Australia’s Inheritocracy
From Inheritocracy to Redistribution
This morning I listened to The Fin’s podcast episode, You’re Probably Part of Australia’s New Inheritocracy, and it included some great insights relevant to my work.
At Equitable Philanthropy, we work at the intersection of wealth and purpose—supporting both funders and charities to move beyond transactional giving and toward transformational change.
In this podcast, journalists James Thomson and Lucy Dean discuss how wealth in Australia is increasingly being transferred—not earned—through intergenerational inheritance. Access to the “Bank of Mum and Dad” has become one of the defining economic advantages of our time. And as the cost of housing, education, and childcare continues to rise, that access (or lack thereof) now determines far more than comfort—it determines opportunity.
But what I found most thought-provoking were the comments made by philanthropist and impact investor Alan Schwartz.
What Schwartz Gets Right
Alan Schwartz doesn’t shy away from acknowledging the realities of inherited wealth. In fact, he’s one of the few high-net-worth individuals in Australia using his platform to publicly question the fairness of a system that concentrates advantage through lineage rather than effort.
Schwartz has consistently challenged the idea that profit alone is a sufficient measure of value, advocating instead for a system that aligns capital with social and environmental good.
He reflected:
“As a young man, I used to go through the [Rich List] quite enthusiastically—looking at it, feeling these people had achieved so much.
I hadn’t looked at the list for 30 years and I was shocked. The total worth of the top 200 in 1984 was $26 billion. In 2024, it’s $621 billion.
And I know that a good proportion of that money sits among a large number of baby boomers passing that on to their children.”
He describes himself as “in the glass house, but also throwing stones,” acknowledging his own wealth while calling for greater accountability. [NB: Quotes summarised as best as possible while listening along!]
“History shows us that increasing inequality creates instability and resentment.
Among those who inherit wealth, there can be a sense of entitlement—a belief in their own self-worth even though they haven’t earned it.
It undermines productivity and innovation and creates social division—it’s a potential cancer on our wonderful egalitarian ethos and history.
“We all know that when people create wealth by creating value for society, that wealth is deserved. That’s our system.”
The problem I have is that inherited wealth never had any of those attributes of hard work or value creation.”
He’s also concerned about how entrenched wealth can manipulate policy:
“We see barriers to competition, regulatory privileges, and tax concessions being used by very rich people to protect their wealth.
It creates an uncompetitive economy that lacks the dynamism we might have seen in the past.”
But he remains hopeful that change is possible:
“I think either out of a sense of self-preservation, a sense of justice, or even self-interest, it’s very possible that enough very wealthy people will say:
‘I’ve actually got more than I need. And it’s not good for me, or my children, or society. So I’m going to give it away—or encourage laws that will force me to give it away.’”
In short: Schwartz believes that wealth—particularly inherited wealth—comes with responsibility. Not just to give, but to change the structures that keep inequality in place.
“If we’re serious about tackling inequality,” Schwartz once said,
“we have to look at systems—not just symptoms.”
That’s a lesson many of us in philanthropy are still tackling with - how can we best support the need now and also disrupt entrenched disadvantage.
From Inheritocracy to Redistribution
The term inheritocracy is deliberately provocative. It suggests that Australia is moving away from a merit-based society and toward one where wealth—and with it, access and influence—is determined by who your parents are.
This isn’t just a social concern; it’s an economic one too. When young people can’t buy homes, start businesses, or invest in their own education without parental backing, we entrench disadvantage and stifle innovation.
Philanthropy has a critical role to play here. And I’m not talking about one-off donations or feel-good gala dinners.
I’m talking about philanthropy as redistribution. Not just wealth, but power. It’s about shifting who gets to decide, who gets funded, and who gets to imagine a different future.
What This Means for Funders
If you’re a funder reading this—and especially if, like the title of the podcast suggests, a lot of us will be inheriting wealth over the next couple decades —I invite you to think beyond charity and toward solidarity. Ask yourself:
Am I able to contribute more now? What will my family giving strategy be as we gain wealth?
Am I currently supporting organisations that are led by those closest to the problems?
Am I helping build capacity and long-term sustainability, or simply responding to crisis?
Am I willing to fund advocacy, systems change, and projects that might challenge the status quo that benefited me?
In my own work with clients, I’m seeing a growing appetite for this deeper level of giving. Funders are tired of transactional relationships. They want transformation. But getting there requires courage—and honesty about where our wealth comes from, and what we want it to do.
Closing the Loop: Philanthropy that Repairs, Not Just Relieves
Alan Schwartz offers a useful blueprint. Use your capital to fix the rules of the game, not just play it better than others.
Whether that’s investing in fairer economic models, supporting First Nations justice initiatives, funding climate advocacy, or backing not-for-profits that are bold enough to ask for systems change, the point is this:
Inherited wealth doesn’t have to perpetuate inequality.
It can be harnessed to dismantle it.
And that’s the kind of philanthropy Australia needs right now.
Are you a funder or social leader trying to navigate these questions? I’d love to hear your thoughts—or better yet, work with you to build a philanthropic strategy that reflects your values. You can get in touch or subscribe for future articles like this one.
Catherine@epadvisory.co