The legal showdown between Brad Pitt and his ex Angelina Jolie has taken another dramatic turn.
Pitt, 62, is now asking the court to order Jolie to produce records showing her income from 2017 to 2019, after she claimed to have ‘largely put her career on hold’ and forewent ‘years of compensation’ following their 2016 separation.
Jolie, 51, allegedly agreed to produce financial records from the years 2017 to 2021, but has apparently only produced documents for the years 2020 and 2021.
The Daily Mail has contacted representatives for both Pitt and Jolie for comment.
In court documents obtained by The Daily Mail, Pitt’s lawyers allege Jolie has been withholding specific financial documents despite agreeing to produce said records.
‘Jolie’s Cross-Complaint alleges that, after the parties’ 2016 separation, she put her career on hold, “forgoing years of compensation”; that Pitt possessed “substantial leverage and control” over her due in part to her financial condition at that time; and that by 2019 she concluded she needed to sell her interest in Miraval to obtain “financial independence” from him,’ Pitt’s filing reads.
Brad Pitt is now asking the court to order Angelina Jolie to produce financial records; pictured 2012
‘On February 23, 2026, Jolie withdrew both her agreement to provide declarations responsive to Request Nos. 81 and 82 for the full 2017-2021 period and her agreement to produce participation statements from that same period.’
They allege she instead provided ‘supplemental responses limiting her production to 2020 and 2021, and later produced profit participation statements and tax returns for those two years only as well.’
They are now seeking to produce documents showing her annual income and profit participation statements from 2017 to 2019.
‘Prior to the IDC [Informal Discovery Conference], Plaintiffs proposed that Jolie stipulate that she was not under economic pressure before January 1, 2020, and that Pitt did not exert economic coercion on her from 2017 to 2019. Jolie declined.
‘At the IDC, the Court then separately proposed limiting the scope of Jolie’s testimony concerning her earnings and compensation. Again, Jolie declined the proposal. Instead, Jolie confirmed at the IDC that she may argue at trial that Pitt used Miraval as leverage to control her and that her decision to put her career on hold bears on why the proposed NDA was allegedly abusive. The parties therefore did not resolve the dispute.’
‘The Requests seek information directly bearing on financial assertions Jolie pleaded: that she forwent “years of compensation,” that Miraval was her “most important asset,” and that Pitt’s control over Miraval distributions gave him “substantial leverage and control” over her during the period leading to her 2019 decision to sell her stake in Chateau Miraval.’
‘Request No. 81 seeks documents sufficient to show Jolie’s earned income during the period between her separation from Pitt through 2019— the year Jolie allegedly decided she needed to sell Miraval—while Request No. 82 seeks documents sufficient to show Jolie’s earnings from the profit-sharing bonuses she received during that period from her earlier acting and directing roles.’
‘Jolie may be able to establish from public information that she held fewer acting or directing roles from 2017–2019 than she did in prior years. But paragraph 23 of her Cross Complaint goes further: it alleges that she forwent “years of compensation.” Documents showing the earned income and profit participation payments she received during those years will permit Plaintiffs to test the accuracy and context of that allegation.’
Yet, in a previous legal filing, Jolie hit back at Pitt’s characterization of her remarks for ‘financial independence’, claiming she was misquoted.
She also noted she has already provided financial records despite having ‘no obligation to do so.’
Pitt’s side is seeking the records after Jolie allegedly claimed to have ‘largely put her career on hold’ and forewent ‘years of compensation’ following their split
‘Pitt claims that Jolie has put her entire financial condition at issue going back to 2017 because of her allegation that she was seeking “financial independence.” (IDC Statement at 3:2-6.),’ a documented filed in June stated.
‘But Pitt’s selective quote misleadingly fails to include the entirety of her allegation. Jolie does not allege that she was seeking financial independence in the abstract; she alleges that she was seeking “financial independence from her ex-husband [Pitt].”’
‘Separating from one’s ex-husband is categorically different from an allegation that one is suffering general financial distress. Jolie has never alleged that she was in financial distress—her allegations are clear that she sought to untangle her financial life from the ex-spouse she was divorcing. That distinction is dispositive.’
It further notes: ‘Pitt also inaccurately ties his demand for a coercive NDA to Jolie’s financial condition, but here too his summaries are not accurate. Appearing to mock her, Pitt highlights that the NDA he proposed “nearly broke her,” and concludes from this, in conjunction with Jolie’s conclusion that she had to sell Miraval to someone else, that Jolie placed her entire financial condition at issue because she felt “financially cornered.” But the phrase “financially cornered” is Pitt’s phrase, not Jolie’s. Jolie never once made that allegation.
‘And the distinction above applies here too: her ex-husband was attempting to have her sign an NDA to cover up his abuse of her and their children as a condition to him buying her most valuable asset, which was their biggest financial entanglement. The issue is not whether Jolie needed the money—the issue is that she was trying to untangle her life and her finances from her controlling and abusive ex husband. That distinction makes all the difference.’
The former power couple have been embroiled in a messy split for years
They also allege digging into Jolie’s finances from 2017-2019 pose a ‘serious invasion’ of her ‘privacy rights.’
‘In short, the entire basis for Pitt compelling these answers is a made-up theory that Jolie did not allege. Nevertheless, to narrow the dispute, and although she feels very strongly that she did not have to do this, Jolie already agreed to produce and has in fact produced her tax returns, and all of her profit participation statements showing any income received, for 2020 and 2021 Although Jolie had no obligation to do so, producing these documents should have ended this dispute. These two years of private financial information—leading up to (2020) and during (2021) – the very dispute that is at the center of this case—already provided Pitt all the insight he needs into Jolie’s financial condition. Going back any further is a serious invasion of Jolie’s privacy rights’.
For a decade, Pitt and Jolie were seen as Hollywood’s ‘It’ couple during their long-term relationship after they met on the set of the 2005 film Mr and Mrs Smith.
They married in August 2014 during a secret ceremony in the South of France and welcomed three children together during their romance: Shiloh in 2006 and twins Vivienne and Knox in 2008.
They also adopted two more, Zahara and Pax, and Pitt legally adopted the son that Angelina had adopted before they got together, Maddox.
But in 2016, it came to an explosive end after the pair got into an alleged physical altercation while on a private flight with their six children and Jolie later filed for divorce.
The former couple have six children together, but many of the children have dropped their father’s last name
Jolie later claimed that Pitt ‘choked’ one of the children during the horrifying dispute and ‘struck’ another in the face, leaving her and the youngsters feeling like ‘hostages’ and cowering in fear under a blanket for hours until they landed.
She also alleged that he grabbed her by the head, slammed her against a wall, and violently shook her at one point during the flight – which resulted in her injuring her back and elbow.
Pitt’s representative called Jolie’s account ‘completely untrue’ to CNN at first, but then released an amended statement to the publication that read, ‘Angelina’s story continues to evolve each time she tells it.
‘Brad has accepted responsibility for what he did but will not for things he didn’t do. He has been on the receiving end of every type of personal attack and misrepresentation.
‘Thankfully, the various public authorities she has tried to use against him over the past six years have made their own independent decisions. Brad will continue to respond in court as he has consistently done.’
Since they split, the two stars have been embroiled in one of the most publicized legal battles in Hollywood history over custody of their children, as well as the winery that they once owned together.
In May 2021, after years of duking it out in court, Pitt and Jolie were officially granted joint custody of their six children, but one month later, the judge’s decision was thrown out.
The fallout from their split has gotten progressively uglier.
Zahara, Vivienne, Maddox, Shiloh and Vivienne have all stopped using their father’s last name. It’s unclear where Pax stands.
Pitt has since moved on romantically and has been dating jewelry designer Ines de Ramon for the last few years.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login