U.S. charitable giving tops $600 billion for the first time, driven by mega-gifts and bequests

According to the Giving USA report, U.S. charitable giving was estimated at $617.2 billion last year, up 5.7% from the year before. The increase came against a backdrop of a strong stock market rally.

It also marked a milestone: in the 60-year history of the annual philanthropy report, yearly giving topped $600 billion for the first time. After adjusting for inflation, giving rose 3% year over year.

But the stock market boom had a bigger effect on donors with deeper pockets. Individual donors still accounted for the largest share of giving at $394.2 billion, but after inflation adjustment it rose just 1.4%. Meanwhile, bequests, gifts left after a donor's death, were estimated at $62.19 billion, a sharp year-over-year increase of 16.6%.

The rise in bequests may also be the latest sign of the Great Wealth Transfer. Cerulli Associates estimates that more than $124 trillion in assets will pass to the next generation by 2048, with about $18 trillion expected to go to charity.

The report's lead analyst said it is still too early to tell how much of the rise in bequests comes from the wealth transfer itself. What is clearer is that among wealthy Americans most likely to leave large charitable gifts, stock market gains in net worth directly improved their giving capacity.

The analysis suggests a fairly tight link between bequests and personal net worth, and between net worth and market performance.

Markets affect giving faster, but overall growth is still constrained by the macro backdrop

The report said the stock market's effect on overall giving, including donations from foundations and corporations, is slower and more muted. Still, analysts said that after several years of strong market growth, a more visible increase in overall giving is expected.

From 2024 to 2025, the S&P 500 rose 13.4% on an inflation-adjusted basis, roughly four times the pace of total giving growth.

The gap may reflect weak GDP growth and low consumer confidence. Analysts said giving often depends on a sense of financial security, and current economic unease may be suppressing some individual donations.

At the same time, analysts stressed that if charitable giving were to move too closely in lockstep with the stock market, it would be bad for the nonprofit sector. Philanthropy should rise when markets go up, but not fall by the same amount when markets decline.

Changing tax incentives and ultra-wealthy dependence: giving is becoming more concentrated

The report also noted that some high-income donors may have accelerated giving in 2025 to take advantage of tax breaks that could fall because of pending legislation. The report estimates that donors contributed an extra $1.71 billion in 2025 to make fuller use of expiring tax incentives.

Although U.S. charities are receiving more money, philanthropy is also becoming more dependent on the ultra-wealthy as economic pressures mount. The report estimates that nine donors contributed $22.32 billion last year, a highly significant share. MacKenzie Scott accounted for the biggest share, at $6.65 billion.

These so-called megagifts, each equal to at least 0.1% of total giving, can reshape the philanthropic landscape from year to year. The report said nearly one-third of the increase in bequests came from the estate of the late Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen, who created a $3.1 billion fund for science and technology research.

A foundation vice chair said views on mega-gifts are mixed. On one hand, he praised the positive impact of billionaires putting wealth into philanthropy and said he hopes more billionaires join in; on the other, he worries that philanthropy's dependence on the ultra-wealthy will keep rising, because such gifts can be more volatile from year to year.

While the growth in bequests is good news for charity, the bigger question is what heirs choose to do. If a billionaire dies and gives $200 million to charity, most of the remaining wealth typically goes to children, so there is also hope that heirs will make better philanthropic decisions.