Like most everything else in China’s economy, philanthropy here is in a boom period, fueled by phalanxes of newly minted billionaires and foundations, encouraged by an army of professional advisers on charity and, increasingly, sanctioned by the government.
Which makes the case of Warren Buffett and Bill Gates, who will come to Beijing this week to share their thoughts on philanthropy with some of China’s wealthiest people, all the more curious.
Buffett and Gates, the Rockefeller and Carnegie of this age, announced plans last month to invite about 50 of China’s superrich to discuss their concept of philanthropy, which includes enlisting the world’s wealthiest people to give away at least half their fortunes.
Things appeared to be going swimmingly until early this month, when the Chinese news media quoted a Beijing official of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation as saying that “a small number of people” had declined to come and that others had asked whether they would be pushed for donations.
Last week, Gates and Buffett issued a letter stating that they were not coming to China “to pressure people to give,” but to listen.
“China’s circumstances are unique, and so its approach to philanthropy will be as well,” they wrote.
Except for denying a report from Xinhua, the state-run news agency, that only two tycoons had accepted the invitation, the organizers of the event have largely fallen silent.
However, the Chinese are unlikely to stop talking soon. In a nation where explosive growth has opened a yawning gap between rich and poor, reports that Chinese billionaires might stiff-arm the invitation have spawned a sort of national Rorschach test of Chinese generosity, not to mention attitudes toward the rich.
“Are Chinese rich scared to be charitable?” asked the Global Times, the English-language newspaper of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
Not at all; “This is the Americans’ conspiracy,” wrote one of 2,000 people who posted comments on the controversy on Sina.com, a major Internet portal. Academics grumbled about efforts to impose Western philanthropic values on Chinese tradition.
Actually, however, Chinese philanthropic tradition was being upended well before the Gates-Buffett dinner was even conceived. In barely a decade, the Chinese economy has created at least 117 billionaires, according to a Forbes magazine ranking, and hundreds of thousands of millionaires by the estimate of Hurun Report, a magazine based in Shanghai whose target audience is the rich. Only the US has more billionaires.
While China’s reported philanthropic donations are now comparatively tiny — about US$8 billion last year, the government says, compared with US$308 billion in the US in 2008 — changes in China’s economic structure and in government policies make that figure almost destined to rise quickly. And, in contrast to the past, riches of today are starting to flow to social and charitable causes.
“The Chinese have been very generous for a long period of time,” Rupert Hoogewerf, who publishes Hurun Report, said by telephone. “The difference has been that they do it between families and don’t publicize it. What we’re seeing now is a new era of transparency.”
Translucency might be a better term. More than a few fortunes have been built on corruption and their owners stay in the shadows. The China Reform Foundation, an economic research group based in Beijing, estimated last month that about US$870 billion in corrupt “gray money” was being hidden by the wealthiest 10 percent of China’s population.
Huang Guangyu (黃光裕), who built an appliance shop into a fortune valued at US$2.7 billion to US$6.3 billion, was singled out by Hurun Report in 2007 as an especially miserly donor. Today he is in prison, convicted of stock fraud and insider trading.
A Global Times article this month stated that in the last decade, 17 members of an annual list of China’s 50 richest people had been convicted of economic crimes.
Ordinary Chinese, steeped in petty government corruption, are often bitterly cynical toward the rich.
“Of course they’ll decline the invitation,” one wrote of the invited billionaires on the Sina.com postings board. “None of their money is clean!”
Yet a growing number of China’s corporate titans are open both about their wealth and about giving it away. The leading example is Yu Pengnian (余彭年), an 88-year-old real estate baron who gave the last of his US$1.3 billion fortune in April to a foundation he created to fund scholarships for poor Chinese students. The latest is Chen Guangbiao (陳光標), 42, a Jiangsu Province recycling-company owner who has taken the Gates-Buffett pledge to give away his US$440 million fortune when he dies.
“Wealth is not something that comes to you when you are born,” he said in an interview two weeks ago. “It’s like water. If you have only a cup, you keep it to yourself. If you have a barrel, you share it with your family. And if you have a river, you share it with everyone.”
This is a new phenomenon and not only because the money is new. The CCP claims to represent the downtrodden and has been reluctant to turn to the private sector to address problems of poverty and disease.
However, since the outpouring of support for victims of the 2008 Sichuan earthquake, the government now seems to be edging toward a more accommodating attitude about private philanthropy. It offers corporations a tax break of up to 12 percent for charitable gifts, rising to 30 percent for individuals.
This year, a re-registration drive has certified more than 1,000 nonprofit groups as able to accept tax-deductible donations. Government officials have also said that they plan to enact the nation’s first charity law, with rules that clearly define what a charity is and how it must operate, by late next year.
“This is wonderful news,” said Liu Youping (劉佑平), the former chief editor of the state-run newspaper China Philanthropy Times.
However, whether revised rules on charities and nonprofit groups generally will broaden or restrict philanthropic work is unclear, said Jia Xijin (賈西津), who directs the NGO Research Center at Tsinghua University in Beijing. While the government has slowly given new leeway to some charitable groups, especially those that provide social services, it keeps a tighter rein on groups that advocate policy changes or raise money on their own.
The government’s concern is that “most public fundraising organizations need some social cause, and if you organize people,” she said, “that means the organization represents some social force.”
For Chen, the best way to encourage philanthropy by the select group invited to dine with Buffett and Gates is to publicize the names of people who decline to attend.
“I’ll help you bash them in the media,” he said. “We can’t be misers.”
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers