Philanthropy is having a restless spring. While Congress wrangles over a tax bill that could slap a 10 percent levy on the investment income of the biggest foundations and require corporations to meet a one-percent giving floor, a new breed of profit-for-purpose ventures is rewriting the playbook from the outside in. Exhibit A: The 144k Collective, a coalition of entrepreneurs, artists and neighborhood organizers that says it will channel $250 million a year into community causes.
At first glance the math looks audacious, yet it is mostly arithmetic. The Collective has opened a campaign to enroll 144,000 equal “partner-members,” each pledging a dollar a day. That would generate roughly $52 million in fresh capital. Ninety percent of those profits, the group says, will be put into direct aid for those who need it.
While traditional charity asks you to part with what’s left over, the 144k Collective is asking people to become owners in something that is, by design, generous — capitalism with guardrails. The model borrows from Davis’s long-running Power In Numbers framework and updates it for an era in which influence carries balance-sheet value. Last month The Collective publicly challenged YouTube philanthropist MrBeast to a friendly fundraising duel called “144K vs. The Beast.”
The Collective’s giving is projected to double by 2030, and subscription-style contributions are now philanthropy’s fastest-growing revenue stream. Younger donors, especially Gen Z, say they want transparency, immediacy and a sense of belonging — exactly what member-owned funds promise.
At the same time, policy uncertainty is rippling through the sector. The House bill’s proposed taxes on endowments, coupled with the looming expiration of key 2017 tax breaks, have many legacy nonprofits bracing for leaner budgets. For donors uneasy about parking money in donor-advised funds that may sit idle, a high-velocity, for-profit engine like The 144k Collective offers a different hedge: impact that is quick, crowd-audited and, crucially, unencumbered by 501(c)(3) rules.
Skeptics warn that running philanthropy as a business can invite mission drift or governance headaches. The Collective counters that each partner-member gets an equal vote on portfolio decisions and that audited financials will be posted quarterly.
Overall, this is a broader signal that giving in 2025 is being crowdsourced, gamified and capitalized like a start-up. If the tax winds keep blowing and donor attention keeps fragmenting, expect more hybrids where the profit motive is bent — not broken — in service of the public good.