November, 15 2023, 08:09am EDT
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f620f/f620f671503904aa841440f80ff9c6c3cda7f88c" alt="Institute for Policy Studies"
New Report from the Institute for Policy Studies Reveals the True Cost of Billionaire Philanthropy
The new analysis details how the ultra-wealthy use charitable giving to avoid taxes and exert influence, while ordinary taxpayers foot the bill.
On November 15, the Institute for Policy Studies released a crucial new report revealing the true cost of billionaire philanthropy to taxpayers, the nonprofit sector, and our society.
The report comprehensively details how the ultra-wealthy use charitable giving to avoid taxes and exert influence, while ordinary taxpayers foot the bill.
As communities prepare to enter the season of giving and highlight charitable donations as a critical way to support communities’ urgent needs, this report reveals how the wealthiest donors in our society give differently than ordinary donors.
- The ultra-wealthy claim the lion’s share of the hundreds of billions in annual tax subsidies to incentivize charitable giving.
- Yet most donations by the ultra-wealthy flow to private foundations and donor-advised funds (DAFs), intermediaries controlled by these donors (As our report shows, 41 cents of every dollar of individual giving in 2022 went to one of these intermediaries). At best, this delays the flow of funds to working nonprofit charities on the ground. At worst, it leads to a warehousing of charitable funds. Private foundations are only required to payout 5 percent of assets annually to charities and donor-advised funds (DAFs) have no payout requirement. To make matters worse, some wealthy donors are playing shell-games to fulfill these minimal obligations.
- The most charitably-orientated billionaires in the U.S., those who have signed the Giving Pledge to donate half their wealth during their lifetime, are not immune from these trends. At their current pace, most funds will end up in perpetual family foundations, not in the hands of active charities.
As wealth concentrates in fewer hands, the imbalance is having a corrosive impact on our nonprofit sector. U.S. nonprofit charities are currently experiencing a transition from broad-based support across a wide range of donors to an increasing reliance on a small number of ultra-wealthy people, a trend IPS has named “top-heavy philanthropy.”
The report sounds the alarm over the way that wealthy donors are using taxpayer-subsidized giving systems to create perpetual foundations that extend their private power and influence.
Key findings include:
WEALTHY DONORS RECEIVE THE BIGGEST TAX BREAKS.
Millions of U.S. donors give directly to local charities without any reduction in their taxes. Less than ten percent of households use the charitable deduction. Wealthy donors, in turn, receive most of the taxpayer subsidies for charitable giving. The taxpayer subsidy for charity is hundreds of billions of dollars –and the wealthier the donor, the greater the taxpayer subsidy.
- The direct taxpayer subsidy for charitable giving was $73.24 billion in 2022 due to personal and corporate charitable deductions and is $111 billion including other known reductions in taxes. But the subsidy is several hundreds of billions a year if estate and capital gains tax reductions are included.
- The wealthier the donor, the greater the taxpayer subsidy for their donation. For every dollar a billionaire donates to charity, taxpayers chip in 74 cents in lost revenue. This is because wealthy donors not only reduce their income tax obligations, but also capital gains, estate and gift taxes.
RISE OF DONOR-CONTROLLED INTERMEDIARIES.
Low and middle income givers are more likely to give directly to local nonprofit charities in their community including youth centers, food banks, and organizations addressing poverty, social needs, arts, and environmental issues.
In contrast, the report finds that wealthy donors are more likely to contribute to their own private foundations and donor-advised funds (DAF), intermediaries that they continue to control. These donors receive immediate tax reductions in the year of their donation, but as this report shows, the funds may take decades to reach working charities, if ever.
An estimated 41 cents of every 2022 individual donation going to charity went to either a private foundation or DAF, up from 37 percent in 2021. In 2022, 27 percent of individual donations went to DAFs, up from 22 percent in 2021. In 2022, 14 percent of individual donations went to private foundations.
“One of the main drivers of DAF growth is the financial industry’s aggressive marketing of DAFs for their considerable tax benefits, secrecy, and non-existent payout rate,” observed Chuck Collins, author of the report.
Over the past five years, the median payout rate for private foundations has hovered between 5.2 and 5.6 percent. And this payout includes compensation to trustees, overhead, and donations to donor-advised funds (DAFs) which have no payout.
Donations to DAFs are now more than a quarter of all U.S. individual charitable giving. The $85.5 billion donated to DAFs in 2022 made up a full 27 percent of the $319 billion in individual giving that year, up from $73.34 billion and 22 percent in 2021.
The largest DAF sponsors now take in more money each year than our largest public charities. By 2021, seven of the top ten recipients of charitable revenue in the country were DAF sponsors, including the four largest affiliated with Fidelity, Schwab, Vanguard and the National Philanthropic Trust.
A significant amount of DAF grants go to other DAFs. We found $2.5 billion in grants going from national donor-advised funds to other national donor-advised funds in 2021 alone.
GIVING PLEDGERS NEED TO PICK UP THE PACE.
The report analyzes the progress of the Giving Pledge, founded in 2010 by Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, that has inspired over 220 billionaires to pledge to donate half of their wealth during their lifetime. The report found that while a handful of donors are moving funds in a timely manner, most have seen their wealth dramatically increase over the fourteen years since the start of the Giving Pledge and need to pick up the pace of giving.
The report suggests that most of these pledges will be fulfilled by donations to private family foundations and donor-advised funds, delaying the public benefit of the taxpayer subsidized donations. In the worst case, some Pledgers have used their philanthropy for self-serving purposes, such as taking out loans from their foundations or paying themselves hefty trustee salaries.
The 73 living U.S. Giving Pledgers who were billionaires in 2010 saw their wealth grow by 138 percent, or 224 percent when adjusted for inflation, through 2022. Their combined assets increased from $348 billion in 2010 to $828 billion over those twelve years.
Of these 73 people, 30 of them have seen their wealth increase more than 200 percent when adjusted for inflation. Those with the greatest growth include Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan (1,382 percent), Dustin Moskovitz and Cari Tuna (1,166 percent), Elaine and Ken Langone (755 percent), Arthur M. Blank (739 percent), and Bernie and Billi Marcus (714 percent).
Of the $12 billion in identifiable gifts of over $1 million that the Giving Pledge signers donated to charity in 2022, 68 percent — more than $8 billion — went either to foundations or to DAFs.
The action of some billionaire donors raise concerns that what began as a civic-minded initiative to spur generosity is instead serving to concentrate private wealth and power at taxpayer expense.
“The missing voice in the philanthropy discussion is the U.S. taxpayer, who subsidizes the private giving of billionaires to the tune of several hundred billion a year,” explains Chuck Collins, co-author of the report and the director of the Program on Inequality and the Common Good at the Institute for Policy Studies. “We should be alarmed at the ways billionaires use philanthropy as a taxpayer-subsidized extension of their private power and influence.”
“We need to update the laws governing philanthropy to keep the financial industry from capturing it and turning it into another tax dodge for the wealthiest people in our society,” Collins adds.
Key recommendations to reform charitable giving and ensure more money ends up in the hands of actual active charities, where it’s needed most:
- Implement a payout requirement for donor-advised funds
- Raise the minimum payout rate requirement for private foundations
- Prevent grants to DAFs from counting towards foundation payout
- Require sponsors to report on DAFs on an account-by-account basis
- Implement a universal charitable tax credit for non-itemizers
“We have to make sure that the tax breaks we underwrite are actually funding charities actively working for the public good,” warns Helen Flannery, co-author of the report and a researcher at the Institute for Policy Studies who is an expert on philanthropy and charitable giving.
“We hope this report will encourage policymakers, the media, and the public to look at the charitable pronouncements of billionaires with more scrutiny,” she adds. “Sometimes their giving is a genuine attempt to give back, but other times it is more about enhancing their political voice, their reputation, or their wallet.”
Full report: https://ips-dc.org/report-true-cost-of-billionaire-philanthropy
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
Vermonters Protest JD Vance: 'Go Ski in Russia'
'J.D.Vance came to Vermont for a get-away. Locals had other ideas'
Mar 01, 2025
Over a thousand Vermonters lined both sides of Route 100 in Waitsfield, Vermont, Saturday morning protesting Vice President JD Vance, who was visiting nearby Sugarbush Resort this weekend with his family.
Vance's ski vacation comes right after Friday's disastrous meeting where US President Donald Trump and Vance ambushed Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in the Oval Office.
Protesters shouted obscenities and waved signs as the Vance motorcade rolled past."Vance is a traitor. Go Ski in Russia," one sign read.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Thuggery From Trump and Vance': World Reacts to Oval Office Meltdown With Zelenskyy
"Donald Trump is treating the destruction of a democracy as a political show—throwing Ukraine to the wolves and doing a favor for Putin," said one Senate Democrat.
Feb 28, 2025
A televised Oval Office screaming match between U.S. and Ukrainian leaders on Friday led to politicians worldwide reaffirming support for Ukraine, congressional Democrats decrying the Trump administration, and human rights advocates expressing alarm about what lies ahead.
U.S. President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance took turns berating Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who reportedly left the White House without plans for a cease-fire or a rare minerals deal with the United States, which has put nearly $183 billion toward help Ukraine respond to the 2022 Russian invasion.
"This is thuggery from Trump and Vance, plain and simple," Ed Davey, leader of the Liberal Democrats in the United Kingdom, said of the public spat on Friday—a day after the U.K.'s Labour prime minister, Keir Starmer, visited the White House and urged Trump to proceed cautiously on a potential peace deal for the region.
"Your dignity honors the bravery of the Ukrainian people," European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen
told the Ukrainian leader on social media Friday. "Be strong, be brave, be fearless. You are never alone, dear President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. We will continue working with you for a just and lasting peace."
Zelenskyy responded, "Thank you for your support." He shared that same message in response to similar comments from the presidents of the European Council and Parliament as well as leaders in Austria, Canada, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Moldova, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Spain, and Sweden.
Despite the incident at the White House, Zelenskyy also said: "Thank you America, thank you for your support, thank you for this visit. Thank you President Donald Trump, Congress, and the American people. Ukraine needs just and lasting peace, and we are working exactly for that."
While world leaders largely focused on rallying behind Ukraine and its president, many Democrats on Capitol Hill were quick to condemn Trump and Vance's conduct.
"Trump and Vance are an EMBARRASSMENT and DISGRACE. It was absolutely shameful to watch them berate the president of another country. Let alone one of our allies!" said Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas).
Crockett also blasted Trump's ultimatum for the Ukrainian leader, saying: "That's not leadership—this is a power play with no regard for what's really happening in the world. President Zelenskyy is literally fighting for his country's survival!
Congresswoman Delia Ramirez (D-Ill.) slammed the U.S. leaders' subservience to the Russian president, charging that "there is no clearer evidence that Trump and Vance kiss the ring of Vladimir Putin than today's meeting with President Zelenskyy."
"What the American people saw was Trump and Vance behaving in ways that are unbefitting their offices," she continued. "Trump's obsession with pleasing Putin is a betrayal of the Ukrainian people, a national security threat, and an international crisis."
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) denounced their behavior as "disgusting and damaging," while Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) opted for "shameful and dangerous." She added that "Donald Trump is treating the destruction of a democracy as a political show—throwing Ukraine to the wolves and doing a favor for Putin."
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) similarly said that "the United States doesn't support Ukraine as a favor, but because it serves our security. Putin is a dictator, not Zelenskyy. Putin started the war, not Zelenskyy. Yelling in the Oval Office and siding with Putin is shameful and a danger to democracy around the world."
Andrew Albertson, executive director of Foreign Policy for America—which was founded after Trump's first win and is largely aligned with the Democratic Party—said in a Friday statement that "in capitals around the world, our closest allies are expressing tonight their shock and dismay at what they witnessed from an American president in the Oval Office."
"Once again," Albertson said, "we saw two things from President Trump: his bizarre affinity for the murderous dictator Vladimir Putin and Trump's grotesque willingness to make even this—Ukraine's fight for survival in the face of Russia's unconscionable invasion—about himself, turning a White House meeting into something we would expect from a reality TV show."
Amnesty International USA said on social media that "nothing that was said today in the Oval Office changes the facts: Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine was an act of aggression and a manifest violation of the U.N. Charter. Sustainable peace in Ukraine is only possible through justice and accountability for all crimes under international law committed since 2014."
Kenneth Roth, a former executive director of Human Rights Watch who's now a visiting professor at Princeton University, called out Vance over berating Zelenskyy for "daring to exercise his free speech rights before the American media," and Trump for "making life-and-death decisions based on his fragile ego."
"Because Ukraine's President Zelenskyy didn't immediately kiss the 'king's' ring, Trump threatens to abandon Ukraine's democracy to Putin's predation," he said. "Trump seems to be so accustomed to sycophants that he becomes outraged when Zelenskyy has the audacity to argue back. Zelenskyy rightly points out that Putin has already breached prior agreements. Why would this one be different without security guarantees?"
"Trump pretends to miss the point," Roth added. "Zelenskyy is perfectly 'ready for peace.' But he wants peace that will last, not a pause in the fighting that will enable Putin to rearm and reinvade. That requires a U.S. security guarantee that Trump refuses to provide."
Meanwhile, Republicans in Congress praised Trump—as did Dmitry Medvedev, a former Russian president who is now deputy chair of the country's Security Council.
"The insolent pig finally got a proper slap down in the Oval Office," Medvedev said of Zelenskyy. "And Donald Trump is right: The Kiev regime is 'gambling with WWIII.'"
The battle in Ukraine over the past three years has elevated global fears of a world war and the potential use of nuclear weapons. Of the nine nations with nukes, Russia and the United States have the largest arsenals.
The U.S.-based peace group CodePink said in a Friday statement that "the heated exchange in the White House... is not helpful for finding an immediate solution to the conflict," but also argued that "without an end to U.S. weapons to Ukraine, the war would continue to present an increased risk of nuclear catastrophe."
"The response to this exchange in the media has been largely about the demonstrated lack of decorum from the Trump administration regarding Ukraine—but we encourage the public to focus instead on the material realities facing Ukraine and Russia," the group said. "This war continuing would cost thousands of more Ukrainian and Russian lives—and an escalation would have an impact on the entire world."
"We hope the U.S. and Ukraine come back together on a more realistic basis before the war escalates further, but that will require serious diplomacy. It will require Europe to stop encouraging Ukraine to keep fighting," CodePink added. "Now is the moment when all sides must recognize that this war must be settled at the negotiating table, no matter how hard that is."
Keep ReadingShow Less
As Freed Palestinians Describe Torture, Trump OKs $3 Billion Arms Package for Israel
Like the Biden administration, Trump is claiming an "emergency" in order to bypass Congress.
Feb 28, 2025
As Palestinians released from Israeli imprisonment recount torture and other abuse suffered at the hands of their former captors, the Trump administration on Friday approved a new $3 billion weapons package for Israel.
The new package, reported by Zeteo's Prem Thakker, includes nearly $2.716 billion worth of bombs and weapons guidance kits, as well as $295 million in bulldozers. The Trump administration said that "an emergency exists that requires the immediate sale," allowing it to bypass Congress, as the Biden administration did on multiple occasions. However, the weapons won't be delivered until 2026 or 2027.
The Trump-Vance State Department just approved $3.01 billion in arms & equipment sales to Israel $2.04 billion in bombs $675.7 million in bombs & weapon guidance kits $295 million in bulldozers Administration said "an emergency exists that requires the immediate sale," waiving congressional review
[image or embed]
— Prem Thakker ツ ( @premthakker.bsky.social) February 28, 2025 at 4:56 PM
From October 2023 to October 2024, Israel received a record $17.9 billion worth of U.S. arms as it waged a war of annihilation against the Gaza Strip that left more than 170,000 Palestinians dead, maimed, or missing and millions more displaced, starved, or sickened. Israel is facing genocide allegations in an International Court of Justice case brought by South Africa. The International Criminal Court has also issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant.
Reporting on the new package came after U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on Monday announced an effort to block four other arms sales totaling $8.56 billion in offensive American weaponry to Israel.
Meanwhile, some of the approximately 1,000 Palestinians released by Israel as part of a prisoner swap described grim stories of abuse by Israeli forces. The former detainees, who were arrested but never charged with any crimes, "have returned visibly malnourished and scarred by the physical and psychological torture they say they faced in Israeli prisons," according toThe Washington Post. Some returned to what were once their homes to find them destroyed and their relatives killed or wounded by Israeli forces.
Eyas al-Bursh, a doctor volunteering at al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City when he was captured by Israeli troops, was held in Sde Teiman and the Ofer military prison in the illegally occupied West Bank for 11 months.
"The places where we were held were harsh, sleep was impossible, and we remained handcuffed and blindfolded," al-Bursh told the Post.
"We endured psychological and physical torture without a single day of respite—whether through beatings, abuse, punches, or even verbal insults and humiliation," he added.
The Israel Defense Forces told the Post that it "acts in accordance with Israeli and international law in order to protect the rights of the detainees held in the detention and questioning facilities."
However, farmer Ashraf al-Radhi, who was held for 14 months—including at the notorious Sde Teiman prison in Israel's Negev Desert—told the Post that "we witnessed all kinds of humiliation."
According to the newspaper:
Radhi said he "wished for death" during his detention, which included long periods when he was blindfolded, handcuffed, andcrammed into a filthy cell with dozens of other prisoners. The 34-year-old said he had no access to a lawyer; no idea why he was there; or what, in his absence, had become of his family.
Rahdi also said that Mohammed al-Akka, a 44-year-old detainee held with him, died last December. Al-Akka is one of dozens of Palestinian prisoners who have died in Israeli custody, some from suspected torture and, in at least one case, rape with an electric baton. A number of Israeli reservists are being investigated for the alleged gang-rape of a Sde Teiman prisoner.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular