Color me totally shocked. Not really.
The Silicon Valley Community Foundation (SVCF) with $10B in assets isn't really a benign "community foundation", but a way for billionaires to promise wealth/asset giveaways later and get tax breaks now.[0]
0. https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/205...
Every billionaire is a policy failure and likely a deeply greedy, malevolent, and out-of-touch (and bordering on crazy) individual with far too much power and influence over other people and the fate of the species and planet Earth.
According to the audit you linked, the foundation had 1.5b in revenue and made 1.3b in contributions, with management under 1%.
This looks like a well run, standard charitable organization. Of course charitable giving has tax breaks. As a society we decided to align our taxation system to incentivize charitable giving.
Tax breaks are not given for a promise, they are given for a hard transfer of assets to a charity. If one makes 100 million and gives away 100 million to charity, they net out to a zero tax bill. That doesn't magically enrich the donor by way of some conspiracy which you seem to be insinuating - the donor is still out 100 million plus the opportunity cost of the compounding (say, 5-10 million per year, growing over time via compounding), which the tax breaks don't come close to competing with on a net financial basis.
I don't disagree with your view on wealth accumulation in the least, but the vilification of charities giving, literally over a billion to charity over a year in this case, and then hand-waving "the tax breaks make them net beneficial financially for the donors and just another evil for society" I have never understood.
[dead]