立即打开
危机当头,比尔•盖茨等亿万富翁在干什么?

危机当头,比尔•盖茨等亿万富翁在干什么?

Alan Davis 2020年07月15日
糟糕的是,迄今为止,超级富豪的捐款金额几乎没有太大的变动。

如今,每一位美国人都身陷囹圄,堪称一生中最艰难的时刻。那么美国的600余位亿万富翁,以及那些坐拥数十亿美元的慈善基金会都到哪里去了呢?他们本该是力挽狂澜的主力军,然而,比起携手解决当下的困境,他们似乎更关心自己的大金库——在捐款博彩的背后,更多的是精打细算。是时候来聊聊他们了。

单看这些亿万富翁的捐款总额,很容易给人一种“慷慨大方”的错觉。但其实在慷慨与否这件事上,百分比更能说明问题。以比尔•盖茨为例,他一共捐了3亿美元救助金,或许对大多数人而言,这已经是一个天文数字,但对盖茨本人,这不过是九牛一毛而已。以他的身家,3亿美元不过是其净资产中的0.3%。以其每年的被动投资收益进行计算,即便他每隔两周就捐出3亿美元,到今年年底,也依然还有1000亿美元。

“亿万富翁只是看起来很慷慨,疫情之下,他们应该为慈善事业再多付出一点。”艾伦•戴维斯写道。图片来源:PHOTO-ILLUSTRATION BY FORTUNE; ORIGINAL IMAGE: CHONESS—GETTY IMAGES

事实上,美国上层囤积的财富已经达到了令人发指的地步。目前,诸如盖茨基金会、洛克菲勒基金会,以及福特基金会此类的慈善机构共计持有约1万亿美元捐款。但美国前0.1%的富豪家族资产已经达到了12万亿美元,前者与后者相比,依旧相形见绌。自疫情爆发以来,美国的失业率及食品短缺率都越过红线,冲破了历史最高点,然而富豪们的资产却风雨无阻地增加了4000亿美元。更为糟糕的是,迄今为止,超级富豪的捐款金额几乎没有太大的变动。

此外,富豪们的捐款动机也并非表面上所说的那样单纯。捐款行为可以帮助富豪得到税收减免优惠,只要向私人基金会或者其他政府推荐的慈善机构捐款,该捐款人就能被豁免70%左右的税收。如果是一些实行高税收政策的国家,这一优惠力度还会更大。换言之,富豪捐款中的2/3,说到底还是来自纳税人的钱,但他们却有权利去指定自己的受助对象。

众所周知,比尔•盖茨早前曾经发起并签署了广受赞誉的“捐赠誓约”,承诺会在有生之年或在自己的遗嘱中捐出半数的财富。既然如此,为什么不能早一点实行,早一点为社会做出贡献呢?

在疫情和经济危机的双重夹击下,在这个水深火热的时代,是时候让那些坐拥亿万的超级富豪、那些私人基金会的操盘手、那些社会中前0.1%的富人精英从幕后来到台前了。在此,希望有关人士自愿签署“危机慈善承诺书”,该项活动由莱纳德及索菲•戴维斯基金会联合发起,名为“WhyNot Initiative”(为什么不采取行动),旨在呼吁更多人主动承担起危机下的社会责任,共同挽救国家经济。签署该项承诺的个人或机构需要在今年按规定比率捐出总资产中的一定金额(不低于10万美元),以此帮助美国渡过难关。

其实现在美国国会已经在起草与之相似的“紧急性慈善事业激励法案”了,未来或将立法要求富豪连续三年每年捐款定量的金额,但作为慈善事业的领导人,深谙“尽早行动”的道理,立法的过程缓慢而艰巨,慈善团体必须加快步伐。

在项目初始阶段,该项承诺书对于捐款人的要求并不严苛:净资产在2500万美元以上的捐款方需要抽出其资产中的2%;净资产在1.5亿美元以上的捐款方需要抽出其资产中的3%;净资产在10亿美元以上的捐款方需要抽出其资产中的4%;净资产在250亿美元以上的捐款方需要抽出其资产中的5%,以此递进。

不少批评人士指出该方案的数字金额太少,对此本人完全赞同,毕竟一个亿万富翁不可能只花4000万美元就能买到死后晋升天堂的坐席。但是,我们确乎需要寻找到一个可行的出发点。如果能积少成多,这也会帮助我们筹集到上千亿美元,给当下的疫情危机打上一针聊胜于无的强心剂。

总的来说,这份承诺书的意旨不在于“捐给谁”,而在于“现在就捐”。仅仅承诺在今后的某个时间点去捐赠,哪怕捐得再多也是不能解决问题的。疫情之下,很多社会弊端被无情地暴露出来,我们已经没有时间去慢慢修复它们了。

面对社会中近乎荒谬的不公平与不公正,很多富人也在跟着一起大声疾呼,甚至有人还对政府呼吁要提高自己的税收金额。但是,当社会真正需要他们的时候,当他们有机会回报社会的时候,某些人却守着自己的资产不肯放手,这是何等的令人心寒。是时候了,让社会中最富有的人参与进来,鼓励他们做出承诺,和所有人一起,为美国做出有意义的改变。(财富中文网)

本文作者艾伦•戴维斯是莱纳德及索菲•戴维斯基金会主席、爱国富翁协会成员、“WhyNot Initiative”活动发起人。

编译:陈怡轩

如今,每一位美国人都身陷囹圄,堪称一生中最艰难的时刻。那么美国的600余位亿万富翁,以及那些坐拥数十亿美元的慈善基金会都到哪里去了呢?他们本该是力挽狂澜的主力军,然而,比起携手解决当下的困境,他们似乎更关心自己的大金库——在捐款博彩的背后,更多的是精打细算。是时候来聊聊他们了。

单看这些亿万富翁的捐款总额,很容易给人一种“慷慨大方”的错觉。但其实在慷慨与否这件事上,百分比更能说明问题。以比尔•盖茨为例,他一共捐了3亿美元救助金,或许对大多数人而言,这已经是一个天文数字,但对盖茨本人,这不过是九牛一毛而已。以他的身家,3亿美元不过是其净资产中的0.3%。以其每年的被动投资收益进行计算,即便他每隔两周就捐出3亿美元,到今年年底,也依然还有1000亿美元。

事实上,美国上层囤积的财富已经达到了令人发指的地步。目前,诸如盖茨基金会、洛克菲勒基金会,以及福特基金会此类的慈善机构共计持有约1万亿美元捐款。但美国前0.1%的富豪家族资产已经达到了12万亿美元,前者与后者相比,依旧相形见绌。自疫情爆发以来,美国的失业率及食品短缺率都越过红线,冲破了历史最高点,然而富豪们的资产却风雨无阻地增加了4000亿美元。更为糟糕的是,迄今为止,超级富豪的捐款金额几乎没有太大的变动。

此外,富豪们的捐款动机也并非表面上所说的那样单纯。捐款行为可以帮助富豪得到税收减免优惠,只要向私人基金会或者其他政府推荐的慈善机构捐款,该捐款人就能被豁免70%左右的税收。如果是一些实行高税收政策的国家,这一优惠力度还会更大。换言之,富豪捐款中的2/3,说到底还是来自纳税人的钱,但他们却有权利去指定自己的受助对象。

众所周知,比尔•盖茨早前曾经发起并签署了广受赞誉的“捐赠誓约”,承诺会在有生之年或在自己的遗嘱中捐出半数的财富。既然如此,为什么不能早一点实行,早一点为社会做出贡献呢?

在疫情和经济危机的双重夹击下,在这个水深火热的时代,是时候让那些坐拥亿万的超级富豪、那些私人基金会的操盘手、那些社会中前0.1%的富人精英从幕后来到台前了。在此,希望有关人士自愿签署“危机慈善承诺书”,该项活动由莱纳德及索菲•戴维斯基金会联合发起,名为“WhyNot Initiative”(为什么不采取行动),旨在呼吁更多人主动承担起危机下的社会责任,共同挽救国家经济。签署该项承诺的个人或机构需要在今年按规定比率捐出总资产中的一定金额(不低于10万美元),以此帮助美国渡过难关。

其实现在美国国会已经在起草与之相似的“紧急性慈善事业激励法案”了,未来或将立法要求富豪连续三年每年捐款定量的金额,但作为慈善事业的领导人,深谙“尽早行动”的道理,立法的过程缓慢而艰巨,慈善团体必须加快步伐。

在项目初始阶段,该项承诺书对于捐款人的要求并不严苛:净资产在2500万美元以上的捐款方需要抽出其资产中的2%;净资产在1.5亿美元以上的捐款方需要抽出其资产中的3%;净资产在10亿美元以上的捐款方需要抽出其资产中的4%;净资产在250亿美元以上的捐款方需要抽出其资产中的5%,以此递进。

不少批评人士指出该方案的数字金额太少,对此本人完全赞同,毕竟一个亿万富翁不可能只花4000万美元就能买到死后晋升天堂的坐席。但是,我们确乎需要寻找到一个可行的出发点。如果能积少成多,这也会帮助我们筹集到上千亿美元,给当下的疫情危机打上一针聊胜于无的强心剂。

总的来说,这份承诺书的意旨不在于“捐给谁”,而在于“现在就捐”。仅仅承诺在今后的某个时间点去捐赠,哪怕捐得再多也是不能解决问题的。疫情之下,很多社会弊端被无情地暴露出来,我们已经没有时间去慢慢修复它们了。

面对社会中近乎荒谬的不公平与不公正,很多富人也在跟着一起大声疾呼,甚至有人还对政府呼吁要提高自己的税收金额。但是,当社会真正需要他们的时候,当他们有机会回报社会的时候,某些人却守着自己的资产不肯放手,这是何等的令人心寒。是时候了,让社会中最富有的人参与进来,鼓励他们做出承诺,和所有人一起,为美国做出有意义的改变。(财富中文网)

本文作者艾伦•戴维斯是莱纳德及索菲•戴维斯基金会主席、爱国富翁协会成员、“WhyNot Initiative”活动发起人。

编译:陈怡轩

In the midst of the worst economic crisis any of us have faced in our lifetimes, those who are most able to afford to help—the 600 or so billionaires in the U.S. and billion-dollar charitable foundations—are more concerned with protecting their vast piles of wealth than they are with fixing the problems we’re facing. Ultra-wealthy so-called philanthropists are pinching pennies while asking for praise, and it’s time for Americans to call them out.

America’s billionaires might seem generous when you look at the absolute amount they give, but percentages are much more telling when it comes to measuring generosity. Bill Gates, for example, is giving $300 million for COVID-19 relief, a number too large for most of us to fathom. But here’s the thing: According to his estimated wealth as of this writing, Gates is giving just 0.3% of his net worth. It’s a big number, but it’s pocket change for him. Based on estimates of what he earns on passive investments, Gates could contribute $300 million every two weeks and still have the same $100 billion at the end of the year as he had in the beginning.

The staggering amounts of hoarded wealth are almost beyond comprehension. Foundations like Gates, Rockefeller, and Ford are sitting on endowments of nearly $1 trillion, but even that is dwarfed by the $12 trillion held by the top 0.1% of households. And things are only getting worse. Food shortages and unemployment are at record highs, yet billionaires managed to add over $400 billion to their collective holdings just since this crisis began. Yet so far this year, the ultra-rich have barely increased their giving at all.

It’s even more insulting when you consider that most of what they give away is your money. The rich get large tax deductions for their donations—in fact, money donated to private foundations and donor-advised funds can enjoy tax benefits of as much as 70%, and even more in high-income tax states. This means that rich people control who gets the money, but because they get such a big tax cut for every dollar they give away, more than two-thirds of their giving should really be considered taxpayer money.

To his credit, Gates initiated and signed the Giving Pledge, with which billionaires commit to giving away more than half of their wealth in their lifetimes or in their wills. Why not start now, and give back more than they continue to accumulate?

With a pandemic and economic crisis, it is time for the hoarders—those who control private foundations, sit on donor-advised funds, and rank in the top 0.1% of households—to step up. I encourage them to sign on to the Crisis Charitable Commitment, an effort of the WhyNot Initiative of the Leonard and Sophie Davis Fund, both of which I lead. Signing on means agreeing to contribute a minimum of $100,000 to nonprofits in 2020 at or above defined minimum percentages of net worth.

This is consistent with the proposal for an emergency charitable stimulus bill, which would require this payout each year for three years. But we can’t wait for legislation—the philanthropic community must step up.

For the 0.1 percenters, this pledge establishes what could be considered a generosity standard for charitable donations, akin to tithing: 2% of assets over $25 million, 3% of assets over $150 million, 4% of assets over $1 billion, and 5% of assets over $25 billion. I accept the criticism that these numbers are low—a billionaire should not be able to buy a seat in heaven by giving just $40 million. But we need to start somewhere, and this will generate a few hundred billion dollars to mitigate damage caused by the coronavirus crisis.

The pledge doesn’t dictate where to give the money—just to give, and give now. Pledges to give lavishly at some point decades in the future aren’t the answer. The pandemic has laid bare the many problems we face, and we don’t have luxury of time when it comes to fixing them.

It’s frustrating to see so many people of wealth speak out about the absurd inequality that exists in our country, even proposing higher taxes on themselves, and yet, when the critical need and opportunity to give back arises, these same people hoard far more than they help. It’s time the richest among us get on board, take the pledge, and make a meaningful difference.

Alan Davis is director of the WhyNot Initiative, president of the Leonard and Sophie Davis Fund, and a member of Patriotic Millionaires.

最新:
  • 热读文章
  • 热门视频
活动
扫码打开财富Plus App