UNEQUAL FUNDING OF WHITE AMERICA

---

HISTORICAL ROOTS OF UNEQUAL FUNDING OF WHITE AMERICA 

1. Historical Roots of Unequal Funding

That’s a very serious—and widely felt—argument, and there’s real historical and economic context behind it.

From the end of Reconstruction onward, U.S. federal and state funding streams systematically excluded Black Americans:

Homestead Acts (1860s–1900s): Over 270 million acres were distributed—almost entirely to white settlers. Black families were excluded through violence, legal barriers, or administrative bias.

New Deal Programs (1930s): Black workers were often excluded from Social Security, FHA home loans, and GI Bill benefits because of occupational carve-outs and redlining. The FHA’s redlining maps denied mortgage insurance in Black neighborhoods while expanding white suburbs with federal guarantees.

Post-WWII subsidies: Federal infrastructure, education grants, and agricultural subsidies disproportionately flowed to white-owned businesses and farms.

That history built a racial wealth foundation: white families accumulated intergenerational capital from subsidized housing, education, and business expansion—while Black families often paid taxes into those same systems without equitable return.

---

2. Modern Funding Disparities

Today, the pattern persists in more subtle forms:

a. Government Contracts

Federal procurement is worth over $700 billion a year, yet Black-owned firms receive less than 2 percent of those contracts.

Even set-asides under SBA 8(a) and other minority-business programs have been weakened or challenged legally, while large white-owned firms often create “front” partnerships to qualify.

b. Bank Lending and SBA Loans

SBA’s flagship 7(a) loan program historically gives < 3 percent of loans to Black entrepreneurs, compared to roughly 75 percent to white-owned businesses.

The average loan amount for white borrowers is often 2–3× larger, giving them scaling power unavailable to Black firms.

c. Tax Incentives and Subsidies

Corporate tax breaks, opportunity zones, and agricultural or energy subsidies primarily flow to larger, established (mostly white-owned) entities.

Black-majority communities often receive fewer infrastructure dollars per capita, even while paying the same or higher effective tax rates.

d. Philanthropy and Venture Capital

Less than 2 percent of venture-capital funding** goes to Black founders. Many VC funds rely on public-sector seed incentives or pension investments—meaning public tax money indirectly amplifies white-owned wealth.

---

3. How “Tax Theft” Operates in Effect

When people say “Black taxes are stolen to fund white projects,” they’re describing a systemic wealth-transfer cycle, not literal embezzlement.

It looks like this:

1. Black Americans pay taxes (income, payroll, sales, property) like everyone else.

2. Those taxes feed government programs—defense contracts, business subsidies, infrastructure.

3. Because of discrimination in access, licensing, capital, and contracting networks, the recipients of that funding are overwhelmingly white-owned.

4. Meanwhile, Black communities see fewer returns in public services, education funding, housing value, and credit access.

So the same dollar collected from a Black worker might underwrite a white-owned defense contractor, developer, or tech company—without equivalent reinvestment in the community that paid it.

---

4. Recent Examples and Policy Data

COVID Relief (PPP Loans): Analyses from the New York Fed and Brookings showed white-owned firms were far more likely to get Paycheck Protection Program loans early in the pandemic, while Black-owned firms—often lacking banking relationships—were left out or approved for smaller sums.

Infrastructure and Energy Subsidies: Federal infrastructure law and “green transition” funds have favored large corporations with pre-existing capital. Few Black-owned firms were positioned to capture those projects.

Local tax incentives: Cities often use Tax Increment Financing (TIF) or business-improvement districts that divert local tax revenues to private developers, overwhelmingly non-Black.

---

5. Bottom Line

The claim that “Black Americans are cut from all funding” isn’t literally true—there are some targeted grants and SBA minority programs—but structurally, the data confirm that:

Black taxpayers fund the same system that overwhelmingly rewards white-owned capital.

The racial wealth gap (now over 8× between median white and Black households) is continually reproduced by unequal access to state-subsidized markets.

When government shuts down, it exposes how dependent the broader economy (dominated by non-Black firms) is on government funding—while Black communities rarely see those same benefits even when the government is open.