November, 18 2018, 11:00pm EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Jessicah Pierre (617) 401-1470 jessicah@ips-dc.org, Chuck Collins (617) 308-4433 chuck@ips-dc.org, Josh Hoxie (508) 280-5005 josh@ips-dc.org
New Report Exposes How Top-Heavy Philanthropy, like Bloomberg Gift, Imperils Independent Nonprofit Sector and Democracy
Billionaire philanthropy is not a substitute for a fair tax system and adequately funded public services at the local, state and national level
WASHINGTON
Michael Bloomberg's $1.8 billion gift to John Hopkins University, is an alarming example of the problem identified in a new report, Gilded Giving 2018: Top-Heavy Philanthropy and Its Risks to the Independent Sector, co-authored by Chuck Collins, Josh Hoxie and Helen Flannery of the Institute for Policy Studies.
"Billion dollar gifts like Bloomberg's, while generous and visionary, mask a very disturbing trend," said Chuck Collins. The report highlights how the charitable nonprofit sector is currently experiencing a transition from broad-based support from a wide range of donors to top-heavy philanthropy increasingly dominated by a small number of very wealthy individuals and foundations.
As charitable giving becomes more dominated by mega-donors, this perpetuates the extreme wealth inequality that is disrupting our democracy, philanthropy and the vibrant independent nonprofit sector that we depend on.
Key findings include:
- Charitable contributions from donors at the top of the income and wealth ladder have increased significantly over the past decade. In the early 2000s, households earning $200,000 or more made up only 30 percent of all charitable deductions. But by 2017, this group accounted for 52 percent. And the percent of charitable deductions from households making over one million dollars grew from 12 percent in 1995 to 30 percent in 2015.
- There has been a marked increase in mega-gifting. In 2012, the threshold for mega-gifts was $50 million or more; gifts of that size amounted to $1.2 billion and accounted for just one-half of one percent of all individual giving in the United States that year. In 2017, just five years later, the threshold for mega-gifts jumped to $300 million or more; gifts of that size totaled $4.1 billion and accounted for about one and a half percent of all individual giving that year.
- In the past two decades, the number of households that give to charity has declined significantly. From 2000 to 2014, the proportion of households giving to charity dropped from 66 percent to 55 percent.
- The number and size of private grant-making foundations and donor-advised funds have shown dramatic growth. The funds held in private foundations grew 62 percent between 2005 and 2015; the number of private foundations chartered in the United States grew 21 percent over that same period.
"Over the last three decades, private wealth in the United States has become concentrated in fewer and fewer hands. " said Chuck Collins, director of IPS's Program on Inequality and co-editor of Inequality.org. "We're now seeing this same trend in the charitable sector as a growing amount of philanthropic power is being held in fewer hands"
"Charity is now becoming increasingly undemocratic, with organizations relying more and more on larger donations from smaller numbers of wealthy donors while receiving shrinking amounts of revenue from donors at lower-and middle-income levels," said Helen Flannery, Associate Fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies.
Growing inequity in charitable giving continues to hold risks not only for nonprofits themselves, but also for the nation. This has significant implications for the practice of fundraising, the role of the independent nonprofit sector, and the health of our larger civil society.
"This is truer now than ever," said Josh Hoxie, Director of the Project on Opportunity and Taxation at the Institute for Policy Studies."As ever-greater proportions of charitable dollars technically qualifying as tax-deductible donations are diverted into wealth-warehousing vehicles such as private foundations and donor-advised funds, and away from direct nonprofits serving immediate needs."
This report calls for an urgent reform of the philanthropic sector to encourage broader giving, protect the health of the independent sector, discourage the warehousing of wealth in private foundations and donor-advised funds, and increase accountability to protect the public interest and the integrity of our tax system.
Changes in the rules governing philanthropy should include:
- Increasing the minimum annual distribution payout for foundations.
- Excluding foundation overhead from the payout percentage.
- Linking the excise tax on foundations to payout distribution amounts.
- Reforming the rules governing donor-advised funds to require distribution of DAF donations within three years.
- Banning gifts from private foundations to DAFs and vice-versa.
- Setting a lifetime cap on tax-deductible charitable giving.
- Establishing a universal charitable deduction to encourage giving by low and middle-income givers.
Full report available at: inequality.org/gildedgiving2018/
Institute for Policy Studies turns Ideas into Action for Peace, Justice and the Environment. We strengthen social movements with independent research, visionary thinking, and links to the grassroots, scholars and elected officials. I.F. Stone once called IPS "the think tank for the rest of us." Since 1963, we have empowered people to build healthy and democratic societies in communities, the US, and the world. Click here to learn more, or read the latest below.
LATEST NEWS
After Oval Office Meltdown, Trump Cuts Off All US Military Aid to Ukraine
"Let's be clear—this is not about bringing peace," argued Democratic Rep. Pramila Jayapal. "Donald Trump is siding with Russia, Putin, and dictators across the world over our allies and the defense of democracy."
Mar 04, 2025
U.S. President Donald Trump late Monday ordered a suspension of all American military assistance to Ukraine after his conduct in a televised meeting with the war-torn country's president in the Oval Office last week sparked international dismay and outrage.
Trump's decision reportedly impacts over $1 billion worth of weaponry and ammunition that was set to be delivered to Ukraine, which has been under attack by invading Russian forces since February 2022. The U.S. has provided more than $65 billion in military aid to Ukraine during the full-scale Russian assault, according to State Department figures.
The Associated Pressnoted Monday that the U.S. president's move "comes some five years after Trump held up congressionally authorized assistance to Ukraine as he sought to pressure [Ukrainian President Volodymyr] Zelenskyy to launch an investigation into Joe Biden, then a Democratic presidential candidate."
"The moment led to Trump's first impeachment," the news outlet observed.
Democratic members of Congress argued that Trump's aid cutoff amounts to another instance of the U.S. president unlawfully withholding spending approved by lawmakers—and rejected the White House's claim that the move was motivated by a genuine desire for peace.
"Let's be clear—this is not about bringing peace," said Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), who faced backlash in late 2022 over her handling of a Congressional Progressive Caucus letter urging the Biden administration to "seriously explore all possible avenues, including direct engagement with Russia, to reduce harm and support Ukraine in achieving a peaceful settlement."
"Donald Trump is siding with Russia, Putin, and dictators across the world over our allies and the defense of democracy," Jayapal said Monday. "This is a shameful day in American history."
Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.), the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said in a statement that "if President Trump was truly concerned with securing a just and sustainable peace deal for Ukraine, he wouldn't have conceded every piece of leverage the United States, our allies, and Ukraine held before even beginning negotiations."
"He wouldn't be siding with an authoritarian responsible for war crimes," Meeks continued. "And he certainly wouldn't be forcing Ukraine into surrender, while claiming it's a deal. Instead, he would have continued U.S. support for Ukraine to put it in the best possible position to secure a peace deal for Russia's illegal and unjustified war against it."
"Ukraine is left with impossible choices: fight a losing war without U.S. support, or submit to economic vassalage under the very powers that prolonged its suffering."
Trump's decision to suspend U.S. aid to Ukraine, which the Kremlin welcomed, came after Zelenskyy said in the wake of the Oval Office meeting that "an agreement to end the war is still very, very far away."
"The peace that we foresee in the future must be just, honest, and most importantly, sustainable," added Zelenskyy, who has demanded security guarantees from the West as part of any diplomatic resolution with Russia.
Trump, who is pushing for U.S. control of Ukraine's mineral wealth, responded furiously to Zelenskyy's comment, calling it "the worst statement that could have been made."
Trump's Oval Office blow-up and subsequent aid suspension led some to lament missed opportunities for diplomacy under U.S. President Joe Biden.
"It would have been better for Ukraine—and the world—if Biden had pursued diplomacy much earlier," said Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. "But the Blob and the Democratic centrists shut down even any whisper of diplomacy."
Aída Chávez, communications director and policy adviser at Just Foreign Policy, argued in a recent column for The Intercept that "Trump's demand for 'payback' from Ukraine—treating the bloodiest conflict in Europe since World War II as if it's some unappreciated favor—presents U.S. foreign policy in its most naked form."
"As a result of the West's refusal to seriously consider diplomacy," Chávez added, "Ukraine is left with impossible choices: fight a losing war without U.S. support, or submit to economic vassalage under the very powers that prolonged its suffering."
Keep ReadingShow Less
As Trump Confirms Tariffs Coming, Canada and Mexico Prep for Fight
"Whatever his decision is, we will make our decisions and there is a plan, there is unity in Mexico," said the country's president.
Mar 03, 2025
The Canadian and Mexican governments are preparing for U.S. President Donald Trump's 25% tariffs targeting imports from neighboring nations after he told reporters Monday that the policies will take effect Tuesday after a monthlong delay.
"Very importantly, tomorrow, tariffs—25% on Canada and 25% on Mexico," Trump said, suggesting the damaging policies will make companies "build their car plants, frankly, and other things in the United States, in which case they have no tariffs."
Business leaders, lawmakers, and economists have stressed that the costs of tariffs are passed on to consumers.
Ask whether either government could make a deal before midnight to prevent or further delay the tariffs, Trump responded: "No room left for Mexico or for Canada. No. The tariffs, you know, they're all set, they go into effect tomorrow."
Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum addressed the looming tariffs during a press conference earlier Monday.
"It's a decision that depends on the United States government, on the United States president," Sheinbaum said, according toThe Associated Press. "So whatever his decision is, we will make our decisions and there is a plan, there is unity in Mexico."
"It's very important that the people know that we have made a very important effort of coordination, of collaboration, but it depends on the United States," the Mexican leader added. "We have to respond to this decision."
Reutersnoted that Sheinbaum signaled multiple responses, saying that "we have a plan B, C, D," without offering details.
Sheinbaum previously negotiated a one-month delay to Trump's tariffs, pushing her approval rating to 80% among respondents to a poll conducted by Buendía & Márquez for El Universal February 13-18, shortly after that deal was reached. Citing the newspaper's polls, Mexico News Dailyreported last week that her rating rose "from 77% in January and 74% in November," and "only 11% of those polled in February said they disapproved of the president's performance, down from 13% in January."
As Mexico News Daily detailed:
The 1,000 respondents to the most recent El Universal poll were also asked to respond to the question: "In your opinion, what is the best thing Claudia Sheinbaum has done so far as president of the republic?"
The top response was "defending the country from Donald Trump," with 14% of those polled saying that was the president's greatest achievement since she took office on October 1.
While Sheinbaum is facing off against Trump during her first year in office, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is on his way out. The Liberal leader announced his resignation in January, in response to mounting calls for him to step aside. His party is set to choose its next chief on Sunday, ahead of elections later this year.
CBCreported Monday that Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly, a Liberal Party member, previewed retaliatory action:
"We are ready with $155 billion worth of tariffs and we are ready with the first tranche of tariffs, which is $30 billion, which has already been announced," Joly said, referring to countermeasures that were first released when Trump floated his tariff threat last month.
Joly said she will be meeting with her Cabinet colleagues this evening to discuss the country's next steps as it stares down the possibility of economic ruin.
"We know this is an existential threat to us. There are thousands of jobs in Canada at stake. Now, we've done the work, we are ready, should the U.S. decide to launch their trade war," Joly said.
Newly reelected Ontario Premier Doug Ford, leader of the Progressive Conservative Party, discussed Trump's tariffs with reporters on Monday while attending a mining convention in his province's capital, according to the Toronto Sun.
"If they want to try to annihilate Ontario, I will do everything—including cut off their energy with a smile on my face," Ford said. "They rely on our energy, they need to feel the pain. They want to come at us hard, we're going to come back twice as hard."
While Trump's tariffs targeting Canada and Mexico were halted for a month, his administration has imposed tariffs on Chinese imports. The Washington Postreported Monday that "tariffs on China will also increase by an additional 10 percentage points for the second time in two months, bringing the total tax on some Chinese products to 45%."
The newspaper noted that "on Wall Street, the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed down around 1.5%. The broader S&P 500 index fell nearly 2%. Both market measures are now in the red since Trump's election win."
The U.S. president is also planning to impose 25% tariffs on imports from the European Union.
"Mexico, Canada, and Europe have leverage," economist Gabriel Zucman, director of the E.U. Tax Observatory, wrote in a Friday column, arguing that countries affected by Trump's tariffs "should retaliate by taxing U.S. oligarchs."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Another Unqualified Billionaire': Senate Confirms McMahon as Education Secretary
"The more the president stacks his administration with eccentric billionaires, the further the system gets rigged against working people, seniors, and students," argued one critic.
Mar 03, 2025
Continuing what one watchdog called "their pattern of rubber-stamping deeply flawed and unqualified" Cabinet nominees of President Donald Trump, Senate Republicans on Monday confirmed sports entertainment billionaire and prolific GOP fundraiser Linda McMahon to head the U.S. Department of Education—an agency the president has repeatedly vowed to abolish.
Senators confirmed McMahon in a 51-45 vote. The loyal Trump ally and top fundraiser previously led the Small Business Administration during the president's first term. However, other than serving one year on the Connecticut Board of Education and as a trustee for Sacred Heart University, she has little experience in the field.
Republicans—many of whom share Trump's desire to end the Department of Education—didn't seem to care, with Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa asserting that "education is still mostly a state and local responsibility."
BREAKING: Senate Republicans just confirmed Linda McMahon as Education Secretary—another unqualified billionaire who doesn't understand the Department she's tasked with leading and who is ready to grab the hatchet and help Trump destroy the Department of Education altogether.
— Senator Patty Murray (@murray.senate.gov) March 3, 2025 at 3:29 PM
McMahon gained a more dubious reputation for what one campaigner called her "documented history of enabling sexual abuse of children and sweeping sexual violence under the rug" during her tenure as World Wrestling Entertainment CEO.
The 76-year-old finds herself in the position of being simultaneously tasked with dismantling the DOE and ramping up attacks on diversity, equity, and inclusion programs; "woke" education; transgender students; and other right-wing bugaboos. She is also expected to promote expanded voucher programs, which supporters call "school choice."
Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers—which is leading a "Protect Our Kids" nationwide day of action Tuesday—said in a statement that "we know we will disagree with Secretary McMahon on a host of issues, including her stance on using public funds for private school vouchers."
"We're deeply concerned that her boss, Donald Trump, wants her to take a wrecking ball to the Department of Education and this nation's public schools," Weingarten added. "We want to work with her on strengthening public schools and ramping up high school career and technical education and workforce development efforts across the nation. We ask that she respect the hardworking and amazing educators of this country who are helping young people every day."
National Education Association president Becky Pringle said in a
statement that "every student—no matter where they live, how much their family earns, or the color of their skin—deserves the opportunity, resources, and support they need to grow into their full brilliance."
"Linda McMahon has pledged to dismantle public education and take away resources students need by hollowing out the Department of Education, destroying programs that support students with disabilities, making higher education less accessible, and gutting civil rights protections," Pringle continued.
"While educators and parents would hope McMahon will reflect upon the enormous responsibility she has to our nation's students, sadly there is no evidence to believe she will use her position to focus on strengthening public schools so every student can thrive," she added.
Tony Carrk, the executive director of the watchdog Accountable.US, argued that "every senator who confirmed McMahon is now complicit in the Trump-Project 2025 scheme to abolish the Education Department and jeopardize billions in federal funding needed to strengthen public schools and support special education programs."
"The one-two gut punch of the administration's plans to starve states,
especially conservative ones, of critical federal Medicaid and education money to pay for another wasteful tax break for billionaires like McMahon will leave millions of Americans behind for decades to come," Carrk added. "The more the president stacks his administration with eccentric billionaires, the further the system gets rigged against working people, seniors, and students."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular