Younger wealthy donors rely far less on cash gifts, Bank of America survey finds

Both confidence measures fell by about the same proportion, roughly 14.5% of their 2024 level, though one lost 8 points and the other 11 ^[18][19]. The respondents were more than 1,430 Americans aged 21 or older with at least $3 million in investable assets outside their homes ^[3]. Fortune set the results against the $124 trillion Great Wealth Transfer now getting under way ^[21].

Younger respondents in the same study describe something else. Among Gen Z and millennial donors, 87% say honoring the family's philanthropic tradition is important, and 86% say establishing their own charitable identity matters as much ^[5]. "Younger donors want to honor the charitable traditions that shaped them, but they also want to define their own impact," Bank of America Private Bank's head of philanthropic solutions, Jennifer Chandler, wrote in the study ^[6].

The counter-thesis is that a survey answer costs the respondent nothing, and parents may be seeing something the self-reports miss. Tom Thiegs of Ascent Private Capital Management with U.S. Bank, the firm's managing director of leadership and legacy, described parents' fear that wealth could dampen their children's drive. He told Fortune it is "a very real concern I'm hearing from ultra-affluent families right now" ^[7].

Following the payments shows a change of route. The cash gap between the oldest and youngest donor groups is 36 points ^[20]. Younger donors are more likely to give through charitable trusts and family foundations ^[16] and roughly twice as likely to use a donor-advised fund ^[4]. Many of them come from families that already set up foundations, trusts or DAFs, Dianne Chipps Bailey, a managing director in BofA's Philanthropic Solutions division, told the Chronicle of Philanthropy ^[9]. She said younger donors also gravitate to DAFs because they are digital-first ^[9]. The study does not report dollar amounts, so the change in method cannot yet be stated as a change in money.

A single charity feels the per-cause figure first. If a younger donor's total stayed flat, spreading it over 12 causes instead of eight would cut the average amount per cause by a third ^[22]. Nonprofits spent decades cultivating wealthy boomers, and that connection fades with each generation removed from the original donor, Fortune reported ^[17]. "A lot of nonprofits feel a bit paralyzed in how to tackle that problem," Steve Isom, chief operating and financial officer of donor-software firm Bloomerang, told Fortune earlier ^[15]. "Donors are ready to trust nonprofits, but they want to see the receipts more," Isom said ^[10].

Some advisors are already planning around the parents' doubts. Trent Von Ahsen of Cedar Point Capital Partners told Fortune his clients are leaning on mentorship and phased wealth transfers instead of lump-sum inheritances ^[12]. Those families keep more of the capital, and the decisions about it, in the older generation's hands for longer.

The pattern can resolve one of three ways. If it belongs to the generation, money keeps flowing into family vehicles and DAFs and gets spread across more organizations, with cash-dependent charities taking the loss. An age effect would instead narrow the cash gap as heirs take control of inherited assets. And if the parents are right, stated commitment never turns into grants. In my view the evidence fits the first case best: Bloomerang's 2026 Giving Signals Report, run with The Harris Poll, ranked millennials the most active donor generation ^[11], and the BofA fundraising and mentoring rates point the same way ^[14]. That view is wrong if a later round of the survey shows younger donors' cash share climbing toward their elders' as they age ^[8].