American Summer at Citywealth: Boston, where wealth, science and philanthropy meet
From Harvard and biotechnology to family-owned sporting franchises and some of America’s oldest cultural institutions, Boston exercises an influence far beyond its size. Unlike New York, whose private wealth industry is built around global finance, Boston’s wealth is closely connected to universities, hospitals, scientific research, venture capital and philanthropy. It is a city where new fortunes are created through ideas, but where the responsibilities associated with wealth remain shaped by institutions established generations ago.
That model is now being tested. Federal funding disputes have exposed the dependence of Boston’s research economy on public capital, while financial pressures at the Museum of Fine Arts have raised questions about the future of historic cultural organisations. At the same time, biotechnology founders, entrepreneurs and younger generations are directing more capital towards measurable problems and global causes.
See the Citywealth Top 20 Boston Advisors and Managers here
As part of Citywealth’s American Summer series, Boston offers a window into a wider change taking place across American private wealth: the gradual movement from funding institutions towards funding solutions, alongside a growing focus on succession planning as entrepreneurial wealth passes between generations.
Boston’s interconnected wealth network
Boston does not match New York in scale, but its private wealth community is unusually concentrated. The city’s universities, hospitals, investment firms, foundations and family-owned businesses form a closely connected network. Harvard, MIT, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston Children’s Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and the city’s biotechnology and venture capital communities are not separate parts of its economy. They continually exchange research, talent, investment and philanthropic support.
Boston Business Journal reports that New England firms are expanding private banking teams to serve an estimated US$80 trillion to US$109 trillion expected to transfer between generations over the next two decades. Citywealth estimates that Massachusetts could account for between 3% and 5% of that Great Wealth Transfer, reflecting the state’s exceptional concentration of entrepreneurs, biotechnology wealth, venture capital and high net worth households. That would suggest between US$3.7 trillion and US$6.2 trillion of wealth changing hands over the coming decades. While any estimate should be treated with caution, it illustrates the scale of the opportunity.
However, in Boston the circle at the top is smaller, making individual families more visible and increasing the influence they hold through universities, foundations, hospitals and long-established financial institutions. Civic engagement has long been a defining feature of Boston’s wealthy families, from the historic Brahmin families to more recent entrepreneurial fortunes. But the sources of wealth are changing, as are the ways in which families choose to deploy it.
Nina Heindel Baumbach, Senior Manager, International Tax / Transfer Pricing at RSM US, is based in New York but works in Boston regularly. “My sense is that Boston reflects many of the broader US themes but with its own personality. While NYC is often the gateway for global capital and private wealth, Boston is one of the country’s leading centers for innovation-driven growth, particularly in life sciences, healthcare, tech, higher education and PE/venture-backed businesses. Like any other place, as many of those businesses mature, there’s increasing focus on succession planning, philanthropy, family governance and preparing the next generation.”
“Based on my client base, wealth creation continues to be closely tied to biotech, healthcare, AI, technology and university-linked research. Boston is also highly international, although in a different way from NYC. Its global connections are often driven more by universities, research, healthcare and innovation than by financial markets.”
“The ecosystem around Harvard, MIT, the major teaching hospitals like MGH, and VC/PE continues to attract entrepreneurs, talent and investment from around the world. There’s a particularly strong founder and entrepreneur community, much of it driven by science, healthcare and tech.”
“Overall, I’d say Boston mirrors many of the trends we’re seeing across the US around succession, cross-border planning and global mobility, but its story is especially tied to innovation, education, life sciences and long-term business building.”
That reputation is also attracting growing interest from overseas businesses, particularly from the UK, where advisers are seeing Boston emerge as a natural destination for innovation-led expansion into the US market.
David Livitt, Partner, US Global Mobility at tax and accountancy practice Blick Rothenberg said. “My experience is this market is less developed, Boston remains a leading innovation hub and UK businesses continue to see Boston as a strategic destination because of its concentration of universities, venture capital and highly skilled talent. Speaking to colleagues, we’re seeing increasing interest from UK scale-ups looking to commercialise technology in the US, particularly those with university links or operating in regulated industries.”
A city that creates wealth through knowledge
As we have heard, Boston produces an extraordinary concentration of scientists, physicians, researchers, founders and entrepreneurs. Research conducted at its universities and teaching hospitals leads to patents, biotechnology companies and medical treatments. Venture capital finances the commercial development of those discoveries, while founders and early investors create private wealth as businesses mature or are sold.
Four forms of capital reinforce one another: federal funding for academic and medical research, private philanthropy through gifts and endowments, venture capital and private equity investment, and the entrepreneurial capital created when research is commercialised. This distinguishes Boston from wealth centres built predominantly around banking, property or natural resources. It is a wealth creation city, but its ability to create that wealth depends heavily on an underlying research and educational infrastructure.
As businesses mature, advisers are increasingly needed to help founders deal with liquidity events, business succession, trusts, charitable giving and the preparation of the next generation. The growth of this market is already shaping Boston’s advisory industry. Private banks and wealth managers are placing greater emphasis on combining investment management, lending, estate planning, philanthropy and family governance rather than treating them as separate services.
The need is particularly acute among founders whose wealth may be concentrated in private company shares, carried interests or other assets that cannot be transferred or diversified as easily as a conventional investment portfolio.
The liquidity challenge
That challenge extends beyond succession planning itself. For many Massachusetts families, the issue is not simply how wealth is transferred, but how any estate tax liability can be met without forcing the sale of a business or other illiquid assets.
J. Devin Birmingham, Managing Director and Estate Planning Consultant at Howden Private Wealth, believes life insurance has become one of the most important liquidity tools in modern estate planning, particularly for entrepreneurial families whose wealth is concentrated in private businesses.
“Life insurance has evolved from a protection product into a strategic wealth planning tool for internationally mobile families. It does not reduce the tax itself, but when structured correctly it can provide the liquidity needed to pay estate taxes without forcing the sale of a family business or other key assets. Increasingly, the challenge is not reducing the tax itself but ensuring families have sufficient liquidity to meet estate tax liabilities on their own terms, rather than being forced into the sale of a business or other illiquid assets.”
The issue is particularly relevant in Massachusetts, where an estate tax return is required once an estate, together with adjusted taxable gifts, exceeds US$2 million, compared with the current US$15 million federal estate tax exemption available to US citizens. While many entrepreneurial families have substantial wealth on paper, much of it may be tied up in private businesses, commercial property or other illiquid assets, making advance liquidity planning increasingly important.
Research cited by Birmingham shows that 63% of US entrepreneurs are considering exiting their business, while 61% identify tax-efficient wealth transfer as one of their principal challenges. He points to the example of a third-generation manufacturing family with a US$59 million estate, around 80% of which was tied up in the family business, leaving only US$5 million in liquid assets. Facing an estimated US$10–12 million federal estate tax bill payable within nine months, an irrevocable life insurance trust provided the liquidity needed to preserve family ownership rather than forcing a distressed sale.
These practical succession issues illustrate why Boston’s wealth ecosystem increasingly relies on advisers who can combine investment management, tax, trusts, philanthropy, insurance and family governance. They also help explain why the city’s wider research economy matters so much.
Harvard, Trump and the research economy
The confrontation between Harvard and the Trump administration demonstrated how exposed Boston can be when one source of capital is disrupted. The Trump administration froze or terminated more than US$2.2 billion in federal research grants and contracts associated with Harvard. The university challenged the action, arguing that it was unlawful and threatened academic independence as well as scientific research.
In September 2025, a federal judge ruled that the funding freeze was unlawful. The wider confrontation has nevertheless continued through further litigation and federal investigations.
The effects extend beyond Harvard. Federal grants support researchers, laboratories and highly skilled employment, but they also contribute to discoveries that become patents, companies and investment opportunities. Boston’s universities and hospitals are therefore part of an economic chain connecting public research spending with private capital and private wealth.
Traditionally, institutions such as Harvard have drawn upon several sources of support: federal grants, endowment income, tuition fees, philanthropy and corporate partnerships. Harvard’s endowment provides considerable protection, but it cannot simply replace federal research funding without affecting teaching, financial aid and the long-term purposes for which much of the endowment was given.
The dispute has renewed a larger debate about whether private philanthropy, university endowments and commercial capital will be expected to carry more of the burden of American scientific research.
That prospect creates opportunities for private client advisers, but also difficult questions. A family may wish to support medical research, for example, but deciding whether to give to an established university, create a foundation, use a donor-advised fund or invest in a commercial life sciences company involves very different governance, tax and impact considerations.
Boston invented a model of philanthropy
Boston’s historic relationship with philanthropy is central to understanding the city. The term Boston Brahmin emerged in the 19th century to describe a group of established Anglo-American families, including the Lowells, Cabots, Forbeses, Higginsons, Gardners, Peabodys and Winthrops. Their wealth was created through trade, shipping, textiles, railways, industry and banking. But their longer legacy can be seen in the institutions they built and supported.
Patricia Annino, a Boston native and Partner at Rimon Law in their Trusts & Estates Group Boston office, has more than 30 years of experience advising families, family enterprises, and owners of closely held businesses on estate planning, succession, governance, philanthropy, and wealth transfer. She believes the city now provides an unusually clear view of how the philosophy of philanthropy is changing.
A shift in the philosophy of philanthropy
“Philanthropy in Boston may be the main story of today. Boston invented one model of American philanthropy and is now helping invent the next. Boston is a story, not because of Harvard, the Museum of Fine Arts, the Boston Symphony Orchestra or Robert Kraft individually, but because Boston may be the best place in America to observe a profound shift in the philosophy of philanthropy.
“One thought keeps returning to me: The Brahmins built institutions. The twentieth century endowed institutions. The twenty-first century funds solutions. If there is truth in that sentence, then Boston becomes far more than a city profile. It becomes a lens through which to examine how wealth, philanthropy and civic responsibility are being redefined.
“Boston was one of the great birthplaces of institutional philanthropy in America. The city’s Brahmin families: the Lowells, Cabots, Forbeses, Higginsons, Gardners, Peabodys and others, did not simply give money away. They believed that wealth carried with it an obligation to create institutions that would outlive them and elevate society. Their philanthropy helped build much of Boston’s civic and cultural landscape: Massachusetts General Hospital, the Boston Public Library, the Museum of Fine Arts, the Boston Symphony Orchestra, the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum and, over generations, Harvard’s extraordinary rise through private support. These were not projects; they were permanent institutions. They reflected a belief that culture, education, medicine and civic life were public goods worthy of enduring private investment. In many respects, Boston became America’s laboratory for institutional philanthropy. The model it developed was copied across the country.”
Will philanthropy remain local?
“Today, I wonder whether we are witnessing the next chapter. The new generation of wealth creators is no less generous, but it often begins from a different premise. Instead of asking, ‘What institution should I build or sustain?’ the question is increasingly, ‘What problem should I solve?’
“The result is a different deployment of capital. Rather than funding buildings or endowments, today’s philanthropy is directed toward Alzheimer’s research, AI, biotechnology, climate science, women’s health, educational innovation, social mobility and global health. Capital is increasingly entrepreneurial, data-driven and collaborative. It moves easily between philanthropy, venture investing, scientific research and public policy. It is often measured by outcomes rather than longevity.”
“Neither model is inherently superior. One built the institutions that shaped American civic life. The other is tackling some of humanity’s most urgent challenges. But they operate according to very different philosophies.”
“Seen through that lens, Harvard’s confrontation over research funding, the financial pressures facing the Museum of Fine Arts, and the challenges confronting the Boston Symphony Orchestra are no longer separate stories. They are different expressions of the same question: How do institutions built for one era of philanthropy flourish in another? A discussion of Boston is uniquely positioned to explore that question because nowhere else combines such a concentration of historic philanthropic institutions with one of the world’s leading ecosystems for biotechnology, venture capital, medicine and scientific discovery.”
The connection between wealth and place has fundamentally changed
“There is another shift that fascinates me. Boston’s historic philanthropists largely invested in Boston. Today’s wealth creators often invest in missions rather than municipalities. A biotechnology entrepreneur in Cambridge may choose to fund cancer research in Africa, AI safety, pandemic preparedness or women’s health worldwide rather than a local museum or orchestra. The social impact may be extraordinary, but the connection between wealth and place has fundamentally changed. That raises what may be the central question: Are we witnessing the evolution of American philanthropy from institutions to impact, from place to purpose?
Sporting philanthropy and enduring public value
“Robert Kraft provides an interesting counterpoint. Rather than relying primarily on philanthropy, he has built a commercially sustainable civic platform around sport, entertainment, real estate and global events. It represents yet another model for creating institutions with enduring public value.
“Perhaps the real story is this: Boston has always exercised influence far beyond its size; not through finance like New York or politics like Washington, but through institutions. Its universities, hospitals, museums, orchestras and research laboratories have educated leaders, advanced medicine, produced scientific breakthroughs and shaped culture around the world. If the philosophy that has sustained those institutions is evolving, then Boston offers an extraordinary window into what the future of philanthropy may look like – not only in America, but globally.”
“Boston may be the place where the old and the new are colliding most visibly and perhaps most productively.”
From institutions to solutions
The distinction Annino identifies is becoming visible across American philanthropy. Historic giving was often designed to establish something permanent: a university faculty, hospital, museum, library or concert hall. Modern donors are more likely to begin with a problem and then choose whichever structure appears most capable of addressing it. That could involve a conventional charitable foundation, a donor-advised fund, venture philanthropy, impact investment, a limited liability company or direct investment in a mission-led business.
Many families now use several structures simultaneously. A private foundation may support family governance and long-term grant-making. A donor-advised fund can provide a relatively efficient way to make charitable grants. Trusts can support succession planning, while a family office or investment vehicle can hold commercial businesses and impact investments. The change also affects the conversations advisers must have with clients. Technical advice on tax and structures remains essential, but families increasingly require help defining what they are trying to achieve, how decisions will be made and how younger generations will participate.
Research published in 2026 by Boston-based The Philanthropic Initiative found that advisers and high net worth clients now generally expect philanthropy to form part of their relationship. However, it also found that advisers are not always meeting client expectations for the depth and quality of those conversations.
This is particularly relevant in Boston, where philanthropy may involve supporting a local institution, financing global scientific research, investing in a biotechnology company or combining all three.
Do legacy institutions appeal to ‘new’ philanthropists?
The Museum of Fine Arts provides a practical example of the pressure facing the older model. In January 2026, the museum announced a restructuring and a reduction of 6.3% of its workforce as it sought to address a growing structural deficit. More than 30 positions were affected, while the museum faced a projected deficit reported at approximately US$13 million.
This does not mean the MFA lacks valuable assets or an endowment. Rather, it illustrates the difference between having substantial long-term assets and generating enough ‘unrestricted’ annual income to fund staff, buildings, exhibitions and public programmes.
The difficulty is not confined to Boston. Museums across the United States continue to face lower attendance than before the pandemic, rising operating costs, changes in audience behaviour and uncertainty around public funding.
But Boston makes the tension particularly visible. The city is producing substantial new wealth through biotechnology, artificial intelligence and venture-backed businesses. The question is whether those fortunes will continue to support local cultural institutions or be directed towards international and cause-specific missions.
The answer may require institutions to make a stronger case for their contemporary relevance, widen their audiences and develop relationships with donors whose ideas about philanthropy differ from those of previous generations.
Sport as a family business and civic platform
Sport provides another model for connecting private wealth with public identity. Boston’s professional teams are unusually important to the city and the wider New England region. The Patriots compete in American football, the Red Sox in baseball, the Celtics in basketball and the Boston Bruins in professional ice hockey. They are not merely sporting assets. They are substantial family businesses with influence extending into property, media, entertainment, tourism and philanthropy.
Team ownership also gives families a degree of public visibility that few conventional businesses can match. The Kraft family’s businesses provide the clearest example. The Kraft Group owns the New England Patriots, the New England Revolution and Gillette Stadium in Foxborough. The stadium has become a broader sports and entertainment destination, supported by the surrounding Patriot Place development.
Gillette Stadiumin Boston is also one of the venues selected to host matches during the 2026 FIFA World Cup, including knockout fixtures. The tournament demonstrates how a sporting venue and family-owned sporting business can be used to bring soccer or global football to Boston, New England and wider America. Bringing ‘new’ sports and opportunities from Europe into the USA. The Kraft model combines sport, entertainment, property and major international events. It is commercially sustainable but also serves a civic function by bringing people together and increasing Boston’s international reach.
It may also point towards a broader trend. American private capital has already moved heavily into European football and other sports. Boston shows the reverse opportunity: using established American sporting infrastructure, commercial expertise and family capital to build a larger domestic audience for international football (soccer).
Preparing Boston’s next generation
Across each of these themes sits the question of succession. Boston’s historic families built institutions intended to survive for generations. Today’s entrepreneurs may instead hold concentrated interests in biotechnology, technology, private equity or venture-backed companies. Both groups face the same underlying challenge: transferring not only assets, but also knowledge, responsibility and a sense of purpose.
See the Citywealth Top 30 Transatlantic Select list of Advisors and Managers
Boston advisers are increasingly working with families on lifetime gifts, trusts, family investment structures, private foundations and charitable vehicles. They are also helping younger family members understand the responsibilities attached to inherited wealth.
That preparation cannot begin at the point when assets are transferred. It requires earlier conversations about decision-making, family values, philanthropy, business interests and the role that individual family members are expected to play.
Great transfer of wealth in slow motion
The transfer itself may also happen more slowly than some industry forecasts suggest. People are living longer and founders often retain influence over businesses, investments and family structures even after legal ownership begins to pass to the next generation. For advisers, the challenge is therefore not simply to execute a tax-efficient transfer. It is to help families manage a prolonged period in which several generations share influence, but may hold different ideas about investment, philanthropy and civic responsibility.
Looking ahead
Boston’s private wealth story is not simply about old families giving way to new entrepreneurs. The city’s historic institutions remain central to its ability to create new wealth. Universities educate scientists and founders. Hospitals support medical research. Philanthropy finances laboratories and professorships. Venture capital turns discoveries into businesses, while successful entrepreneurs frequently return capital to research, healthcare and charitable causes.
The system is circular, but it is not guaranteed to continue unchanged.
Federal funding disputes, pressure on museums and the changing preferences of donors all raise questions about how Boston’s universities, hospitals and cultural organisations will be financed in the future.
The emerging model is likely to involve a wider mixture of public funding, endowment income, private philanthropy, commercial partnerships, venture investment and family capital. It will also require advisers who can work across conventional boundaries between tax, trusts, investment, philanthropy, business succession and family governance.
Increasingly, that also means helping families ensure they have the liquidity to preserve businesses, investment portfolios and philanthropic ambitions as wealth passes from one generation to the next.
Boston’s influence has always extended far beyond Massachusetts. Its universities, hospitals, laboratories and cultural institutions have shaped education, medicine and scientific research around the world.
The question now is whether a city that helped invent institutional American philanthropy can successfully create its successor. Boston may no longer be defined only by the institutions its historic families built. Its next chapter will be shaped by the solutions its new wealth chooses to fund.
Boston at a glance
- One of the world’s leading centres for biotechnology, medical research, higher education and venture capital.
- Home to Harvard, MIT and a major network of research hospitals and scientific organisations.
- A wealth market shaped by founders, entrepreneurs, private equity executives and long-established families.
- A centre for multigenerational estate planning, family governance, charitable foundations and institutional investment.
- Home to major family-owned sporting businesses, including the New England Patriots, New England Revolution, Boston Red Sox and Boston Bruins.
- A city where historic philanthropy, scientific innovation and private capital continue to reinforce one another.
Next in the series: Chicago, examining the family fortunes, financial institutions, foundations and businesses that have made the Midwest a major centre of American private wealth.
Would you like to contribute to the Citywealth American Summer editorial or become involved with the Citywealth Forum USA in New York on 10 March 2027? Please complete our submission form or contact Karen Jones at kjones@citywealthmag.com.
Citywealth will feature over the summer to celebrate 250 years of America: New York, Boston, Chicago, Miami & Latin America, California, Texas and Washington DC/International US.
Key Takeaways
- Boston’s wealth is deeply tied to universities, healthcare, and innovation, differing significantly from New York’s finance-driven model.
- Challenges such as funding disputes and financial pressures are reshaping the traditional philanthropic landscape of Boston.
- The shift from funding institutions to solutions reflects a generational change in how wealth creators view philanthropy and civic responsibility.
- Boston’s interconnected network of foundations, hospitals, and educational institutions demonstrates a unique model of wealth creation through knowledge.
- The city faces questions about the sustainability of its cultural institutions amidst shifting donor priorities and a changing economic landscape.
Subscribe to the Citywealth Weekly Newsletter to learn more about Private Wealth Management.
Read more:
IFC insights: Indian wealth management
The Global Migration Shake-Up: Why the Wealthy Are Moving
Citywealth Leaders List: Top 30 Immigration Advisors 2026
Citywealth Forum 2026 – Speaker: Matthew Briggs, Boyes Turner
60 seconds with Matthew Briggs, Boyes Turner
American Summer at Citywealth: Why New York remains the gateway to global wealth
From Wall Street and artificial intelligence to cross-border wealth planning, New York continues to play a defining role in the international private wealth industry. Despite competition from lower tax states, advisers say the city remains the principal gateway for global families, entrepreneurs and businesses entering the US market.
The business of philanthropy: Why philanthropy is becoming part of mainstream private banking
For many wealthy families, philanthropy is no longer viewed as a separate charitable activity but as an integral part of wealth planning. Private banks, family offices and advisers are increasingly being asked to help clients define not only how they invest and transfer wealth, but also the values that underpin those decisions.