(I anticipate this comment will not go over well, as it seems I must just not see the truth that Bill Gates is a perfectly benevolent being who has ascended from human qualities)
Possibles exceptions to this include hard-to-value assets like art, where someone could potentially exaggerate the value by at least 1/t to defraud the tax authorities, but this doesn’t seem relevant to donating publicly-traded Microsoft stock. Bill Gates would be richer if he didn’t make these donations.
https://givingpledge.org/About.aspx
There's lots of weirdness in society about having the wealthiest having influence starting to approach government program status, but here we are. (perhaps they're trying to blunt the income inequality complaints, but maybe they really have come around to caring...)
He’s not benevolent or lead a perfectly good life. But he decided to spend his billions on trying to improve the world and you all are still hung up on the anti trust things he did at Microsoft. Or think he’s doing it to “gain power and influence” or as a tax dodge.
You don’t have to forgive him. But stop coming up with weird conspiracy theories about why he’s spending his money and let go of the unscrupulous business decisions.
Well firstly, no I don't have to do any of that. And secondly, it's not a theory about a conspiracy. It's more of a speculation. Finally, I highly doubt his benevolence, that's my whole point as I said in my original post - he probably enjoys the influence a lot more than he enjoys helping people.
1. none of "giving pledge" signees pledged 100% – they do pledge most of it, although inheriting "almost nothing" of billions is still pretty comfy.
2. the biggest cushion the heirs of Giving Pledgers will inherit is something money can't buy: influence. After all the Gates foundation is a family trust and as such will be run by the trustee's heirs, when their parents die [1]
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/society/commentisfree/2017/jul/2...