Philanthropy’s best-kept secret: the more you have, the less you’re required to give

The 50 largest private foundations in America hold more than $535 billion between them.

Their obligation is to distribute 5% of it each year, a minimum unchanged since 1969.

Across the sector as a whole, average payout now runs closer to seven percent, but that average conceals where the money sits.

Research from FoundationMark found that 17 of the 40 largest US foundations, the ones holding the greatest share of assets, averaged less than 5% over five years.

The floor moves least where the capital is greatest, not out of any particular reluctance, but because the incentives were never built to push it higher.

That single, static number is quietly becoming the most consequential figure in American philanthropy, and this is the year to ask whether it still works.

Warren Buffett’s continued lifetime giving has, once again, prompted the familiar commentary: taxes, timing, control.

But the terrain beneath those questions has shifted.

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, signed last July, permanently raised the federal estate tax exemption to $15 million per person, removing much of the urgency that drove a decade of estate tax motivated giving, while introducing new floors and caps that reduce the tax benefit of charitable deductions for individuals, corporations, and higher rate donors alike.

Individual filers now face a new floor before any deduction applies.

Corporations must clear a one percent income threshold to qualify at all.

Higher rate donors see their deduction capped below their marginal rate.

Every lever that once nudged wealth toward charity has grown weaker.

The payout requirement was never tied to any of it, and so it alone remains untouched, the one mechanism left where policy, not personal inclination, still governs the pace at which capital moves.