Tag Archives: african american wealth

When Intel Leaves: Endowments, NCCU, and the $2.5 Billion NBA Paradox

“I know I got it made while the masses of black people are catchin’ hell, but as long as they ain’t free, I ain’t free.” – Muhammad Ali

The recent news that Intel will discontinue its $1 million annual funding of North Carolina Central University’s (NCCU) Technology Law and Policy Center is more than just a line item in the university’s budget. It is a sharp reminder of how precarious institutional development becomes when African American colleges and universities rely on the European American corporate cycle of generosity and withdrawal. Where is African American corporate philanthropy is a pertinent question, but an article for another day.

Intel’s departure leaves a gap that must now be filled through other means. But the mathematics of filling it points to a broader truth: without substantial, permanent endowments, HBCUs will remain vulnerable to the political and financial whims of European American corporations. To replace $1 million in annual program funding, NCCU would need to raise between $20 million and $25 million in endowment principal assuming a 4–5% annual spending rate, the standard in higher education finance.

The fact that an entire academic pipeline, designed to produce future African American lawyers and policymakers, can be destabilized by a single corporate decision underscores the fragility of HBCU institutional power. And it raises a haunting contrast: while 66 African American NBA players will together earn $2.5 billion in salaries this upcoming season, not a single African American university controls an endowment robust enough to insulate it from the kind of disruption Intel’s withdrawal has now caused.

The mechanics are straightforward. Endowments work by pooling donated capital, investing it, and spending a sustainable portion of annual returns—usually 4–5%. To replace Intel’s $1 million annual gift, NCCU must therefore build an endowment of $20–25 million. This is not extraordinary by university standards. At most predominantly white institutions (PWIs), a $25 million endowment is considered modest. At Harvard, Yale, or Stanford, it would not even make the footnotes. Yet for NCCU, an institution with an endowment of $89 million as of December 2024, the sudden need for another $20–25 million underscores the gap between HBCUs and their white peers.

The underlying truth is that corporate funding is inherently unstable. It ebbs and flows with market cycles, political administrations, and corporate priorities. Endowments, however, endure across generations. The very act of raising such capital is itself an exercise in institutional power: it demonstrates to the world that the university and its community can stand on their own financial feet.

Intel did not single out NCCU maliciously. The company is undergoing a profound transformation, not least because the U.S. government has become its largest shareholder after a multi-billion-dollar deal with the Trump administration. Like other firms facing political scrutiny, Intel is quietly shedding high-profile DEI commitments. For NCCU, however, the effect is real. The Technology Law and Policy Center was designed to provide African American law students with training in emerging technology and policy—a space historically closed to Black lawyers. It also featured internships at Intel, summer placements, and the now-defunct “Intel Rule,” which required outside law firms to staff diverse teams if they wanted Intel’s business. Now, without a replacement funding mechanism, the Center risks contraction. Students will still enroll. Faculty will still teach. But the acceleration that Intel’s money provided—the ability to recruit nationally, to build cutting-edge programming, to give students exposure to high-tech legal practice—will slow.

Enter the paradox of the NBA’s 66 Black players earning $25 million or more in the upcoming season. Collectively, those 66 players will earn $2.5 billion in salary during the 2025–2026 season. Each of these players individually makes at least what NCCU would need to permanently replace Intel’s $1 million annual commitment through endowment. The collective sum is staggering: $2.5 billion in one season—enough to seed $25 million endowments at 100 HBCUs.

It is not about individual responsibility. No one player can be expected to save an institution. But collectively, the paradox points to the imbalance between African American individual wealth and African American institutional poverty. Even if just 10% of that wealth—$250 million—were organized and directed into HBCU endowments, the result could replace Intel’s contribution not only at NCCU but across multiple campuses. Yet there is no mechanism, no institutional strategy, no coordinated pipeline that directs such flows into African American universities. This is not new. For decades, African American excellence has been harvested at the level of the individual, while African American institutions have remained underfunded. The NBA is simply the latest, most visible example.

The Intel withdrawal reminds us of a hard truth: reliance on outside benevolence is not a strategy for power. It is, at best, a strategy for survival. Corporate giving is always the first budget item to shrink when recession looms or political winds shift. For HBCUs, this means programs rise and fall on decisions made in Silicon Valley or Wall Street boardrooms—far removed from Durham, Tallahassee, Baton Rouge, or Montgomery. The vulnerability is compounded when African American communities assume that the generosity of corporations will substitute for building our own endowments. The danger is not simply financial but cultural: it conditions us to believe that power comes from outside, not from within.

Intel’s $1 million a year was not charity—it was investment. It bought Intel goodwill, a trained pipeline of diverse lawyers, and reputational capital in the DEI era. Now that DEI is politically unpopular, the investment is deemed expendable. This is why endowments matter. They are not subject to the quarterly report or the election cycle. They anchor institutions in the long term.

Let’s be clear about the scale of the challenge. The combined endowments of all HBCUs hover around $4 billion, compared to more than $800 billion at PWIs. Harvard alone has an endowment of nearly $52 billion. NCCU’s endowment stands at $89 million. To raise an additional $20–25 million to replace Intel’s support would represent a 22–28% increase in its current endowment base. Such a leap is achievable—but it requires strategy. It means cultivating alumni giving systematically. It means leveraging African American wealth beyond alumni, drawing in professional athletes, entertainers, and entrepreneurs. It means creating vehicles—donor-advised funds, pooled endowments, institutional investment cooperatives—that make giving both efficient and impactful. Most of all, it means shifting mindset. We must stop thinking of endowments as luxuries reserved for Ivy League institutions. They are necessities. They are the only way to secure institutional independence.

The Intel decision can serve as a turning point, if we are willing to see it clearly. Corporations are not institutional guardians. They may play a role, but they will not underwrite our survival. Their goals are their own. When interests diverge, as they now have, funding vanishes. Individual wealth must be institutionalized. The contrast between NBA salaries and HBCU endowment poverty is not about shaming athletes. It is about building structures that make institutional giving the default, not the exception. Endowments are the only safety net. No government program, no corporate sponsorship, no philanthropic fad can substitute. Only endowments give institutions perpetual capacity to fund themselves.

What would it take, concretely, for NCCU to raise the $25 million needed? A handful of major gifts in the $2–5 million range from alumni, athletes, or African American business leaders could jump-start the campaign. NBA, NFL, and WNBA players could be recruited to create a pooled fund. Instead of individual gifts, imagine a collective “Athletes for HBCU Endowments” initiative. African American foundations and community funds could direct grants toward seed capital, matched by alumni. If every NCCU law graduate gave $1,000 a year for ten years, the cumulative effect would approach the tens of millions. NCCU could also partner with African American-owned banks and investment firms to maximize returns and circulate dollars within the community. The strategy would not only replace Intel but set a precedent: when outside money leaves, we do not shrink. We build.

The broader question is not whether NCCU will survive the loss of Intel’s support. It will. The real question is whether African American institutions will continue to live in the shadow of dependency—or whether we will use moments like this to chart a new course. The paradox of $2.5 billion in NBA salaries versus the need for a $25 million endowment is not just a rhetorical flourish. It is a mirror held up to African America. It asks whether we will continue to celebrate individual wealth while neglecting collective survival.

Every dollar of Intel’s withdrawal can be replaced. But only if African American wealth is organized. Only if alumni, athletes, and entrepreneurs see endowments not as gifts but as obligations. Only if we remember that the true measure of power is not what any one of us earns, but what we can build together.

Intel has reminded us of an uncomfortable truth: corporate giving is temporary. Endowments are permanent. To replace $1 million a year, NCCU needs $25 million in endowment. That number is not insurmountable. It is the equivalent of one NBA salary in a single season. There are 66 African American players earning at least that much this year alone, with combined salaries of $2.5 billion. The juxtaposition is stark: individuals flourish while institutions starve. The future of HBCUs—and the broader African American ecosystem—depends on closing that gap. Until African America learns to institutionalize its wealth, every Intel withdrawal will feel like a crisis. But the day we build our endowments, such exits will be footnotes. And our institutions will finally stand on the firm ground they have always deserved.

Disclaimer: This article was assisted by ChatGPT.

Give Black App: A Digital Gatekeeper For African American Philanthropy & Institutional Capital

“We must invest in ourselves. Without our own institutions, we will always be at the mercy of others.” – Mary McLeod Bethune

In the long arc of African American economic life, a recurring pattern emerges: the institutions most critical to our survival are consistently starved of capital, while the broader society thrives off of our labor, culture, and creativity. From Reconstruction-era mutual aid societies to the undercapitalized HBCUs of today, the struggle has never been whether African Americans are generous, but whether that generosity is systematically directed into institutions that can build durable power.

The Give Black App, founded by David C. Hughes, Alexus Hall, and Fran Harris, positions itself at this inflection point. It is not simply an app but a digital strategy—one attempting to reshape the flow of African American philanthropy and donations by curating, centralizing, and amplifying support for Black-led institutions.

The Context of Underfunding

African American nonprofits receive disproportionately less funding compared to their White counterparts. A 2020 Bridgespan study found that unrestricted net assets of White-led nonprofits were 76% larger than those of Black-led nonprofits, while revenues were 24% higher. These disparities compound over time. For HBCUs, the story is even starker: the endowments of all 100+ HBCUs combined is less than 1/10th of Harvard University’s alone.

Despite African America’s estimated $1.8 trillion in annual buying power, only a fraction is captured by its own institutions. Much of African American giving remains individual-to-individual or church-centered, providing immediate relief but not the kind of long-term institutional scaffolding needed to compete with White or global capital. Platforms like Give Black attempt to redirect that generosity into a framework where dollars reinforce permanence.

Building the Infrastructure of Giving

Give Black’s strength lies in infrastructure, a word often overlooked in philanthropy. The app operates as a digital gatekeeper, cataloguing Black-led nonprofits and enabling donors—whether individuals, alumni associations, or grassroots organizations—to find and fund them with ease.

This may seem simple, but its implications are profound. In an environment where discoverability is one of the greatest barriers for Black-led organizations, Give Black centralizes attention. For the countless nonprofits that lack robust marketing budgets, development officers, or national visibility, the app provides a seat at the table they would otherwise be denied.

The team itself reflects intentional design. Hughes, a Morehouse and Prairie View alumnus, carries the academic gravitas to engage institutions; Hall, with a background in cybersecurity and software sales, grounds the platform’s technical operations; Harris, a lifelong advocate of Black love and economic empowerment, provides the cultural grounding and marketing voice. Alongside them stand directors rooted in community engagement, finance, athletics, and science. Together, they represent a cross-section of African American life that mirrors the very community the app seeks to serve.

Philanthropy Meets Technology

Unlike GoFundMe or Benevity, which serve broad audiences, Give Black narrows its focus: African American-led institutions. This specificity is both its greatest strength and its potential vulnerability. By making African American philanthropy visible and trackable, the app attempts to normalize institutional giving within the community itself.

African American donors, long used to personal giving—funeral funds, tuition help, emergency assistance—are now asked to see their dollars not just as charity but as investment. An app that allows for transparency, accountability, and impact measurement may finally bridge the gap between intent and sustained institutional support.

Technology also democratizes giving. Younger generations, accustomed to digital wallets and mobile donations, are unlikely to write checks or mail contributions. By existing where they already transact, Give Black normalizes philanthropy as part of daily life. With proper marketing, it could serve as a digital equivalent of the collection plate—except one that sends dollars to Black think tanks, schools, health clinics, and endowment foundations rather than solely to Sunday offerings.

The Role of Fran Harris

Much of the initial confusion about Give Black’s leadership arises from Fran Harris’s name. She openly jokes about it—she is not the Fran Harris who was a WNBA champion or Shark Tank winner, though many assume otherwise. Instead, she distinguishes herself as someone whose “entire life has been about Black love and economic empowerment.”

That distinction matters. Whereas celebrity often drives visibility in African American philanthropy, Harris positions herself not as a star but as a steward of a broader vision. Her work focuses on the storytelling and cultural marketing needed to align African American giving with institutional capital. In a sense, her humor in addressing the name confusion underscores the seriousness of her actual role: grounding the app’s message in authenticity rather than celebrity.

The Gaps in the Strategy

Despite its promise, Give Black faces hurdles. First, fundraising expertise at the highest level appears limited within the core team. Major philanthropy is an industry of its own, requiring seasoned development officers capable of cultivating seven- and eight-figure gifts. Without this, Give Black risks becoming a platform for small-dollar giving—important, but insufficient for closing institutional capital gaps.

Second, technological depth must match ambition. While Hall’s cybersecurity background provides operational credibility, scaling a fintech-style platform requires CTO-level leadership. Issues of compliance, data integrity, and user trust are not optional—they are the foundation of sustainability.

Third, policy and compliance matter. Donations intersect with financial regulations, nonprofit law, and IRS oversight. To become the definitive gateway for Black giving, Give Black must not only build a sleek front end but also a back-end architecture that can withstand regulatory scrutiny and instill donor confidence.

Where the Opportunities Lie

The greatest opportunities for Give Black lie in institutional self-reliance.

One clear pathway is through alumni networks. HBCU alumni giving rates remain in the single digits, compared to 20–30% at elite PWIs. If Give Black positioned itself as the official conduit for alumni donations, it could help double or triple those rates over time. That alone would shift millions into endowments and operating budgets across the HBCU ecosystem.

Another opportunity lies in membership-based organizations—from professional networks to civic associations. Instead of dues going solely toward programming, portions could be funneled into long-term institutional giving through Give Black, creating a culture of collective philanthropy.

The Pan-African Diaspora represents yet another opening. African and Caribbean communities abroad are increasingly connected digitally. Give Black could expand to become a Pan-African philanthropic bridge, enabling solidarity between African Americans and global Black communities. Diaspora donors, often seeking trustworthy channels for giving, could find in Give Black a centralized, transparent platform.

Finally, the most transformative opportunity is to integrate endowment-building features directly into the app. Too much African American giving is trapped in the cycle of operating expenses. By redirecting portions of donations into permanent capital funds, Give Black could help institutions create reserves that outlast political climates and economic downturns.

Lessons from History

The urgency of Give Black’s mission must be seen against history. During the early 20th century, White-controlled philanthropy dictated the survival of many HBCUs. Institutions like Hampton and Tuskegee often relied on Northern industrialists whose donations came with ideological strings attached. The absence of African American-controlled philanthropic infrastructure meant dependency—and dependency always meant vulnerability.

Today, African American institutions still operate under the shadow of that dependency. Foundation funding remains racially skewed, and government support is often politically weaponized. Give Black, by offering a decentralized and community-driven alternative, challenges that cycle.

But history also warns: movements that lack discipline or scale are easily absorbed or ignored. Just as the Negro Leagues produced baseball talent but lacked the capital to maintain independence, so too can African American philanthropy generate excitement but fail to sustain institutional life if it is not channeled strategically.

The Verdict

Give Black App is not merely a digital donation tool. It is a test case: can African America leverage technology to redirect its wealth into its own institutions? The team’s composition, heavy in HBCU roots, marketing authenticity, and community engagement, suggests it understands both the stakes and the culture.

Still, the app must avoid the trap of becoming a feel-good project without measurable institutional outcomes. Its long-term success will be determined by whether it can:

  1. Secure partnerships with HBCUs, alumni associations, and membership-based organizations.
  2. Develop deep fundraising and compliance infrastructure.
  3. Normalize institutional giving across African American households.

If it does, Give Black could evolve into a cornerstone of African American institutional development—a kind of digital Freedman’s Bureau, redistributing not charity but power.

For African America, the stakes could not be higher. In an era where White nonprofits sit on multibillion-dollar endowments, while Black nonprofits scrape for survival, the question is not whether we are generous. It is whether our generosity is building the kind of institutions that ensure survival for centuries, not just survival for today.

Give Black, if scaled with vision and discipline, may finally provide the infrastructure to answer that question with a resounding yes.

When the Numbers Don’t Add Up: Shannon Sharpe’s $10 Million Settlement (Offer) and Savannah State University’s $12 Million Endowment

“If we don’t support our own institutions, who will? Our future depends on it.” – Dr. Johnnetta B. Cole

In a society where celebrity controversy often overshadows institutional legacy, the recent $10 million legal settlement offer by Shannon Sharpe is notable not just for its allegations, but for what it inadvertently reveals about the chasm between Black celebrity wealth and the underfunded institutions that shape it.

Sharpe, an NFL Hall of Famer turned sports media luminary, is embroiled in a sexual assault lawsuit in April 2025 that has added fuel to the fodder over his public image for years. The allegations, dating back to 2021, accused him of sexual assault and misconduct. Though the terms of the settlement do not admit guilt, the figure—$10 million—is enough to reverberate well beyond the courtroom. Particularly for Savannah State University, Sharpe’s alma mater, whose entire endowment hovers just north of $12 million.

That a single lawsuit settlement could nearly eclipse the full financial endowment of a university—an institution that has educated generations of Black students since its founding in 1890—demands attention. It is more than legal coincidence; it is cultural commentary. Sharpe’s settlement and Savannah State’s endowment share more than proximity in value—they reflect a profound misalignment between individual Black success and collective Black institutional health.

Celebrity Capitalism vs. Institutional Capital

Sharpe’s alleged settlement offer arrives at a time when he is more visible than ever. From ESPN panels to viral podcast interviews, he has crafted a new media identity grounded in charisma, cultural commentary, and athletic credibility. He is a multimillionaire many times over, and for much of the public, a figure of Black excellence.

And yet, while the scandal has put his reputation into question, the institutional damage is more structural than sensational. Savannah State University, like most HBCUs, remains chronically underfunded. In Georgia, the flagship University of Georgia enjoys an endowment exceeding $1.8 billion. Savannah State’s $12 million looks less like a war chest than a coin jar.

This contrast is not unique. Harvard’s endowment, currently over $50 billion, generates more passive income in a single day than most HBCUs earn annually. Meanwhile, Black cultural, entertainment, and sports figures continue to accumulate individual wealth—largely without corresponding reinvestment in the institutions that launched their journeys.

In Sharpe’s case, it is particularly jarring. He has long spoken with pride about Savannah State, often positioning his ascent from a small HBCU to NFL stardom as proof of grit, talent, and perseverance. But the question remains: can Black America afford to celebrate individual ascent while its institutions struggle to survive?

Institutions as the Forgotten Priority

The logic of endowments is simple: they are long-term capital. Through careful management, they yield investment income that sustains a university’s operations—faculty salaries, scholarships, research grants, infrastructure. A $12 million endowment, assuming a 5% annual drawdown, provides just $600,000 per year. That’s not enough to fund a single major building renovation or hire a cohort of tenure-track faculty.

Yet for a fraction of what he has paid in legal settlements, Sharpe—or any number of successful HBCU alumni—could fundamentally change the trajectory of such institutions. This is not to single out Sharpe, but to highlight the imbalance. In an ideal world, the very wealth that is now being paid out in settlements would be instead building libraries, research labs, and scholarship funds.

This tension is particularly visible among athletes and entertainers. Black America’s most visible ambassadors often emerge from institutions that are themselves invisible in the national philanthropic conversation. According to UNCF, the combined endowments of all HBCUs total less than $5 billion. The Ivies, by contrast, hold over $200 billion in endowment assets.

Culture, Crisis, and the Limits of Individualism

Sharpe’s settlement speaks to more than a personal reckoning—it is a cultural moment. It raises questions about power, accountability, and how society arbitrates guilt and innocence outside the courtroom. But for the Black community, it should also prompt deeper reflection on how fame and fortune are managed—and how institutions are too often left behind.

There is a troubling pattern: institutions that produce Black talent are celebrated in name, while being abandoned in practice. Alumni homecomings become nostalgic affairs, rich in ritual but poor in revenue. HBCUs are used as cultural references in music and fashion, but rarely as investment priorities.

The result is that even as African Americans make gains in representation and cultural power, their institutions remain at risk of irrelevance or collapse. The stakes are not merely educational—they are existential. Without strong institutions, there can be no sustainable community power.

What a $10 Million Gift Would Mean

Imagine instead that $10 million were a donation, not a payout. At Savannah State, that amount would nearly double the endowment overnight. It could launch a center for Black media studies, a school of sports journalism, or fund full scholarships for dozens of students. It could digitize archives, attract talent, and fund study-abroad programs that broaden horizons.

Better yet, it could serve as a challenge grant—a call for other high-profile HBCU alumni to match it, dollar for dollar. Such a campaign could transform the entire financial landscape of HBCUs in a single generation.

There is precedent. Oprah Winfrey’s $13 million donation to Morehouse College, Robert F. Smith’s debt forgiveness gesture at Morehouse’s graduation, and Reed Hastings’ $120 million donation to Spelman, Morehouse, and UNCF during the racial reckoning of 2020 showed what’s possible. But sporadic generosity is not a strategy. What’s needed is a systemic culture of giving—an institutional ethos that reorients Black wealth toward Black infrastructure.

Moving from Scandal to Structure

Sharpe, like many public figures, is navigating a complex personal and professional moment. Settling a case of this magnitude inevitably invites scrutiny. But what comes next is more important. Can this moment be a catalyst—not just for personal reflection, but for public responsibility?

Celebrity scandals are ephemeral. Institutions, if cared for, are permanent. The opportunity now is for Sharpe—and others in similar positions—to pivot toward legacy-building. That means using their platforms not only to defend their names, but to elevate their alma maters. To protect not just brand equity, but intellectual capital. To trade spectacle for structure.

A Future Worth Investing In

Savannah State University is not just a school—it is a symbol of survival, intellect, and potential. Its alumni include judges, scientists, teachers, engineers, and businesspeople. It deserves more than to be a footnote in a celebrity controversy. It deserves capital, vision, and strategic philanthropy.

In the end, the numbers don’t lie. A $10 million lawsuit may capture headlines. But a $12 million endowment defines futures. The question is not what Shannon Sharpe did or didn’t do—but what he and others like him will do next.

If fame is fleeting and fortune unpredictable, then perhaps the wisest investment is the one that cannot be taken away: the institutions that built you.

2023’s African America Household Portfolio Creeps Towards $7 Trillion In Assets

At the end of 2023, African America had asset values totaling $6.54 trillion and liability values totaling $1.55 trillion. This is an increase of $330 billion and $40 billion, respectively. Below is a breakdown of that wealth by assets and liabilities as reported by the Federal Reserve’s Distribution of Household Wealth data. African American assets amounted to 4% of U.S. Household and African American liabilities amounted to 8.3% of U.S. Household liabilities. This is a 100 basis points decline in assets from 2022 and 50 basis points decline in liabilities from 2022.

HBCU Money took a look at what exactly the African American asset portfolio entailed. African Americans are highly concentrated in two main areas, real estate and retirement accounts (pensions and 401K), respectively. These two groups comprise over 70 percent of African American assets versus only 43 percent for European Americans. Corporate equities/mutual funds and private business ownership comprise a staggering 35.3 percent of European American assets versus only 9.2 percent for African Americans, these two categories also representing African America’s lowest asset holdings.

Examining where African America puts its money and theorizing why can give us insight into strategies that can help in closing both household and institutional wealth gaps.

ASSETS

Real estate – $2.24 trillion

Definition: Real estate is defined as the land and any permanent structures, like a home, or improvements attached to the land, whether natural or man-made.

% of African America’s Assets – 34.3%

% of U.S. Household Real Estate Assets – 5.0%

4.2% increase from 2022

Consumer durable goods – $570 billion (3.6% increase from 2022)

Definition: Consumer durables, also known as durable goods, are a category of consumer goods that do not wear out quickly and therefore do not have to be purchased frequently. They are part of core retail sales data and are considered durable because they last for at least three years, as the U.S. Department of Commerce defines. Examples include large and small appliances, consumer electronics, furniture, and furnishings.

% of African America’s Assets – 8.7%

% of U.S. Household Assets – 7.2%

3.6% increase from 2022

Corporate equities and mutual fund shares – $270 billion

Definition: A stock, also known as equity, is a security that represents the ownership of a fraction of the issuing corporation. Units of stock are called “shares” which entitles the owner to a proportion of the corporation’s assets and profits equal to how much stock they own. A mutual fund is a pooled collection of assets that invests in stocks, bonds, and other securities.

% of African America’s Assets – 4.3%

% of U.S. Household Assets – 0.7%

17.4% increase from 2022

Defined benefit pension entitlements – $1.66 trillion

Definition: Defined-benefit plans provide eligible employees with guaranteed income for life when they retire. Employers guarantee a specific retirement benefit amount for each participant based on factors such as the employee’s salary and years of service.

% of African America’s Assets – 25.4%

% of U.S. Household Assets – 9.5%

3.1% increase from 2022

Defined contribution pension entitlements – $730 billion

Definition: Defined-contribution plans are funded primarily by the employee. The most common type of defined-contribution plan is a 401(k). Participants can elect to defer a portion of their gross salary via a pre-tax payroll deduction. The company may match the contribution if it chooses, up to a limit it sets.

% of African America’s Assets – 11.2%

% of U.S. Household Assets – 5.6%

21.7% increase from 2022

Private businesses – $330 billion

Definition: A private company is a firm held under private ownership. Private companies may issue stock and have shareholders, but their shares do not trade on public exchanges and are not issued through an initial public offering (IPO). As a result, private firms do not need to meet the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) strict filing requirements for public companies.1 In general, the shares of these businesses are less liquid, and their valuations are more difficult to determine.

% of African America’s Assets – 5.0%

% of U.S. Household Assets – 2.1%

5.7% decrease from 2022

Other assets – $740 billion

Definition: Alternative investments can include private equity or venture capital, hedge funds, managed futures, art and antiques, commodities, and derivatives contracts.

% of African America’s Assets – 11.3%

% of U.S. Household Assets – 2.7%

2.8% increase from 2022

LIABILITIES

Home Mortgages – $770 billion

Definition: Debt secured by either a mortgage or deed of trust on real property, such as a house and land. Foreclosure and sale of the property is a remedy available to the lender. Mortgage debt is a debt that was voluntarily incurred by the owner of the property, either for purchase of the property or at a later point, such as with a home equity line of credit.

% of African America’s Liabilities – 50.3%

% of U.S. Household Liabilities – 6.0%

1.3% increase from 2022

Consumer Credit$710 billion

Definition: Consumer credit, or consumer debt, is personal debt taken on to purchase goods and services. Although any type of personal loan could be labeled consumer credit, the term is more often used to describe unsecured debt of smaller amounts. A credit card is one type of consumer credit in finance, but a mortgage is not considered consumer credit because it is backed with the property as collateral. 

% of African America’s Liabilities – 47.7%

% of U.S. Household Liabilities – 14.8%

4.2% increase from 2022

Other Liabilities – $30 billion

Definition: For most households, liabilities will include taxes due, bills that must be paid, rent or mortgage payments, loan interest and principal due, and so on. If you are pre-paid for performing work or a service, the work owed may also be construed as a liability.

% of African America’s Liabilities – 1.9%

% of U.S. Household Liabilities – 2.7%

0.0 nonchange from 2022

Source: Federal Reserve

2022’s African America Household Portfolio Just Over $6 Trillion In Assets

At the end of 2022, African America had asset values totaling $6.2 trillion and liability values totaling $1.5 trillion. Below is a breakdown of those by wealth component by assets and liabilities as reported by the Federal Reserve’s Distribution of Household Wealth data. African American assets amounted to 5% of U.S. Household assets and African American liabilities amounted to 8.8% of U.S. Household liabilities.

HBCU Money took a look at what exactly the African American asset portfolio entailed. African Americans are highly concentrated in two main areas, real estate and retirement accounts (pensions and 401K), respectively. These two groups comprise almost 70 percent of African American assets versus only 43 percent for European Americans. Corporate equities/mutual funds and private business ownership comprise a staggering 35.1 percent of European American assets versus only 9.6 percent for African Americans, these two categories also representing African America’s lowest asset holdings.

Examining where African America puts its money and theorizing why can give us insight into strategies that can help in closing both household and institutional wealth gaps.

ASSETS

Real estate – $2.15 trillion

Definition: Real estate is defined as the land and any permanent structures, like a home, or improvements attached to the land, whether natural or man-made.

% of African America’s Assets – 33.1%

% of U.S. Household Real Estate Assets – 6.1%

10 Year % Growth – 187%

Consumer durable goods – $550 billion

Definition: Consumer durables, also known as durable goods, are a category of consumer goods that do not wear out quickly and therefore do not have to be purchased frequently. They are part of core retail sales data and are considered durable because they last for at least three years, as the U.S. Department of Commerce defines. Examples include large and small appliances, consumer electronics, furniture, and furnishings.

% of African America’s Assets – 7.2%

% of U.S. Household Assets – 7.3%

10 Year % Growth – 81%

Corporate equities and mutual fund shares – $270 billion

Definition: A stock, also known as equity, is a security that represents the ownership of a fraction of the issuing corporation. Units of stock are called “shares” which entitles the owner to a proportion of the corporation’s assets and profits equal to how much stock they own. A mutual fund is a pooled collection of assets that invests in stocks, bonds, and other securities.

% of African America’s Assets – 4.9%

% of U.S. Household Assets – 1.1%

10 Year % Growth – 90%

Defined benefit pension entitlements – $1.57 trillion

Definition: Defined-benefit plans provide eligible employees with guaranteed income for life when they retire. Employers guarantee a specific retirement benefit amount for each participant based on factors such as the employee’s salary and years of service.

% of African America’s Assets – 24.7%

% of U.S. Household Assets – 10.5%

10 Year % Growth – 51%

Defined contribution pension entitlements – $600 billion

Definition: Defined-contribution plans are funded primarily by the employee. The most common type of defined-contribution plan is a 401(k). Participants can elect to defer a portion of their gross salary via a pre-tax payroll deduction. The company may match the contribution if it chooses, up to a limit it sets.

% of African America’s Assets – 11.8%

% of U.S. Household Assets – 8.0%

10 Year % Growth – 163%

Private businesses – $350 billion

Definition: A private company is a firm held under private ownership. Private companies may issue stock and have shareholders, but their shares do not trade on public exchanges and are not issued through an initial public offering (IPO). As a result, private firms do not need to meet the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) strict filing requirements for public companies.1 In general, the shares of these businesses are less liquid, and their valuations are more difficult to determine.

% of African America’s Assets – 4.7%

% of U.S. Household Assets – 2.2%

10 Year % Growth – 106%

Other assets – $700 billion

Definition: Alternative investments can include private equity or venture capital, hedge funds, managed futures, art and antiques, commodities, and derivatives contracts.

% of African America’s Assets – 13.6%

% of U.S. Household Assets – 4.2%

10 Year % Growth – 136%

LIABILITIES

Home Mortgages – $770 billion

Definition: Debt secured by either a mortgage or deed of trust on real property, such as a house and land. Foreclosure and sale of the property is a remedy available to the lender. Mortgage debt is a debt that was voluntarily incurred by the owner of the property, either for purchase of the property or at a later point, such as with a home equity line of credit.

% of African America’s Liabilities – 56.1%

% of U.S. Household Liabilities – 7.2%

10 Year % Growth – 53.3%

Consumer Credit$710 billion

Definition: Consumer credit, or consumer debt, is personal debt taken on to purchase goods and services. Although any type of personal loan could be labeled consumer credit, the term is more often used to describe unsecured debt of smaller amounts. A credit card is one type of consumer credit in finance, but a mortgage is not considered consumer credit because it is backed with the property as collateral. 

% of African America’s Liabilities – 42.1%

% of U.S. Household Liabilities – 14.1%

10 Year % Growth – 91.7%

Other Liabilities – $30 billion

Definition: For most households, liabilities will include taxes due, bills that must be paid, rent or mortgage payments, loan interest and principal due, and so on. If you are pre-paid for performing work or a service, the work owed may also be construed as a liability.

% of African America’s Liabilities – 1.8%

% of U.S. Household Liabilities – 2.8%

10 Year % Growth – 200%

Source: Federal Reserve