Wealthy Americans' confidence in their heirs' giving falls to 47% in Bank of America survey

The two confidence measures in the Bank of America Private Bank figures, as reported by WealthManagement.com, fell by almost the same proportion ^[1][2]. The readiness figure lost 8 points off a base of 55, a decline of about 14.5% ^[13]. The shared-commitment figure lost 11 points off 76, also about 14.5% ^[14].

The two levels are further apart. Parents who think their children share the commitment outnumber wealthy Americans who think the heirs are prepared by 18 points, 65% against 47% ^[15]. The questions went to different groups, parents in one case and wealthy Americans broadly in the other, so the gap is approximate. Taken loosely, it describes families who believe their children hold the values and doubt they could run the giving.

On most of the survey's measures, the heirs report more activity than their parents. Gen Z and millennial donors back 12 causes on average against eight for wealthy donors overall ^[3], and 87% of them say honoring the family's philanthropic legacy is important ^[6]. They are already inside the family structures too. Their trust and foundation use runs far above the older cohort's, and the report says some of those vehicles may have been inherited ^[5]. They part from their parents on method and cause, and 86% say establishing their own charitable identity is just as important as the legacy ^[8].

The parents are changing as well. More than a third of wealthy respondents say their priorities shifted over the past year, and 55% say changes in government policy have influenced their charitable strategies, according to the report ^[11]. The report does not give dollar amounts or a sample size. The survey can show that parents expect less of their heirs, and it cannot show whether heirs give less money.

The evidence fits more than one outcome. Heirs may settle into the family's trusts and foundations as they take control, and the 87% legacy figure supports that ^[6]. They may instead keep the family name and move the money to vehicles they run themselves. Donor-advised funds let a donor make large commitments while controlling when and how gifts become public ^[10], and the younger cohort already favors them ^[9]. Or the 8-point drop may be a mood that reverses in the next edition ^[13].

I think the second outcome is the likeliest, and it is the one an advisor can act on. Basic necessities lead wealthy donors' causes at 86% ^[12]. A family that keeps its grants on the parents' causes and leaves heirs out of the planning is assuming the money stays in the foundation after the transfer. Bringing heirs into grant decisions early, with part of the budget set aside for their causes, addresses the 18-point readiness gap directly ^[15]. The counter-thesis is that parents know their children. If a later survey shows heirs' dollar giving falling alongside the confidence number, the doubt was about commitment, and earlier inclusion would not have changed it.