Warren Buffett, the investing guru who has accumulated 150 billion dollars in personal wealth, published a lengthy article on Monday, announcing that four family funds managed by his children will donate 1.1 billion dollars worth of Berkshire Hathaway stocks and appoint three independent trustees to take over his charitable endeavors.

Buffett had previously pledged to donate over 99% of his wealth, and in his latest article, he stated that he has once again donated 2.4 million shares of Class B stock, valued at about $1.1 billion. Specifically, Buffett will convert 1,600 Class A shares into 2.4 million Class B shares in order to donate the Class B shares to the four family foundations.

Of these, approximately 1.5 million shares are given to the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation, while 0.3 million shares are given to The Sherwood Foundation, The Howard G. Buffett Foundation, and the NoVo Foundation each.

In the article, Buffett reiterated his opposition to "inherited wealth." He believes that intergenerational transfer of family wealth can have negative effects, such as weakening personal growth, complicating family relationships, and creating uncertainty for society, as it is unpredictable how future generations will allocate this wealth.

Buffett wrote in the article,

I have never wanted to establish a hereditary wealth system or develop any long-term plans beyond my children. I am very aware of and fully trust my three children. However, things are different for future generations. Who can foresee the priorities, wisdom, and loyalty of successors, as well as how they will distribute huge wealth in a potentially completely different charitable environment?

Currently, Buffett holds about 37.6% of Berkshire Class A shares, and he stated that distributing the assets he has accumulated may take longer than his children's lifetimes. Therefore, he has appointed three successor trustees for charitable reits who may take over the distribution of wealth from his children in the future. Buffett's three children are currently aged 71, 69, and 66.

I have designated three potential successor trustees. They are very familiar with my children, and this arrangement makes sense for us. They are also younger than my children," Buffett wrote. "However, these successors are currently on the reserve list. I hope my three children can personally allocate all my assets." The specific identity of the trustees has not yet been disclosed.

Since 2006, Buffett has donated annually to four family foundations. A previous article by Wall Street Insights mentioned that Buffett donated Berkshire Hathaway stocks worth up to 5.3 billion USD to five charitable organizations this August.

He stated that over the years, he has built strong trust in his children's management capabilities and charitable ambitions.

From 2006 to 2024, this phase has given me the opportunity to observe each child's actions, and during this period, they have learned a lot about large-scale philanthropy and behavioral science," he said. "They enjoy financial comfort but are not burdened by wealth. Their mother taught them these values, and if she saw their performance, she would definitely be very proud. So would I.

Buffett previously told The Wall Street Journal that after his death, nearly all remaining wealth will be injected into a new charitable trust fund, to be jointly managed by his daughter and two sons. At Berkshire, Buffett has handed over the decision-making power for capital allocation to Greg Abel, who is the next head to succeed Buffett in leading this large conglomerate based in Omaha.

Buffett also reflected on the many advantages he has had throughout his life. He stated that given his background, both in terms of geography and social status, he has "long believed" that he would become rich.

As I write these words, I still feel that since I was born a white male in the USA in 1930, I have been in a fortunate series of victories," he wrote. This luck has contributed to his development of a "philanthropic philosophy," which he has passed on to his children as well as other Berkshire shareholders.

Here is the original text of Buffett's long article:

Today's donation has reduced the number of Berkshire Hathaway Class A shares held to 206,363 shares, a decrease of 56.6% since I made the donation commitment in 2006. In 2004, before my first wife Susie passed away, we both held 508,998 Class A shares together. Over the years, we both believed she would outlive me and subsequently allocate most of our wealth, but that turned out not to be the case.

When Susie passed away, her estate was approximately $3 billion, of which about 96% was donated to our fund. In addition, she left each of our three children $10 million, which was the first substantial gift we gave them. These legacies reflect our belief: extremely wealthy parents should leave their children enough assets to do something meaningful, but not so much that they do nothing.

Susie and I have long encouraged our children to participate in small charitable activities, and we have been satisfied with their enthusiasm, effort, and results. However, at the time Susie passed away, my children were not prepared to manage the vast wealth that came from Berkshire shares. Since I made my pre-death donation commitment in 2006 and subsequently expanded it, their charitable activities have significantly increased.

Today, the children have far exceeded our expectations. After my death, they will be entirely responsible for gradually distributing all of my Berkshire shares. These shares currently account for 99.5% of my total wealth.

Time will ultimately prevail. But it is fickle—sometimes even unfair and cruel. It may end life at its beginning or soon after, while at times it may wait nearly a century to visit. So far, I have been very fortunate, but it won't be long before it finds me too.

However, there is a downside to being able to evade its visit. Since I made my commitment in 2006, my children's life expectancy has noticeably shortened. They are currently 71, 69, and 66 years old, respectively.

I never wished to establish a hereditary wealth system, nor did I want to create long-term plans beyond my children. I have a very good understanding of and complete trust in my three children. But the situation is different for future generations. Who can foresee what priorities, wisdom, and loyalty future descendants will have when faced with distributing vast wealth, especially in a potentially very different charitable environment? Nonetheless, the large wealth I have accumulated may take longer to distribute fully than my children’s lifetimes. And decisions made by three living and purpose-driven minds are clearly wiser than those made by a deceased person.

Therefore, I have designated three potential successor trustees. They are very familiar with my children and have our unanimous approval. They are slightly younger than my children.

However, these successors are currently still on the waiting list. I hope that Susie, Howard, and Peter can personally allocate all my assets.

Each of them respects my wishes, and the plan to allocate the Berkshire stocks I hold will never betray the tremendous trust that Berkshire shareholders have placed in Charlie Munger and me. From 2006 to 2024, I had the opportunity to observe the performance of each of my children in action. They have learned a lot about large-scale charity and human behavior during this time. Each of them has managed teams of 20 to 30 people for many years and has gained deep insights into the unique employment dynamics that affect charitable organizations.

Some wealthy friends are curious about my great trust in my children and potential successors. They are particularly surprised by my requirement that all foundation decisions must be unanimously approved. They ask how this could possibly work.

In response, I explained that my children will always face sincere requests from friends and others. Another reality is that when someone requests a large charitable donation, a "no" often prompts potential beneficiaries to consider different strategies—such as seeking another friend or proposing a different project. Those who can allocate large sums are always seen as "targets of opportunity." This unpleasant reality is a side effect of that status.

Therefore, I set up a rule of "unanimous consent." This limitation allows my children to give immediate and final responses to those seeking donations: "That cannot get my brother's consent." Such an answer would make my children's lives easier.

Of course, this "unanimous consent" clause is not a panacea—this is clearly not feasible if you have nine or ten children or stepchildren. Moreover, it does not address the daunting issue of how to efficiently allocate billions of dollars each year.

I have a suggestion applicable to all parents, regardless of whether their wealth is ordinary or extremely rich. When your children are mature enough, ensure that before you sign your will, each child understands the logic behind your decisions and the responsibilities they will assume after your death. If they have any questions or suggestions, listen carefully and adopt those reasonable opinions. You do not want your children to ask "why" regarding the will's decisions when you are unable to respond.

Over the years, my three children have raised questions or opinions with me, and I have often adopted their suggestions. There is nothing wrong with advocating for one's ideas. My father did the same for me back in the day.

I revise my will every few years, usually making just minor changes and trying to keep it simple. Over the years, Charlie and I have seen many families split apart due to the clauses in the will after someone's passing, as beneficiaries become confused or even angry about it. Childhood jealousy and real or imagined unfair treatment often get magnified, especially when sons are favored financially or in significant positions more than daughters.

Charlie and I have also seen examples of wealthy parents who thoroughly discuss their will arrangements with their families before passing, which tends to strengthen family relationships. What could be more satisfying than that?

As I write these words, I still feel my luck, a luck that began in 1930 when I was born a white male in the usa. My two sisters, of course, were promised equal rights with men long before in the 19th Amendment passed in 1920. After all, this was also the message conveyed by our thirteen colonies in 1776.

However, in 1930, the country where I was born had not truly realized those early visions. It was not until the efforts of Billie Jean King, Sandra Day O'Connor, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and countless others that things started to change in the 1970s.

As a beneficiary of male privilege, I early on became convinced that I would become wealthy. However, neither I nor anyone else could foresee the magnitude of wealth that could be achieved in the usa over the past few decades. This change has been astonishing—exceeding even the imaginations of Ford, Carnegie, Morgan, and even Rockefeller. Billions of dollars have become the new 'million dollars.'

I was born at the onset of the Great Depression, and things did not look optimistic. However, the true power of compound interest often manifests in the last twenty years of life. Because I didn't 'slip on a banana peel,' I am still active at the age of 94 with substantial savings—able to pass these 'delayed consumption units' to those who drew the 'short straw' at birth.

I am also very fortunate that my philanthropic ideas have been wholeheartedly supported and further expanded by my two wives. Whether it was my first wife, Susie, or my second, Astrid, neither subscribed to the idea of inherited wealth.

On the contrary, we all agreed that equal opportunity should start at birth, and while an extravagant lifestyle may be legal, it is not desirable. As a family, we have everything we need or want, but we have never tried to derive enjoyment from owning what others desire.

I am particularly gratified that many of Berkshire's early shareholders have independently formed similar ideas. They save, live well, take care of their families, and transform their savings into substantial or even enormous wealth through the power of compound interest, giving back to society. Their 'wealth checks' are widely distributed to those less fortunate.

Upholding this philosophy, I began to live my life the way I wanted in my late twenties. Now, I watch my children grow into excellent and productive citizens. Their viewpoints on many issues differ from mine and each other, but the core values they share remain steadfast.

Little Susie, Howard, and Peter spend more time directly helping others than I do. They enjoy financial comfort but are not burdened by wealth. They have learned these values from their mother, who must be proud of them.

So am I.

Editor/new