to influencers as younger people turn to them for news, said McGowan, who’s known for pontificating from her kitchen. Many people distrust traditional media and want regular people to break down complex topics.

“We don’t know who to believe anymore, and there are just so many lies out there,” McGowan said in an interview. “The people who take the time to say authentically this is what they believe in, that’s who people believe.

In California, political ad spending in the 2026 election cycle is projected to approach $1 billion, more than any other state, according to political advertising intelligence firm AdImpact. Roughly $114 million is expected to go to digital platforms such as Facebook, Google, Snapchat and X.

The campaign opposing Proposition 40 has plenty of money to spend on political messaging in what’s become one of the most expensive ballot fights in California’s history. Billionaires such as Google co-founder Sergey Brin have donated millions to Building a Better California, a group funding ads against the wealth tax proposal. More than $350 million has been contributed to fight the billionaire tax and support two propositions — 41 and 42 — that could block it.

Campaign finance forms show how much groups spend on digital media, but they don’t say how much of that goes to influencers. While the data are limited, campaign leaders and other experts say social media stars are playing a bigger role in how brands and political movements advertise.

“Any modern campaign that wants to win needs to be active in spaces where voters get information — and that’s exactly what the No on 40 coalition is doing,” said Evan Westrup, a spokesman for the coalition opposing Proposition 40.

Some political influencers broadcast their views independently or talk to campaigns without compensation. Others are paid a few hundred dollars or even up to $30,000 per post, according to an October report from the Center for Democracy & Technology and the Communication Technology Research Lab at the University of Pittsburgh.

Influencers will post content for political campaigns to make money, but “genuine belief in political issues or candidates can — and often does — coexist with compensation,” the report said.

One Los Angeles influencer, The Speech Prof, who has more than 1.7 million combined followers on Instagram and TikTok, said he refused money to stop the billionaire tax.

The creator, also known as Professor Chesko, talks about everything from parenting and misogyny to politics. In September, he posted a viral video in which he says he rejected a large amount of money to oppose the billionaire tax.

This month, he posted a new video backing the billionaire tax, noting that the Proposition 40 campaign paid him to make the content. “It’s not nearly as much, but they’re a healthcare union and not corporate oligarchs. Plus I already said where I stand for free,” he said in the October video.

Professor Chesko didn’t respond to a request for comment.

The storm of new voices chiming in on the political debate, delivered through people’s personalized social media feeds, could be causing confusion, said Ramesh Srinivasan, professor of information studies at UCLA.

“If I’m seeing a completely different reality than you, whether it’s through influencers, AI or social media microtargeting,” he said. “Then it’s impossible to have a common basis for making decisions or choices.”

While the anti-billionaire tax war chest is much bigger, groups behind the tax say they’re still winning on social media.

“Despite being heavily outspent, the Prop. 40 campaign has been beating the billionaires on social media content and impact,” said Suzanne Jimenez, chief of staff for the SEIU-UHW, the healthcare union backing the billionaire tax.

She said influencers support the tax even when they’re not paid because they understand that “California needs functioning hospitals and emergency rooms, not more tax breaks for billionaires.”

Some sponsored influencers are avoiding direct criticism of the billionaire tax and instead signaling support for a ballot measure that could nullify Proposition 40 even if voters approve it.

Proposition 42 prohibits new taxes on “retirement holdings, individually-owned assets, and other forms of personal savings,” but it conflicts with the billionaire tax proposal. If voters approve both, the one with the most “yes” votes generally would become law.

Karen Clay-Fenderson, a Los Angeles mom and retired teacher with more than 120,000 Instagram followers, has posted videos about Proposition 42.

“I did my research on 42, and I did see something about the billionaire tax. But I want to keep my retirement and my life savings. I don’t want that taxed,” she said in an interview.

She disclosed that the Proposition 42 campaign paid her for the videos, but didn’t go so far as to tell people how to vote.

“They understand that we have influence, and people listen to what we have to say,” she said. “That’s why I’m very cautious. This is what I’m doing, but you need to make your choice.”

In California, influencers must disclose that they are being paid by a political campaign. In September, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed legislation that would penalize influencers who failed to disclose that they were paid to post political content. Influencers could face fines of up to $5,000 per post.

Social media platforms also have their own rules. Instagram allows paid political ads, but TikTok doesn’t — though enforcement has been an issue.

Nathan Click, a spokesperson for Proposition 42, said their partners disclose they are paid and follow all campaign laws.

“Creators play an important role in the political conversation,” he said. “And campaigns across the country partner with them to ensure their audiences understand what’s at stake in the election.”

If you need permission to watch “The Permission” — a.k.a. Rhyne Howard of the Atlanta Dream — try to keep her team’s WNBA championship dreams alive, Flavor Flav’s got you covered.

The rapper issued signed permission slips Tuesday on social media for everyone to be excused from work on Thursday to watch Game 6 of the WNBA Finals. The next matchup in the best-of-seven championship series between the Dream and the Golden State Valkyries is set to tip off at 9:30 a.m. Pacific that day, when many people would be at work.

“Thursday is a paid holiday. Because Flavor Flav said so,” Flav, whose name is William Jonathan Drayton Jr., declared on Instagram and Threads. “Everyone should be able to watch Women’s Sports.”

The document, which includes a blank space for fans to fill in their own names, urges bosses to “go ahead and approve that day off” for the “very important” Game 6 of the WNBA Finals.

“You support women’s sports, RIGHT?!” the self-proclaimed “World’s Greatest Hype Man” wrote in the note. “Consider it your contribution to gender equality.”

The Valkyries clinched Game 5 at home at the Chase Center on Monday night 64-55 to move within one game of the team’s first-ever WNBA title. The Bay Area expansion team, led by head coach Natalie Nakase and known for its emphasis on defense, is just in its second season.

Flav’s note echoes the message Valkyries stars Veronica Burton and Kiah Stokes sent after Monday’s win to encourage their fans to tune in to Game 6.

“Call in sick,” Burton said. “I recommend it.”

“Y’all know how to fake a cough,” Stokes added.

Atlanta Mayor Andre Dickens also shared a statement Tuesday on Threads asking employers and educators to “show a little love and extend a little grace” to those who may be cheering the Dream on during their school or work hours.

“Lean into the historic moment, embrace the excitement and let Atlanta show up for Atlanta,” he wrote.

The WNBA announced Monday that Game 6 would be played at State Farm Arena in Atlanta with the earlier start time. The game was originally scheduled for 5 p.m. Pacific but was rescheduled so it could be played in the larger arena. Games 3 and 4 of the series were also moved to the larger venue.

The Dream normally play at the 3,500-seat Gateway Center Arena at College Park. State Farm Arena, which can seat around 17,000 for basketball games, will host all Dream home games starting in the 2027 season.

The matinee timing of Game 6 is because of Atlanta’s NBA team, the Hawks, also being scheduled to play at State Farm Arena on Thursday. The team will face the Cleveland Cavaliers for a regular-season matchup at 5 p.m. Pacific.

“Thank you for your cooperation and for doing the right thing,” Flav wrote.