

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."
This country and this world are at a monumental crossroads. US voters have an opportunity to beat back the forces of fascism and confront the billionaires who are rigging the economy, our media system, and our democracy, making it increasingly impossible for ordinary people to get by. We’re not just talking about the election. We’re talking about what must be done once these fascist elements are vanquished from power. We need a bolder set of solutions than what either major party has so far been willing to offer and a working-class movement ready to fight like hell for it. Trump didn't emerge from nowhere. The conditions that fueled MAGA authoritarianism were created by decades of radical neoliberal economic policies and a corrupt political system dominated by corporate interests. They slashed taxes on the super-rich, promising that the benefits would trickle down. They said giveaways to the corporate titans would make life more affordable for the rest of us. It was all bullshit. And when a bitter, betrayed populace searches for someone to blame, right-wing demagogues have little trouble finding scapegoats. People know when they're being lied to, but you won't hear any of this from the corporate media. Only independent journalism—powered and funded by people who believe in building a better world—can deliver truly trustworthy daily news. If you share our vision, please contribute whatever you can to sustain our work. |
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."