And why does it matter? you ask. Why am I prying into the business of a private marriage on Philanthropy Women? Well, as it turns out, we now know that the answer to the question — did MacKenzie Bezos get a fair divorce settlement? — has huge implications for philanthropy. MacKenzie Bezos is one of the newest signatories of the Giving Pledge, committing to give away at least 50% of her assets while living.
Divorcing in a community property state like Washington, where all resources are considered jointly owned in a marriage, MacKenzie was eligible to get as much as $69 billion. Much of the talk before the Bezos divorce was final speculated that it could come out as a 50/50 split, with MacKenzie getting an equal amount. The actual number — $37 billion — is quite a bit smaller than that. Of the $137.2 billion estimated net worth of Jeff Bezos, $37 billion is only 26.9% of that. A far cry from a 50/50 split.
Had MacKenzie gotten 50%, somewhere in the range of $69 billion, that would have meant philanthropy would have gotten $34.5 billion out of her signing the giving pledge, not the $17 billion that is now being predicted. That’s a big difference. Think of all of the philanthropy that MacKenzie Bezos is now going to drive going forward for years and years. All of that philanthropy could have been doubled in size, or supporting twice as many organizations and initiatives.
The Bezos divorce is in line with most divorces in the U.S., where women come away with much less than men. After divorce, on average, men’s standard of living rises by about 33%, while women’s drops by about 20%. Other studies have shown that women’s income after divorce drops by an average of 41%. True to form, Jeff Bezos walks away with a net worth still over $100 billion, while MacKenzie is now at a wealth level less than half as high as his.
It may seem like I’m looking a gift horse in the mouth by suggesting that $37 billion is not an adequate settlement for MacKenzie Bezos, but if we really want to solve problems for women in society, we have to look at the root of the problem. The root of the problem here is the ongoing divorce gap for women in the U.S. As long as our legal system grants women far less money than men in divorce, women will be in control of far less assets, which will impact their capacity to live well, in the case of most women who are thrust into poverty by divorce, and help others live well, in the case of MacKenzie Bezos and her commitment to the Giving Pledge.
And yet, this settlement has made MacKenzie Bezos one of the richest women in the world, which suggests she has done a lot better than many other divorcees in the 1%. It’s hard to know how well high net worth women generally fare in divorce, since most of this information is kept private. But it would be good information to have, since this information could impact the picture for progressive giving, with women more likely to fuel efforts at diversity, inclusion, and systems change.
Powering Philanthropy after Divorce: Mackenzie Bezos Signs the Giving Pledge
MacKenzie Bezos appears to be in that category of givers focused on diversity and inclusion, being a longtime supporter of marriage equality, and the founder of Bystander Revolution, an anti-bullying effort that emphasizes acceptance, tolerance, and celebration of difference. She has also supported efforts to bring more Veterans into political office (inclusion) and to help undocumented immigrants attend college (diversity and inclusion). In addition, she has been a significant funder of cancer and Alzheimer’s research.
MacKenzie Bezos is also a fiction writer, bringing an unusual capacity for creative thinking with her as she forges her way toward giving away half of her $37 billion divorce settlement. MacKenzie Bezos is the author of two novels and received the 2006 American Book Award for her novel The Testing of Luther Albright.
Given all these resources, MacKenzie Bezos has a great deal to offer philanthropy. She articulates her reasons for signing the Giving Pledge with a particular attention to the value of relationships, another important theme in feminist philanthropy. Who knows if MacKenzie will take a particularly feminist approach as she moves forward with distributing an estimated $17 billion over the course of her lifetime. One can hope.
Here is the full letter from MacKenzie Bezos on deciding to sign the Giving Pledge:
May 25, 2019
Thinking about the Giving Pledge, my mind kept searching its folds for a passage I once read about writing, something about not saving our best ideas for later chapters, about using them now.
I found it this morning on a shelf of my books from college, toward the end of Annie Dillard’s The Writing Life. It was underlined and starred like all of the words that have inspired me most over the years, words that felt true in context, and also true in life:
“Do not hoard what seems good for a later place in the book, or for another book… The impulse to save something good for a better place later is the signal to spend it now. Something more will arise for later, something better… Anything you do not give freely and abundantly becomes lost to you. You open your safe and find ashes.”
I have no doubt that tremendous value comes when people act quickly on the impulse to give. No drive has more positive ripple effects than the desire to be of service. There are lots of resources each of us can pull from our safes to share with others — time, attention, knowledge, patience, creativity, talent, effort, humor, compassion. And sure enough, something greater rises up every time we give: the easy breathing of a friend we sit with when we had other plans, the relief on our child’s face when we share the story of our own mistake, laughter at the well-timed joke we tell to someone who is crying, the excitement of the kids in the school we send books to, the safety of the families who sleep in the shelters we fund. These immediate results are only the beginning. Their value keeps multiplying and spreading in ways we may never know.
We each come by the gifts we have to offer by an infinite series of influences and lucky breaks we can never fully understand. In addition to whatever assets life has nurtured in me, I have a disproportionate amount of money to share. My approach to philanthropy will continue to be thoughtful. It will take time and effort and care. But I won’t wait. And I will keep at it until the safe is empty.
It’s All About the Divorce Gap: Ending Isolation for Divorcing Women
Top 10 Posts of 2019 on Philanthropy Women
As NoVo Downsizes, What Next for Women and Girls?
7 thoughts on “At $37 Billion, Did MacKenzie Bezos Get a Fair Divorce?”
62m seconds in 60 years if she spent $5 every second for 60 years she wouldn’t even go through one fourth of 30B all she had to do was get married i think that is kind of fair.
I believe she got a highly unfair settlement. She didn’t build amazon. Jeff did. She should have gotten 5 billion and been on her way. There was absolutely no reason to give her $37 billion and it is garbage court settlements like this that millions of men refuse to get married. This settlement just drove that spike further into the ground.
There’s a saying that “Women need men like fish need a bicycle”, well, we men don’t need women at all. We do even better without you.
Late response, but I agree. I’ve been saying this for years, the assertion she was treated unfairly is really narcissistic and entitled thinking. You’re also right about men not wanting to be married, why is it any talk of a prenup makes you a jerk? We all know why, they want that golden parachute!
Divorces heavily favor the woman, there would be far fewer and less messy divorces if women didn’t get the big pay day to bale out. If they knew they would leave with little or nothing they would spend more time working on the marriage rather than doing the math for their escape. Women you know what I’m taking about.
There is no incentive for men to get married.
And little incentive for women to just be nice and work it out.
this is obviously idiotic and i’m glad others are commenting on it she got 37 billion dollars and didn’t bring anywhere near that into the relationship to leave with that was too much just because they were married doesn’t mean that she’s entitled to half of an amount of money that she didn’t work for.
She got $37bn from a company that her husband runs. Explain to me, morally, how she should expect half of it, unless she is an equal shareholder in the company?
As for the “Divorce Gap”. Yes, women are worse off financially after divorce, because they earn less to start with. How is it equal to reward a female a disproportionate amount of the shared wealth of a couple as part or a divorce settlement?
Well, she earned it by having to supervise her team of maids, drivers, and yard boys while her husband slaved to build a company. Er… never mind.
If women are impoverished by divorce in the U.S., why are they such eager plaintiffs, starting more than half of divorce lawsuits? Isn’t it rare to see intelligent people voluntarily doing things that will make them dramatically worse off?