Financier №2 (42) 2026

In 2023, Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla (TSLA) and SpaceX, stated at a The Wall Street Journal conference: “I’m definitely not a fan of the approach where children automatically receive shares in companies, even if they have no interest, inclination, or ability to run the business. I believe this is a mistake.”

Musk has 14 descendants from four women, and the Forbes billionaire leader is not alone in his desire to “shield” them from his fortune. The world’s wealthiest people are increasingly choosing not to pass their wealth to heirs, but to donate their lifetime savings to charity. The most prominent example of this approach is The Giving Pledge, launched in 2010 by Bill and Melinda Gates and supported by Warren Buffett. Today, more than 250 donors from 30 countries have joined, committing to transfer more than half of their wealth to social projects.

Family Values

Historically, owners of large fortunes built dynasties, cementing their economic and social influence across generations. However, in the 21st century, capital is increasingly seen as a resource to impact society as a whole.

This approach reflects a significant shift in how the world's wealthiest businessmen understand their social responsibility: from preserving wealth within the family, business is moving towards using it to address global challenges. There is also a more pragmatic explanation. Many major entrepreneurs believe that a substantial inheritance can reduce children’s motivation for independent development. For instance, in Berkshire Hathaway’s 2021 press release about transferring the holding’s shares to charitable foundations, the wise Warren Buffett wrote that children should be left “enough so they can do whatever they want, but not so much that they can do nothing.”

The redistribution of private fortunes through charitable structures significantly impacts the global economy. These funds primarily go to healthcare, education, poverty alleviation, and climate initiatives. According to experts at the American Institute for Political Studies (IPS), participants in The Giving Pledge have already directed more than $160 billion to social goals, while about 80 % of the funds are distributed through private foundations, not directly to organisations. This proves that modern philanthropy is acquiring the features of a full‑fledged public institution. Money is accumulated in structures controlled by donors and distributed gradually, within long‑term strategies.

However, not everyone views this trend positively. Some experts are concerned about the concentration of influence. Decisions about allocating large resources are made by a limited scope of persons, and spending by recipient foundations is often insufficiently transparent. Moreover, donation volumes, to put it mildly, do not keep pace with the growth of donors’ wealth. This was noted by IPS researchers in their study The Giving Pledge at 15, dedicated to the campaign’s 15th anniversary. These observations fuel the debate about the model’s real efficiency and its impact on inequality.

A Corner of Stability

At first glance, it might seem that private investors do not care to whom the owner of a public company leaves their assets when they step away from active business. However, this is not entirely true. According to estimates by consulting firm The Angeletti Group, non‑profit organisations in the US, including charitable foundations, have accumulated assets totalling $5.5 trillion. A smaller portion of these funds is held in cash for future spending on social projects and operational activities, while the bulk is invested long‑term in exchange‑traded instruments: stocks, bonds, and ETFs. This lends stability to the stock market and reduces its volatility.

So, if Musk decides to direct his fortune - estimated at over $800 billion - to societal needs, Wall Street will likely view this positively.