Chuck Feeney is not "officially broke." Per this story he has a couple million set aside for retirement and is living a perfectly happy life with all of his needs met. It seems disrespectful to Feeney's vision for his own life - he can give away so much and still be fine. Not broke.

I don't know why the author had to cross the line into falsehood with the title. It's a great story about a great person, why sacrifice your integrity with an utterly false headline, particularly when the story doesn't need it?