Adviser pack
Solicitors, financial advisers and will-writers may all sit near the bequest decision, but they are not doing the same job.
The solicitor is turning instructions into a valid legal document. The financial adviser is helping the client think through assets, retirement, family obligations and sometimes philanthropy. The will-writer is often helping a person get a will completed efficiently, sometimes through a streamlined or digital process.
If a charity sends each of them the same message — “Please tell your clients about gifts in wills” — it misses what each professional is protecting.
The solicitor is protecting independence, capacity, instructions and drafting risk. The financial adviser is protecting the client’s financial position, family intentions and advice boundaries. The will-writer is protecting completion, clarity and escalation when the situation becomes too complex for a standard process.
The bequest opportunity does not remove those concerns. Research for the JBWere Bequest Report estimates that about $150 billion passes through inheritances in Australia each year, but only about $1.3 billion — roughly 1% — goes to charity. Australian sources also cluster around only 6.5–8% of wills containing a charitable gift. Those figures support professional engagement, but they do not justify treating intermediaries as if their only missing ingredient is enthusiasm for your cause.
Your starting point is not “Who can introduce us to donors?” It is “What does this professional need in order to raise charitable giving safely, neutrally and at the right moment?”
The three-intermediary fit test
Use this test before you approach, brief or resource any professional. It stops you from sending the right content to the wrong person in the wrong form.
01Solicitors — the legal-instruction lenslegal instruction⌄
What they are trying to protect
Solicitors are concerned with valid instructions, client capacity, undue influence, conflicts, family provision risk and drafting clarity. They are not looking for a charity to help them decide whether a client should leave a gift. They need accurate organisational information if the client has already raised, or may reasonably want to consider, charitable giving.
What they need from the charity
They need the charity’s correct legal name, ABN, DGR status where relevant, a reliable contact point, and plain-English information about the charity’s purpose. They may also value neutral client-facing material that explains charitable gifts in wills without implying that a gift is expected.
What not to ask them for
Do not ask a solicitor to identify likely donors, steer clients toward your charity, share client information without consent, or treat your suggested wording as legal advice. In Australia, family provision claims are a real estate risk, so any conversation about excluding family, giving a large share, or choosing a structure must stay with the solicitor.
What useful support sounds like
“For clients who already raise charitable giving, we can provide our correct legal identity, ABN and a plain-English description of our work. We do not expect you to recommend us, and we would not ask you to rely on our material as legal advice.”
Shown in use
A solicitor says, “We occasionally have clients ask about charity, but we don’t want promotional material in the file.” The fundraiser responds by offering a one-page organisational information sheet, not a campaign brochure, and labels it: “For clients who have already asked about supporting this organisation.”
02Financial advisers — the asset-and-intention lensfinancial intention⌄
What they are trying to protect
Financial advisers are usually looking at the client’s lifetime income, assets, dependants, retirement plans and broader estate intentions. They may be close enough to know that philanthropy matters to the client, but they are not the person who drafts the will. They need to understand where charitable giving might fit into a broader planning conversation without being pulled into charity advocacy.
What they need from the charity
They need a simple explanation of the charity’s work, the kinds of gifts supporters commonly consider, the charity’s DGR status where relevant, and a referral route for organisational questions. They also need language that keeps the decision with the client and the legal structure with the solicitor. The Australian tax backdrop matters here. Australia has no inheritance tax, estate tax or death duties, so the adviser should not be handed UK-style tax-incentive language. Lifetime gifts to a DGR can be income-tax deductible, while gifts left in a will generally are not. Separately, the Australian Taxation Office position in the facts pack notes that capital gain or loss is disregarded when an asset passes from a deceased estate to a DGR. That is a real Australian mechanic, but the charity should not turn it into client-specific tax advice.
What not to ask them for
Do not ask a financial adviser to recommend your charity as the client’s preferred beneficiary, calculate personal tax outcomes from a bequest, or advise how much the client should leave. Do not equip them with language that sounds like, “This structure will be best for your estate.” That belongs with the client’s qualified advisers.
What useful support sounds like
“When clients are already thinking about philanthropy, we can help with information about our work and our organisational details. Any decision about whether, how or how much to include would need to sit with the client and their professional advisers.”
Shown in use
A financial adviser says, “Some clients ask whether it is better to give now or leave something in the will.” The fundraiser does not answer the client-specific question. They say, “We can explain how supporters commonly think about lifetime gifts and gifts in wills, but the tax and estate-planning comparison needs to come from you and the client’s solicitor or tax adviser.”
03Will-writers — the completion-and-escalation lenscompletion⌄
What they are trying to protect
Will-writers often sit at the moment when intention becomes a completed document. Some work through high-volume, fixed-fee or digital processes. Their risk is not only whether charitable giving is mentioned; it is whether a simple process is being used for a situation that needs legal advice.
What they need from the charity
They need short, accurate, low-friction information: the charity’s full legal name, ABN, contact details, DGR status where relevant, and a simple explanation of common gift types. They also need escalation guidance: when a client’s circumstances are complex, the client should be encouraged to seek qualified legal advice.
What not to ask them for
Do not ask a will-writer to make charitable gifts feel like a default add-on to checkout, to nudge vulnerable clients, or to present your organisation more prominently than other causes. Be especially careful where the platform or service offers free or discounted wills in partnership with charities. Access is useful only if the process protects consent, neutrality and complexity screening.
What useful support sounds like
“We can provide accurate organisational details for your charity directory and a neutral description of our work. We would want any client with family complexity, capacity concerns, a large charitable gift, or uncertainty about wording to be directed to qualified legal advice.”
Shown in use
A will-writing provider asks for a short charity profile. The fundraiser supplies a factual entry: legal name, ABN, contact point, DGR status where relevant, and a 60-word purpose statement. They do not supply urgency-led copy such as “Make your final act count today,” because death-salient pressure undermines the trust the decision requires.
Same pack
Case file — professional partners
scenario
The same pack lands three different ways
A national health charity has prepared a polished gifts-in-wills pack for “professional partners.” It includes a donor story, suggested will wording, a campaign brochure, a fact sheet on the charity’s research, and a request that professionals “help more clients leave a legacy.”
The gifts-in-wills manager sends it to three contacts.
Priya, suburban solicitor
The first is Priya, a suburban solicitor who drafts wills for older clients. She replies politely but says her firm does not distribute charity material to clients.
Marcus, financial adviser
The second is Marcus, a financial adviser who works with retirees. He says the material is interesting, but asks whether the charity can provide guidance on “which clients would be best suited to a bequest rather than a lifetime gift.”
Owen, will-writing platform manager
The third is Owen, a will-writing platform manager. He likes the brochure and asks whether the charity wants to be a featured cause in the online will journey, with a prompt appearing before clients finalise their instructions.
Three different decisions
The charity faces three different decisions, not one distribution problem.
With Priya, the issue is legal independence and file safety. The right move is to strip the material back to factual organisational information and make clear that it is for clients who raise charitable giving themselves.
With Marcus, the issue is client-specific financial and tax advice. The right move is to provide general information about how supporters think about gifts in wills, while refusing to advise which option is better for a particular client.
With Owen, the issue is scale, neutrality and pressure. The right move is to ask how the prompt works, whether all charities are presented neutrally, how vulnerable users are protected, and when users are directed to legal advice.
The pack is not useless. It is undifferentiated. Each professional needs a different version because each one carries a different risk.
Three versions
Build three versions before you build one relationship
Before approaching another professional, create three separate one-page resource outlines.
Solicitor version:
Purpose: accurate information when a client raises charitable giving.
Include:
full legal name, ABN, DGR status where relevant, contact point, short purpose statement, general gift-type descriptions, and a note encouraging independent legal advice.
Remove:
emotional campaign copy, referral requests, donor-prospecting language, and anything that sounds like suggested legal advice.
Financial adviser version:
Purpose: help the adviser recognise philanthropy as a values and planning topic without turning the charity into the adviser’s recommendation.
Include:
plain-English mission summary, common supporter motivations, DGR status where relevant, the distinction between lifetime giving and gifts in wills at a general level, and a route for organisational questions.
Remove:
personal tax claims, estate-structure recommendations, and any wording that implies the adviser should direct clients toward your charity.
Will-writer version:
Purpose: supply accurate charity-directory information and safe escalation prompts.
Include:
legal name, ABN, DGR status where relevant, contact point, short factual description, and complexity flags that should send the client to qualified legal advice.
Remove:
urgency language, prominent “choose us” prompts, pressure-based legacy copy, and any request for preferential treatment unless the ethical and commercial arrangement has been reviewed.
A simple check before you send anything: would this exact page be equally appropriate for a solicitor, a financial adviser and a will-writer? If yes, it is too generic to be useful to any of them — it has not been shaped around the professional’s actual job. Each version should read as though it was written for one role and would feel slightly wrong in the hands of the other two.
The same bequest message becomes more useful, and safer, when it is reshaped around the professional’s actual job: legal instruction, financial intention, or will-completion.
What this changes
You can now separate three intermediary relationships that are often blurred together.
A solicitor needs clarity, independence and accurate organisational details. A financial adviser needs a way to recognise charitable intent without being pushed into recommending your charity or giving client-specific estate advice. A will-writer needs concise information, neutral presentation and clear escalation points when the client’s situation is no longer simple.
The next lesson will assume the donor-facing boundary map from Introduction to Bequests Lesson 8 and move into the intermediary-specific layer: how a charity can accidentally give advice by proxy when a professional is in the room.
