Susan and Michael Dell
What would you do if you had $6.25 billion to give away? Build hospitals? Fund universities? Establish a charitable foundation employing hundreds of people?
Michael and Susan Dell have come up with something rather different. They're giving 25 million American children $250 each, not in cash or through a charity, but directly into investment accounts where the money can grow in the stock market.
It's one of the largest philanthropic commitments in American history, and certainly one of the more interesting. Rather than spending billions trying to improve children's lives through traditional charitable organizations, the Dells are giving them something that wealthy families have understood the value of for generations: capital, ownership and time.
The $6.25 Billion Experiment
The billionaire founder of Dell Technologies and his wife announced their incredible commitment in December 2025, pledging $6.25 billion to help 25 million American children start investing.
The money is being distributed through federally supported Trump Accounts, introduced under President Trump's 2025 tax legislation. The US government separately provides $1,000 for eligible children born between 2025 and 2028, while the Dells' contribution targets older children in predominantly lower-income communities.
Each child receives $250 invested in low-cost funds tracking broad US stock market indices. Families and other eligible contributors can add further money, allowing the investments to grow over time.
It's a simple idea with enormous reach. Rather than asking a charitable institution to spend money on behalf of a child, the Dells are giving that child an investment portfolio. It’s modest but it’s an opportunity to participate in the financial markets.
The idea has personal significance for Michael Dell. At the age of eight, he opened his first savings account with around $8, depositing quarters and learning how interest could make his money grow. A few years later he was investing in stocks, and by 19 he had founded the computer company that would eventually make him one of the world's wealthiest individuals.
Clearly, his childhood savings account wasn't responsible for his fortune, but it introduced him to concepts that many children from wealthy families learn at an early age: saving, investing, compounding and the benefits of owning assets.
For millions of American children, this could be their first introduction to those ideas.
Philanthropy Meets Capitalism
The traditional approach to philanthropy generally involves wealthy families donating to organizations that then decide how best to use the money. Universities build facilities, hospitals purchase equipment, and charities run programs supporting disadvantaged communities.
The Michael & Susan Dell Foundation has followed this model for decades, supporting education, healthcare and economic opportunity. But the couple's latest initiative takes a different approach.
Instead of financing an organization to help children, they're giving the children an asset: one that can appreciate, attract additional contributions and potentially encourage a lifelong interest in investing.
There's something quite appealing about applying the principles of capitalism to philanthropy. The Dells are effectively giving millions of children a tiny stake in the American economy, with the hope that this initial investment will encourage families to build on it.
The initiative also tackles one of philanthropy's biggest headaches: distribution. Giving away a few million dollars effectively can require considerable resources, while distributing billions normally demands a substantial administrative operation.
By using an existing government-backed structure, the Dells can reach millions of beneficiaries without having to build an enormous new charitable organization. It's an approach that family offices, many of which have considerable experience in structuring investments and deploying capital efficiently, might find particularly interesting.
The approach also raises a question about who sets the direction of a philanthropic project. We spoke to Phil Cubeta, a veteran philanthropy adviser, educator and founder of Philanthropy Offerings, who has spent decades helping wealthy families think about charitable giving and legacy.
“Many who create great wealth, particularly in areas like tech, are by nature innovators who leap in, try new things, and pivot or double down depending on what works. That is one style of philanthropy. Another is Mackenzie Scott’s. She gives big to smaller, community-led organizations, many of them, and yields control. Each donor will find their own style.”
His advice to donors is to retain ownership of the mission, even when professionals handle the mechanics: “Experts can handle the tools, file the forms, do the admin, but the heart and soul of it must be the donor’s.”
Of course, there's an obvious question. How much difference can $250 really make?
Assuming a hypothetical annual investment return of 7%, an initial $250 would grow to approximately $492 over ten years, or around $845 over 18 years. Useful, perhaps, but hardly enough to transform a child's financial future. And that's before allowing for inflation, taxes and the possibility of investment losses.
But the more compelling opportunity comes from additional contributions. An initial $250 supplemented by $25 a month, assuming the same hypothetical 7% return over 18 years, would grow to around $11,200.
That's a more meaningful sum, potentially helping with education, a first home or the foundations of a larger investment portfolio.
There are obvious limitations. Wealthier families will be better placed to supplement their children's accounts, potentially widening the gap between those who can afford to save and those who cannot. The investments are exposed to stock market volatility, while a $250 contribution does little to address the underlying causes of poverty and inequality.
Nor is it clear whether receiving an investment account will automatically encourage financial literacy. There's a considerable difference between owning shares in an index fund and understanding how financial markets work.
The success of the program will ultimately depend on whether children and their families engage with the accounts, contribute additional savings and develop better financial habits.
A Lesson for Family Offices
For wealthy families, the Dell initiative raises some interesting questions about the future of philanthropy.
Family offices are accustomed to thinking in terms of investment returns, capital allocation, risk management and long-term wealth preservation. Yet when it comes to philanthropy, many still follow fairly conventional models of grant-making and charitable donations.
The Dells have demonstrated how an investment mindset might be applied to giving. Rather than concentrating on the immediate charitable benefit, they've created a structure designed to generate potential financial returns over many years, while encouraging beneficiaries to take greater ownership of their futures.
It also raises the question of whether families could achieve greater impact by combining their financial expertise with their philanthropic ambitions. Could investment accounts, matched savings schemes or other forms of direct capital distribution complement more traditional charitable giving?
And perhaps most importantly, how should success be measured? The number of children receiving $250 is impressive, but the more meaningful outcomes will emerge over the next decade or two. How much additional money is contributed? How many children continue investing into adulthood? Does early ownership of financial assets improve long-term financial security?
These are considerably harder questions to answer, although they provide an opportunity to measure philanthropic outcomes in terms familiar to investors.
Phil Cubeta cautions against allowing measurement to become the whole purpose of giving. As philanthropy becomes more professional, he says, it can lead to “people treating giving almost like a business, with dashboards of indicators, and recipients of giving treated as vendors to be judged.” The figures matter, but so does the human purpose behind them.
The Dells are already inspiring others. Ray and Barbara Dalio have announced plans to match the $250 contributions for eligible children in Connecticut, while other wealthy individuals and businesses have expressed support for the broader initiative.
It's an encouraging development, and one that suggests this approach could extend well beyond the original $6.25 billion commitment.
The involvement of a government-backed initiative brings another dimension: the relationship between private wealth, public policy and public accountability. Asked specifically about the Dells’ gift and its political associations, Cubeta told Mr Family Office: “Concentrated wealth operating with billions becomes almost like a government unto itself. Philanthropy is for the public good, but the public gets no vote. There will always be pushback. ‘No good deed goes unpunished’ is the philanthropist’s proverb. Rather than take umbrage at how others give, I find it better to ask how I can do whatever I can in my own way, within my own means. This is not a spectator sport. We are on the field.”
Ultimately, the Dell initiative obviously won't eliminate inequality, and a $250 investment won't make anyone rich. But giving 25 million children their first experience of investing is an extraordinary experiment in how philanthropy might be approached differently.
For generations, the world's wealthiest families have spent enormous amounts of time and resources learning how to grow and preserve their fortunes. Michael and Susan Dell are demonstrating how some of those same principles can be applied to giving their money away.
As Cubeta puts it, “Creating great wealth is an extraordinary achievement. How we dispose of it, preserve it, transform it, is another great creative act.”
They've put $6.25 billion behind their idea. The challenge for other families to follow.
-
