Copyright © 2026 OyList. All Rights Reserved.
Share
Items25
1
Warren Buffett
Born
Buffett's 2010 public letter pledged more than 99 per cent of his wealth to philanthropy during his lifetime or at death, reaffirming a stock-giving plan begun in 2006. It is an unusually explicit percentage, with a timetable that also permits estate transfers. Later Berkshire filings document actual share donations, including a June 2025 transfer. Those transactions are evidence of giving; the original promise alone is not proof that the entire commitment has been completed.
More about Warren Buffett2
Bill Gates
Born
Gates co-founded the Giving Pledge in 2010, then set a more definite horizon in May 2025: virtually all his remaining wealth would support his foundation's work before it closes at the end of 2045. This adds a deadline to an earlier broad commitment. The foundation's projected spending also draws on its existing resources, so its total programme budget should not be counted as a new personal cheque from Gates.
More about Bill Gates3
Melinda French Gates
French Gates co-founded the Giving Pledge in 2010 and has separately reaffirmed a commitment to give away most of her resources during her lifetime. In May 2024, she announced an additional $1 billion through 2026 for organisations supporting women and families globally. That later commitment gives her individual programme a defined amount, period and purpose. It is distinct from treating the former couple's joint foundation giving as two separate donations.
More about Melinda French Gates4
MacKenzie Scott
Born
Scott's letter of 25 May 2019 promised to begin giving promptly and continue until her available fortune was exhausted. It joined the Giving Pledge's majority-of-wealth commitment without setting a fixed completion date. The letter emphasised urgency rather than a detailed grant schedule. Her later grants should be assessed through recipient announcements and funding records, keeping the promise itself separate from whatever amount had reached organisations at any particular point.
More about MacKenzie Scott5
Michael Bloomberg
Born
Bloomberg's 2010 letter said nearly all his net worth would be given away in subsequent years or left to his foundation. It therefore described two routes: giving while alive and an eventual charitable legacy. His account favoured earlier support where it could help people sooner, but did not publish a universal deadline for the whole fortune. Leaving assets to a foundation is also different from that foundation immediately distributing all of them to operating charities.
More about Michael Bloomberg6
Paul Allen
Allen joined the Giving Pledge in 2010 with a commitment to devote most of his fortune to philanthropy. His published statement identified science, conservation, cultural organisations and community support among his priorities. The pledge allowed both lifetime giving and later estate distribution. Existing institutes and grants show an operating philanthropic record, but a catalogue of funded projects should not be mistaken for a complete accounting of the estate's eventual allocation.
More about Paul Allen7
Larry Ellison
Born
Ellison's 2010 public letter described an intention to give at least 95 per cent of his wealth to charitable causes. He said he had placed virtually all his assets in a trust and had already funded medical research and education. The distinction is in the wording: putting assets in a trust with an intended charitable destination is not, by itself, evidence that 95 per cent had already reached charities. His letter made a previously private intention public.
More about Larry Ellison8
Mark Zuckerberg
Born
Zuckerberg joined the Giving Pledge in 2010. A joint letter with Priscilla Chan, dated 9 November 2015, reaffirmed giving back at least half their wealth during their lifetimes and described priorities spanning education, science and health. This entry represents that joint commitment once, with Chan credited as a co-author. The statement explains their intended direction, rather than providing an independently verified tally of completed charitable transfers.
More about Mark Zuckerberg9
David Sainsbury, Baron Sainsbury of Turville
Born
Sainsbury's February 2013 letter described a decision to transfer most of the family's wealth gradually to charitable trusts. He and Susie Sainsbury identified areas including plant science, neuroscience, African agriculture, education, public-policy institutions and the arts. The gradual transfer is the commitment being recorded, not a claim that the entire fortune moved that month. Their letter also illustrates how donors retain influence through selecting priorities and building grant-making teams.
More about David Sainsbury, Baron Sainsbury of Turville10
Chuck Feeney
Born
Feeney's letter of 3 February 2011 is a useful exception to the usual pledge story. He explained that virtually all his personal and family assets had already been transferred to Atlantic decades earlier, so he could not newly pledge the same money. His public commitment instead encouraged substantial giving during life and offered his experience to others. The timing matters: this was support for a movement after a major transfer, not an announcement of a fresh fortune-sized donation.
More about Chuck Feeney11
Azim Premji
Born
Premji joined the Giving Pledge in 2013, describing plans to transfer more wealth into the endowment supporting his foundation's public-education work. His letter distinguished that future intention from the Wipro shares he had already donated in December 2010. It also stressed the difficulty of building effective operating institutions. The example connects a public commitment to an identifiable funding mechanism without assuming that a rising endowment automatically measures educational results.
More about Azim Premji12
Nandan Nilekani
Nandan and Rohini Nilekani's joint letter of 8 November 2017 accompanied their commitment to give most of their wealth to philanthropic purposes. They described collaborative, technology-enabled platforms intended to serve the public, drawing on both their professional and charitable experience. They also acknowledged the danger of donors becoming too convinced of their own virtue. This is one family commitment, not two independent pledges, and its ambitions are distinct from evidence of money transferred or outcomes achieved.
More about Nandan Nilekani13
Hasso Plattner
Born
Plattner joined the Giving Pledge in 2013, committing most of his wealth to philanthropic causes. The Hasso Plattner Foundation followed in 2015, giving his family's education, science, culture and conservation work a continuing institutional structure. Its tenth-anniversary report describes grants actually disbursed, which can be assessed separately from the original broad promise. The public commitment did not itself specify that every asset would be distributed immediately.
More about Hasso Plattner14
Richard Branson
Born
Richard and Joan Branson joined in 2013 with a family letter explaining how value taken out of Virgin businesses would support entrepreneurial approaches to public problems. The wording linked future giving to the timing of distributions from the group. It also named existing work through Virgin Unite and partner organisations. That makes the commitment more specific than a headline percentage, while leaving questions of timing, valuation and the eventual charitable destination to subsequent evidence.
More about Richard Branson15
Ted Turner
Born
Turner's September 1997 announcement pledged $1 billion to support United Nations causes, preceding the wider Giving Pledge movement. The United Nations Foundation was established the following year to help carry that work forward. His 2010 Giving Pledge letter also said virtually all his wealth would ultimately go to charity. The original billion-dollar announcement, later payments and funds attracted from partners are separate figures and should not be added together as though all were Turner's personal giving.
More about Ted Turner16
Pierre Omidyar
Born
Pierre and Pam Omidyar's letter of 3 August 2010 reiterated an intention, publicly stated in 2001, to give away most of their wealth during their lifetimes. They described using grants, collaboration and investments in businesses serving overlooked populations. The mix of methods is central to their approach. Capital placed in a for-profit investment should nevertheless be distinguished from a completed charitable grant when assessing how much of the pledge has been fulfilled.
More about Pierre Omidyar17
David Rockefeller
Born
Rockefeller's letter of 21 July 2010 endorsed giving at least half his assets to philanthropy during his lifetime or at death. He placed the commitment within a family tradition of supporting institutions and argued that ideas and patience mattered alongside money. The letter is evidence of his stated intention at that date, not an estate audit. Gifts by earlier or later Rockefeller generations also belong to those donors, rather than automatically being credited to David.
More about David Rockefeller18
George Lucas
Lucas's letter of 16 July 2010 dedicated most of his wealth to improving education. Its emphasis was on learning methods, sharing classroom practice and supporting teachers through the George Lucas Educational Foundation. That gives the commitment a clearer purpose than an unspecified promise to give. The letter predates later events in his business career, so the pledge should not be described as having originated solely with a subsequent sale of Lucasfilm.
More about George Lucas19
T. Boone Pickens
Pickens joined the Giving Pledge in 2010 and wrote that he had already given nearly $800 million, while looking forward to reaching $1 billion. His brief letter also expressed opposition to large inherited fortunes. The existing-giving figure was his report at the time; the billion-dollar figure was then a goal. Keeping those two statements separate avoids turning an aspiration into a completed transfer simply because both appear in the same public letter.
More about T. Boone Pickens20
Gordon Moore
Born
Gordon and Betty Moore's letter of 14 June 2012 described dedicating half their wealth to a foundation in 2001 and reaffirmed their commitment through the Giving Pledge. Their priorities included science, environmental conservation and patient care. Like Feeney's, the statement referred to an earlier funding decision rather than announcing an entirely new transfer that day. Money committed to a foundation and money subsequently granted to outside organisations are different stages of the process.
More about Gordon Moore21
Edgar Bronfman Sr.
Born
Edgar Bronfman's letter of 17 April 2012 accompanied his commitment to the Giving Pledge and explained a focus on Jewish learning, identity and pluralism. He identified work through the Samuel Bronfman Foundation, including Hillel, MyJewishLearning and youth fellowships. The named programmes clarify the purpose of his giving, but the letter supplies no complete payment schedule. Edgar, rather than his brother Charles or his son Edgar Jr., is the author of this particular pledge.
More about Edgar Bronfman Sr.22
Sara Blakely
Blakely joined the Giving Pledge in 2013 and centred her letter on opportunities for women, including education and entrepreneurship. She described setting aside business profits and learning how to use philanthropic resources effectively. The distinction between preparation and distribution is visible in her own account: resources reserved in a foundation still require grant decisions and delivery. Her public promise set a direction for future giving, not a claim that every intended benefit had already occurred.
More about Sara Blakely23
Mo Ibrahim
Born
Ibrahim joined in 2013 with a letter describing his commitment to fund work on governance and leadership in Africa. He reported allocating more than half his earnings since 2006 to his foundation and arranging protection for its funding after his death. Earnings over a period are not the same measure as total net worth. His separate investment activities should also be kept distinct from charitable spending when assessing the scale and delivery of the commitment.
More about Mo Ibrahim24
Patrice Motsepe
Born
Patrice and Precious Motsepe's 2013 letter promised at least half the funds generated by their family assets to the Motsepe Foundation for use during their lifetimes and beyond. Their stated beneficiaries included marginalised communities in South Africa and elsewhere. The exact scope matters: the letter speaks of funds generated by assets, rather than claiming that half of every underlying company holding was transferred immediately. It is a joint commitment with an ongoing charitable vehicle.
More about Patrice Motsepe
