Philanthropy Under Trump: What To Expect

A Pen and ink illustration of the White House, to illustrate a blog on the future of philanthropy under Trump.
Reading Time: 4 minutes

Predicting the future of philanthropy is a tricky business—and even more so when it comes to political shifts. Under the new Trump administration, the direction of philanthropy could change, although I do not think it will drastically. We can only take some guesses based on historical data and recent events.

The Good

A good predictor of charitable giving has been the stock market. It’s simple: When stocks do well, philanthropy follows. A second Trump term will likely drive stocks up and therefore charitable contributions will likely rise, too. Financial prosperity has always correlated with increased generosity among Americans, who tend to share more of their wealth when their portfolios “even look” promising. That is, before their portfolios even actually go up.

Another predictor is taxes. Trump has long supported tax reductions, which means people may have more disposable income. Historically, when people experience reduced tax burdens, their capacity (and willingness) to give increases. Even businesses are more likely to give raises, which then passes to philanthropy. The combination of stock market growth and a lower tax environment could lead to a boom in donations, particularly from high-income households.

In short, the financial landscape might become a positive factor for philanthropy like in the past, with increased donations to many nonprofits—especially those focused on health, community services, and the arts.

The Bad

On the flip side, there are some warning signs. J.D. Vance (Trump’s running mate) could have a negative effect on large-scale philanthropy, particularly for university endowments and larger, powerful foundations. Vance has been outspoken about his belief that many large philanthropic organizations—such as the Ford Foundation, Gates Foundation, and even university endowments—are harmful to American society. Of course, he has a habit of changing his tune (like any other politician) to suit the audience, so these are just guesses. Also, I don’t think philanthropy is high up on Vance’s agenda.

However, as cited in Forbes, Vance has criticized these organizations for promoting “left-leaning ideologies” and has proposed measures on taxation. He once stated that “the Ford Foundation, the Gates Foundation, the Harvard University endowment, these are fundamentally cancers on American society but they pretend to be charities so they benefit from preferential tax treatment.”

His rhetoric (and this rhetoric has been around for several decades, and shared by many on the left and right), if translated into policy, could make the environment more hostile for the larger nonprofits, particularly those in education.

In fact, we are already seeing some impact on charitable giving to higher eds. According to Forbes, donations to institutions like Harvard have dropped by as much as 15% in recent months. A more adversarial political climate could further discourage some donors from supporting institutions that face negative public scrutiny of any kind or potential tax penalties. It remains to be seen how this aspect of philanthropy under Trump will play out. 

Moreover, the potential for new legislation targeting university endowments or even foundation assets could have profound effects. The College Endowment Accountability Act proposed by Vance in 2023 aimed to significantly raise taxes on endowment incomes, though it was blocked by Senate Democrats. However, if Trump and Vance gain more power, similar legislation could gain traction, posing a challenge to the financial stability of large educational and philanthropic institutions.

Even large faith-based endowments will be on watch, like the Mormon Church, which has an endowment almost twice the size of Harvard’s. But remember: Almost all government legislation involves negotiation, so these impacts will not be as large or “detrimental” as the media may portray. In short, don’t worry too, much regardless of which side of the aisle you are on.

The Toss-Up (The Tough to Predict)

Of course, there are always wild cards. The philanthropy landscape involves a web of economic conditions, policy decisions, and individual motivations. While it’s likely that the market and tax changes will create favorable conditions for giving, the question remains: How will donors react to increased scrutiny of foundations and university endowments?

The tone and content of public discourse can significantly impact charitable behavior. If Vance and his colleagues continue to promote some rhetoric towards some nonprofits, donors might think twice before making large contributions to targeted institutions. Alternatively, the pressure could push foundations and endowments to adopt more transparency and to focus more on core missions, potentially leading to increased credibility and renewed public trust.

Another unpredictable factor of philanthropy under Trump is how grassroots philanthropy and smaller nonprofits will fare. Historically, times of political upheaval often led to increases in grassroots efforts and localized charitable giving. People may divert their contributions from larger institutions to smaller organizations they feel are more aligned with their values or less likely to be affected by political pressures.

Final Thoughts

Philanthropy under Trump and his new administration is a mix of potential upsides and downsides. The likely positives are tied to market performance and tax reductions, both of which could create an environment that encourages giving. However, with J.D. Vance’s documented opinions toward major philanthropic players, we might also see a more restrictive regulatory environment for larger institutions—particularly those in education and progressive causes. Many claim, “It’s been done to businesses. Why not to nonprofits?”

Of course, we cannot fully predict how the landscape will evolve. The interplay of political power, economic conditions, and public sentiment will determine whether philanthropy in the coming years will flourish or face challenges. For donors, nonprofits, and those who benefit from charitable efforts, it will be important to stay adaptable and resilient in the face of change. But one thing is for sure: There’s never been a better time for planned giving.

My important take away? Don’t panic. That’s what the majority does. No one ever became wealthy by panicking.

We value your insights! What stood out to you in this article? Join or start a conversation below.

One Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • Amida holds a Master’s in Taxation from Villanova University and is a prolific writer, specializing in philanthropy and its intersection with tax and giving strategies.

    View all posts
Colored open hand illustration

Seeking Visionary Voices!

Do you have:

  • A unique insight or bold idea?
  • A story of success—or valuable lessons from failure?
  • Expert advice that could guide your peers?

Join other forward-thinkers in shaping the future of philanthropy. Contribute today and let your voice be heard.

Related Posts

Two people pointing at the same number from opposite sides—one sees 66, the other sees 99—illustrating how perspective shapes perception.

Living on the Right Side of the Street

As we drive through our neighborhoods, each home tells a different story. On one side, mornings begin with breakfasts, school runs, and fresh energy. On the other, night-shift workers are winding down, reflecting on the day’s lessons. Our perspective defines what we see—hope or fatigue, beginnings or conclusions. By asking, “What does this look like from the other side of the street?” we open the door to empathy. In families, communities, and work, this simple shift can build deeper understanding, turning judgment into connection and isolation into belonging.

Read More »
Finger poised over a glowing red panic button—symbolizing the urgent, high-stakes decisions nonprofits face in uncertain times.

Have We Been Here Before?

Laura MacDonald discusses how nonprofits face recurring disruptions but historically remain resilient. Despite challenges like COVID-19, tax changes, recessions, and current political anxiety, charitable giving has averaged 6% growth since 1967. She advises organizations to project resilience, sustain relationships, respond strategically rather than react, and adopt donor-centric approaches. Rather than making preemptive decisions for donors, nonprofits should stay the course and continue their missions, as anxiety is the enemy of philanthropy but donor confidence typically rebounds within 6-18 months after disruptions.

Read More »
People collaboratively nurturing and tending a flourishing garden, symbolizing humble stewardship through caring cultivation rather than control

Stewardship: More Than You Realized

The author argues that true stewardship requires humility and self-awareness, not just good management skills. Many stewardship efforts remain transactional rather than transformational due to lack of humility. The solution involves self-stewardship through 15 attributes of humility, including being teachable, correctable, and focused on helping others succeed. A donor-centric approach requires genuine curiosity about donors’ passions and motivations. Effective stewardship involves asking better questions, deep listening, and building meaningful relationships. Ultimately, stewardship isn’t about money or control—it’s about love and compassionate service to others.

Read More »
Person standing on endless Möbius strip representing the complex mystery and paradoxical relationship between donor intentions and bequest behavior

The Mystery Behind Bequest Non-Disclosures: A 5-Part Mini-Series

After five decades in nonprofit development, the author explores why donors openly discuss outright gifts but become secretive about planned giving. Key barriers include fear of mortality, financial insecurity, complexity, trust issues, family dynamics, and concerns about increased solicitation pressure. The $84.4 trillion wealth transfer opportunity is significant, yet fewer than 25% of donors with charitable estate plans notify organizations. Success requires building trust, simplifying processes, emphasizing confidentiality, creating legacy donor communities, and prioritizing family needs first before introducing charitable considerations.

Read More »