

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

A new report finds growing inequality in charitable giving. (Photo: Institute for Policy Studies)
A new report focuses on an under-the-radar trend--charitable giving increasingly dominated by the uber-wealthy--and reveals how this concentration of philanthropic power poses a threat to democracy.
Co-authored by Chuck Collins, Josh Hoxie, and Helen Flannery of the Institute for Policy Studies (ISP), the latest edition of Gilded Giving (pdf) shows how there has been an increase in charitable giving over the past 15 years. A closer look, however, shows that there's been a decline in those giving at the low- and mid-dollar amount while there's been an increase in giving by a high-dollar donors.
"The rate of decline in the number of low-dollar donors has an extremely strong correlation with indicators of economic inequality and insecurity in the United States," the report notes.
Moreover, "a few individual gifts given in the past two years have blown all previous concepts of mega-giving out of the water," the authors write.
For example, Bill and Melinda Gates gave a $4.8 billion gift in 2017 to the Gates Foundation, and Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan gave a whopping $1.8 billion to their own Chan Zuckerberg Foundation. Gifts like these, "while generous and visionary," stated lead author Collins, "mask a very disturbing trend."
"Over the last three decades, private wealth in the United States has become concentrated in fewer and fewer hands," Collins, who is also director of IPS's Program on Inequality and co-editor of Inequality.org, added. "We're now seeing this same trend in the charitable sector as a growing amount of philanthropic power is being held in fewer hands."
Among the key findings, as noted in the report:
To be sure, the findings have an impact on fundraising by charities and nonprofits. For example, the groups may face greater instability because they are relying on a smaller donor base. In addition, deep-pocketed donors often earmark the funds towards specific projects rather than general operating costs. But there are in fact major threats to democracy as a result of the top-heavy giving, as the gifts can be used "as an extension of power and privilege protection."
The authors put it thusly:
Perhaps the greatest risks of a top-heavy philanthropic sector are those for our civil society: that charity will cease to be used a vehicle to benefit society as a whole, and will be used instead as a means to protect and preserve individual private wealth and power. This includes an increasingly unaccountable and undemocratic philanthropic sector; the rise of tax avoidance philanthropy; the warehousing of wealth in the face of urgent needs; self-dealing philanthropy; and the increasing use of philanthropy as an extension of private power and privilege protection.
Takckling the problem means taking measures like "establishing a universal charitable deduction to encourage giving by low and middle-income givers" as well as "banning gifts from private foundations to [donor-advised funds] and vice-versa" and "setting a lifetime cap on tax-deductible charitable giving."
Broader reforms, however, are needed, the report stresses, as "policymakers will need to not only reform the rules of charitable giving, but also establish policies to reduce, over time, concentrations of wealth."
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
A new report focuses on an under-the-radar trend--charitable giving increasingly dominated by the uber-wealthy--and reveals how this concentration of philanthropic power poses a threat to democracy.
Co-authored by Chuck Collins, Josh Hoxie, and Helen Flannery of the Institute for Policy Studies (ISP), the latest edition of Gilded Giving (pdf) shows how there has been an increase in charitable giving over the past 15 years. A closer look, however, shows that there's been a decline in those giving at the low- and mid-dollar amount while there's been an increase in giving by a high-dollar donors.
"The rate of decline in the number of low-dollar donors has an extremely strong correlation with indicators of economic inequality and insecurity in the United States," the report notes.
Moreover, "a few individual gifts given in the past two years have blown all previous concepts of mega-giving out of the water," the authors write.
For example, Bill and Melinda Gates gave a $4.8 billion gift in 2017 to the Gates Foundation, and Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan gave a whopping $1.8 billion to their own Chan Zuckerberg Foundation. Gifts like these, "while generous and visionary," stated lead author Collins, "mask a very disturbing trend."
"Over the last three decades, private wealth in the United States has become concentrated in fewer and fewer hands," Collins, who is also director of IPS's Program on Inequality and co-editor of Inequality.org, added. "We're now seeing this same trend in the charitable sector as a growing amount of philanthropic power is being held in fewer hands."
Among the key findings, as noted in the report:
To be sure, the findings have an impact on fundraising by charities and nonprofits. For example, the groups may face greater instability because they are relying on a smaller donor base. In addition, deep-pocketed donors often earmark the funds towards specific projects rather than general operating costs. But there are in fact major threats to democracy as a result of the top-heavy giving, as the gifts can be used "as an extension of power and privilege protection."
The authors put it thusly:
Perhaps the greatest risks of a top-heavy philanthropic sector are those for our civil society: that charity will cease to be used a vehicle to benefit society as a whole, and will be used instead as a means to protect and preserve individual private wealth and power. This includes an increasingly unaccountable and undemocratic philanthropic sector; the rise of tax avoidance philanthropy; the warehousing of wealth in the face of urgent needs; self-dealing philanthropy; and the increasing use of philanthropy as an extension of private power and privilege protection.
Takckling the problem means taking measures like "establishing a universal charitable deduction to encourage giving by low and middle-income givers" as well as "banning gifts from private foundations to [donor-advised funds] and vice-versa" and "setting a lifetime cap on tax-deductible charitable giving."
Broader reforms, however, are needed, the report stresses, as "policymakers will need to not only reform the rules of charitable giving, but also establish policies to reduce, over time, concentrations of wealth."
A new report focuses on an under-the-radar trend--charitable giving increasingly dominated by the uber-wealthy--and reveals how this concentration of philanthropic power poses a threat to democracy.
Co-authored by Chuck Collins, Josh Hoxie, and Helen Flannery of the Institute for Policy Studies (ISP), the latest edition of Gilded Giving (pdf) shows how there has been an increase in charitable giving over the past 15 years. A closer look, however, shows that there's been a decline in those giving at the low- and mid-dollar amount while there's been an increase in giving by a high-dollar donors.
"The rate of decline in the number of low-dollar donors has an extremely strong correlation with indicators of economic inequality and insecurity in the United States," the report notes.
Moreover, "a few individual gifts given in the past two years have blown all previous concepts of mega-giving out of the water," the authors write.
For example, Bill and Melinda Gates gave a $4.8 billion gift in 2017 to the Gates Foundation, and Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan gave a whopping $1.8 billion to their own Chan Zuckerberg Foundation. Gifts like these, "while generous and visionary," stated lead author Collins, "mask a very disturbing trend."
"Over the last three decades, private wealth in the United States has become concentrated in fewer and fewer hands," Collins, who is also director of IPS's Program on Inequality and co-editor of Inequality.org, added. "We're now seeing this same trend in the charitable sector as a growing amount of philanthropic power is being held in fewer hands."
Among the key findings, as noted in the report:
To be sure, the findings have an impact on fundraising by charities and nonprofits. For example, the groups may face greater instability because they are relying on a smaller donor base. In addition, deep-pocketed donors often earmark the funds towards specific projects rather than general operating costs. But there are in fact major threats to democracy as a result of the top-heavy giving, as the gifts can be used "as an extension of power and privilege protection."
The authors put it thusly:
Perhaps the greatest risks of a top-heavy philanthropic sector are those for our civil society: that charity will cease to be used a vehicle to benefit society as a whole, and will be used instead as a means to protect and preserve individual private wealth and power. This includes an increasingly unaccountable and undemocratic philanthropic sector; the rise of tax avoidance philanthropy; the warehousing of wealth in the face of urgent needs; self-dealing philanthropy; and the increasing use of philanthropy as an extension of private power and privilege protection.
Takckling the problem means taking measures like "establishing a universal charitable deduction to encourage giving by low and middle-income givers" as well as "banning gifts from private foundations to [donor-advised funds] and vice-versa" and "setting a lifetime cap on tax-deductible charitable giving."
Broader reforms, however, are needed, the report stresses, as "policymakers will need to not only reform the rules of charitable giving, but also establish policies to reduce, over time, concentrations of wealth."