Opinion: Trump attack on US foundations would devastate global human rights

After weeks of speculation, new reports are signaling that the Trump administration might seek to block U.S. foundations from supporting causes outside the United States. While the tagline focuses on revoking the tax-exempt status of high-profile donors, such as Mark Zuckerberg and Bill Gates, such an executive order limiting foreign funding could have far-reaching effects for human rights globally. As we look at the numbers, it is clear that efforts to stop U.S. foundations’ international grantmaking would be cataclysmic. This threat comes on the heels of actions by a growing list of countries, including the United States, the Netherlands, Sweden, and the United Kingdom, radically reducing foreign assistance. Estimated cuts amount to between $70 billion and $90 billion per year and counting – a reduction of at least a third of foreign aid globally. What would this executive order mean in real terms? At Human Rights Funders Network, we track the nearly $5 billion per year in foundation grants for human rights around the world. This includes grants to protect the basic things everyone deserves, such as being safe from harm, having enough food to eat, getting a chance to learn, and being treated fairly no matter who you are. U.S. funders account for a significant 88% of the global human rights funding in our analysis, making over 20,000 grants, totaling more than $4.3 billion per year. While the availability of U.S. funding data contributes to this large share, it also reflects the broader reality of global philanthropy, where substantial wealth is concentrated in the global north. Looking at human rights funding globally, we see the outsized impact these potential cuts would have around the world. Of the total $1.1 billion granted to recipients outside the United States annually, well over half comes from U.S. foundations. “The legality of using tax-exempt status to limit foreign funding is dubious at best.” --— A closer look at regional funding shows that the possible cuts will have varying impacts, and some regions would be especially hard hit. A full 75% of the human rights funding we track to groups in Latin America and the Caribbean, 72% in sub-Saharan Africa, and 67% in Asia and the Pacific could be cut off if this executive order succeeds in blocking foreign funding from U.S. foundations. Vital programs addressing gender-based violence in Peru, ensuring access to reproductive health care for women with disabilities in Mali, and protecting garment workers facing unsafe conditions in Sri Lanka could all be eliminated. These stark examples illustrate the potential for significant disruption to human rights work globally if U.S. funding is restricted. Between the gutting of USAID, this week’s direct pullback of all U.S. State Department support for human rights, and sweeping directives limiting work related to trans rights, racial justice, and reproductive rights, the Trump administration has already curtailed funding to particular issues both within and outside the country. But where the administration initially focused on federal funding, turning toward independent foundations makes the target clear: pursuing a sweeping political agenda by stifling dissent and starving resources for civil society and human rights. The legality of using tax-exempt status to limit foreign funding is dubious at best, as laid out this week by the Council on Nonprofits and the International Center Not-for-Profit Law. Whether because of shaky legal standing, a shift in strategy, or concerns that some conservative groups could be caught in the legislation, the White House appears to be walking back several potential executive orders, including one that would strip tax exemptions from groups working on climate change and the environment. What comes next? While foundations wait to see if and how the Trump administration will attempt to limit U.S. philanthropic funding within and outside the U.S., some foundation leaders are taking action. As those calling for philanthropy to step up write: “Silence isolates. Solidarity shields.” To act in solidarity, funders in the U.S. are being asked to stretch beyond their own institutions. To recognize that, whether these specific executive orders come to pass, human rights are under attack. To call the limiting of philanthropic support what it is: A well-documented tactic to silence opposition and close civic space. In practice, foundations can: • Focus on network and coalition building. Join with funders organizing across borders and sectors to affirm philanthropy’s commitment to support and protect global civic space. • Sign initiatives to take action, including those currently led by the Council on Foundations, Trust-Based Philanthropy, and WINGS. • Expand endowments, revisit funding priorities to respond quickly and creatively to the moment, and move money to the urgent human rights priorities being targeted, including LGBTQIA+ rights, climate justice, and reproductive rights. • Fund legal infrastructure and secure technologies that enable movements and funders to organize. • Support a wide range of initiatives, including legal coalitions, cross-issue organizing, and movements defending democratic institutions around the world. • Organize across the funding field to ensure no legislation illegally limits the freedom to support movements within and beyond borders. Most of all, foundations must resist the temptation to turn inward. As a new wave of laws actively seeks to dismantle human rights, foundations have an opportunity to join the call to protect democracy and affirm the importance of dignity for all. Update, April 28, 2025: This article has been updated to reflect that estimated aid cuts amount to between $70 billion and $90 billion annually – a reduction of at least a third of foreign aid globally.