
Leonard A. Lauder, philanthropist and cosmetics heir, dies at 92
In 2013, he pledged the most significant gift in the history of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, a trove of nearly 80 cubist paintings, drawings, and sculptures by Pablo Picasso, Georges Braque, Fernand Léger, and Juan Gris. Scholars put the value of the gift at $1 billion and said its quality rivaled or surpassed that of the collections of the Museum of Modern Art in New York, the State Hermitage Museum in St. Petersburg, Russia, and the Pompidou Center in Paris.
Get Starting Point
A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday.
Enter Email
Sign Up
After the gift was announced, he added another dozen major cubist works, The New York Times reported in a profile of Mr. Lauder last year.
Advertisement
Estée Lauder founded the company that bears her name in 1946 and would become the flamboyant public face of her empire, pitching its lipsticks, bath oils, face powders, and antiwrinkle creams with almost messianic zeal. Leonard Lauder, her eldest son, was the marketing expert and corporate strategist working in her shadow.
Advertisement
In a business reliant on imagery and mythmaking, his mother, the daughter of a Queens merchant, had created a genteel Hungarian aristocratic past for herself and a name to go with it. Josephine Esther Lauter, the wife of a luncheonette owner, thus became the glamorous Estée Lauder.
Leonard Lauder joined his family's enterprise in 1958 after a formative hitch in the Navy and, colleagues said, was instrumental in devising its profitable strategies: developing multiple brands that effectively competed with one another; concentrating sales in high-end department stores as competitors focused on discount chains and drugstores; and driving expansion to untapped markets in Europe, Asia, and the Americas.
'My dream,' he wrote in his memoir, 'The Company I Keep: My Life in Beauty,' published in 2020, 'was to make Estée Lauder the General Motors of the beauty business, with multiple brands, multiple product lines and multinational distribution.'
Estée Lauder's sales, which hovered around $800,000 a year when Mr. Lauder joined the company, soared to more than $16 billion for fiscal 2021, despite the disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, as he continued as senior member of the board.
The company markets products under some 30 brand names in 150 countries around the world. Shares were publicly sold starting in 1995, but by January 2025 about 85 percent of the voting stock was still owned by members of the Lauder family, along with about 38 percent of the total common stock.
Mr. Lauder became the company's president in 1972, was CEO from 1982 to 1999, and was named chair in 1995 and chair emeritus in 2009, when he retired. Along the way, he launched brands including Clinique, Aramis, Lab Series, and Origins. He also amassed a personal fortune of about $10.1 billion, according to Forbes, making him one of the 100 richest Americans.
Advertisement
He began a lifelong pursuit of art at the age of 6, when he spent his nickel allowance on a postcard of the Empire State Building. 'I can see that postcard today,' he told The New Yorker in 2012, adding that it turned him into a collector for life. He eventually acquired 125,000 postcards -- not the kind tourists buy, but artistic cards with lithographs and vintage photos depicting celebrities from the worlds of sports and fashion as well as images of war and historical events.
'I'm interested in popular culture and that's where postcards come in,' he told the Times in the 2024 profile. 'I love that they're the predecessor for so many things: email, Instagram, social media.'
In 2002, Mr. Lauder gave the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston a collection of some 20,000 Japanese postcards to complement the museum's collection of Japanese woodblock prints, considered the most important outside of Japan.
Eight years later, Mr. Lauder gave the MFA more than 100,000 postcards from the 1870s through just after World War II.
When considering whether to bid on a work of art, he told the Times last year, he heard his mother's voice saying, 'You only regret what you do not buy.'
Mr. Lauder for years quietly assembled a world-class collection with a focus on cubism, the movement that revolutionized modern art early in the 20th century.
He bought many pieces from the collections of writer Gertrude Stein, Swiss banker Raoul La Roche, and British art historian Douglas Cooper. His collection, given without restrictions, filled an artistic gap for the Met and placed Mr. Lauder in a class with cornerstone contributors such as the Rockefellers and Annenbergs.
Advertisement
A trustee and later president and chair of the Whitney Museum of American Art in New York, he gave millions in money and art to the museum, including nearly 50 works by Jasper Johns. In 2008 he gave $131 million, the largest gift in the Whitney's history.
That gift transformed the Whitney 'from a provincial New York institution to a world-class museum known for its extraordinary holdings of American art,' Carol Vogel wrote in the recent Times profile of Mr. Lauder. When the Whitney moved from its Madison Avenue location to its current home in the meatpacking district, it named its new building after him.
Mr. Lauder, in New York in 1996. He would say of his relationship with his mother: 'It was so love-hate. I was her competitor, her senior partner, her manager."
CHESTER HIGGINS JR./NYT
Leonard Alan Lauter was born March 19, 1933, on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, the older of two sons of Joseph and Josephine Esther (Mentzer) Lauter. (The family name was changed not long after his birth.) His younger brother, Ronald, would serve as ambassador to Austria and run unsuccessfully for mayor of New York.
In the Depression years, his father owned a small chain of luncheonettes and a silk business. During World War II, he and a partner sold military-style post-exchange supplies.
His mother also worked, helping to sell an uncle's homemade face creams and fragrances in the 1930s.
His parents, who were divorced in 1939 but remarried in 1942, founded their company after the war and for years struggled to make it profitable.
After graduating from the Bronx High School of Science in 1950, Leonard Lauder attended the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania and received a bachelor's degree in 1954. He joined the Navy, served on two warships and became a lieutenant junior grade.
Advertisement
After his discharge, he joined his mother's company. Although publicly deferential to her, he shared decision-making with her. She retired in 1995 and died in 2004 at 97.
'It was so love-hate,' he said of their relationship. 'I was her competitor, her senior partner, her manager. . . . I was able to identify what she did that was really good and build on her early success.'
Mr. Lauder married Evelyn Hausner in 1959, and they had two children: William, who is chair of the board of Estée Lauder Cos., and Gary, managing director of Lauder Partners, a Silicon Valley venture capital firm.
Mr. Lauder, in 2024.
JINGYU LIN/NYT
Mr. Lauder's first wife died in 2011. In 2015, he married photographer Judith Glickman. She survives him, as do his sons, his brother, five grandchildren, two great-grandsons, and many stepchildren and stepgrandchildren. In addition to his home in New York, he had homes in Palm Beach, Fla., and Portland, Maine.
He was a co-founder and chair of the Alzheimer's Drug Discovery Foundation and, with his first wife, a founder of the Evelyn H. Lauder Breast Center at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York.
For all his contributions to various causes, Mr. Lauder regarded himself as a frugal man with an eye on the bottom line.
'I use slivers of soap, I reuse paper clips, I use the backside of memos,' he told the Times in 2004. 'You can take the child out of the Depression, but you can't take the Depression out of the child.'
Advertisement
This article originally appeared in
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Miami Herald
2 hours ago
- Miami Herald
Scott Galloway reveals real Social Security problem
Republican lawmakers are preparing to advance President Trump's sweeping Big Beautiful Bill in the coming days, with the Senate expected to hold its first procedural vote as early as June 28. According to the latest report from the Congressional Budget Office, which considers variables such as interest rates, inflation, and projected economic performance, the estimated cost is $2.8 trillion. New York University professor and popular podcaster Scott Galloway says Democrats have criticized the bill but have failed to offer alternatives, which he believes is a missed opportunity. That being the case, Galloway has a few thoughts of his own on problems with the bill and some suggested solutions, including how to handle increasingly pressing problems with Social Security. Don't miss the move: Subscribe to TheStreet's free daily newsletter Despite earning $16 million annually, Galloway believes he shouldn't receive Social Security benefits in retirement. He argues that means-testing - evaluating financial need - should be used to determine eligibility. He points out that although he makes millions, he still pays only about $9,000 a year into Social Security, the same amount as someone earning $160,000 due to the payroll tax cap. Related: Jean Chatzky sends strong message on buying vs. leasing a car In Galloway's view, many Social Security recipients end up collecting two to three times what they contributed over their lifetimes. He suggests that high earners such as himself, while technically eligible, don't necessarily need or deserve Social Security benefits simply because they paid into the system. Galloway explains further views on Social Security and what the Big Beautiful Bill might have included given different leadership in Congress. Galloway lays out some key facts that he believes should be driving the conversation about what should be done to fix Social Security. "Since 1957 the share of Americans who are 65 and older has nearly doubled from 9% to 17%," Galloway wrote in his "No Mercy / No Malice" newsletter on June 27. "At $1.5 trillion dollars, Social Security is the largest expenditure in the federal budget. U.S. seniors are the wealthiest cohort in history and the recipients of the largest redistribution in history, he added." More on personal finance: Dave Ramsey offers urgent thoughts about MedicareJean Chatzky shares major statement on Social SecurityTony Robbins has blunt words on IRAs,401(k)s Galloway points out that Social Security, which currently provides benefits to around 69 million Americans, is facing a looming funding shortfall expected to hit within the next eight years. He attributes this financial strain to a combination of factors: The growing number of Americans entering retirement (a positive sign of longevity and economic success)Longer life expectancies that mean people collect benefits for more years (also positive from a human perspective)A troubling dip in workforce participation, which results in fewer workers paying into the system to support current retirees "If/when Social Security becomes insolvent, America's grandparents will likely put their retirement on their grandkids' credit cards," Galloway wrote. "The fix is straightforward, but politically fraught: Means-test benefits and raise the retirement age (exempting people in physically demanding professions)," he added. According to a CBO analysis, Galloway explained, an increase in full retirement age by two months per birth year until it reaches age 70 for Americans born in 1978 or later would decrease total federal outlays by $122 billion through 2032. Related: Dave Ramsey has blunt words on spending money to keep a dog alive Galloway explains his belief that phasing out benefits for those with more than $150,000 of non-Social Security income would save an estimated $600 billion to $700 billion over the course of a decade. "We now spend $5 on seniors for every $1 on children," Galloway wrote. "Enough already. Seniors who need Social Security should get it, but it shouldn't mean an upgrade from Carnival to Crystal Cruises for NaNa and PopPop." "At current rates, within a decade, we'll spend half our federal budget on programs for seniors," Galloway added. Galloway also explains his views on an issue he believes to be a tax on the youth. He argues that tax policies such as reduced rates on long-term capital gains and mortgage interest deductions disproportionately benefit older and wealthier Americans - essentially moving resources from younger, lower-income individuals to those already financially secure. He highlights the fact that asset ownership - stocks and real estate - is largely concentrated among the wealthy and older population, while younger and poorer Americans are more likely to rent and earn most of their income from wages. In his view, this creates an unfair dynamic where those with the least are indirectly subsidizing the wealth-building of those with the most. Galloway advocates eliminating both the preferential tax treatment for capital gains and the mortgage interest deduction, proposing that investment windfalls be taxed at the same rate as regular income. According to his estimates, doing so could generate an additional $117 billion in annual government revenue. Related: Tony Robbins sends strong message to Americans on 401(k)s The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.

2 hours ago
Senators prep for a weekend of work to meet Trump's deadline for passing his tax and spending cuts
WASHINGTON -- The Senate is expected to grind through a rare weekend session as Republicans race to pass President Donald Trump's package of tax breaks and spending cuts by his July Fourth deadline. Republicans are using their majorities in Congress to push aside Democratic opposition, but they have run into a series of political and policy setbacks. Not all GOP lawmakers are on board with proposals to reduce spending on Medicaid, food stamps and other programs as a way to help cover the cost of extending some $3.8 trillion in Trump tax breaks. The 940-page bill was released shortly before midnight Friday. Senators were expected to take a procedural vote Saturday to begin debate on the legislation, but the timing was uncertain and there is a long path ahead, with at least 10 hours of debate time and an all-night voting session on countless amendments. Senate passage could be days away, and the bill would need to return to the House for a final round of votes before it could reach the White House. 'It's evolving,' said Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., as he prepared to close up the chamber late Friday. The weekend session could be a make-or-break moment for Trump's party, which has invested much of its political capital on his signature domestic policy plan. Trump is pushing Congress to wrap it up, even as he sometimes gives mixed signals, allowing for more time. At recent events at the White House, including Friday, Trump has admonished the 'grandstanders' among GOP holdouts to fall in line. 'We can get it done,' Trump said in a social media post. 'It will be a wonderful Celebration for our Country.' The legislation is an ambitious but complicated series of GOP priorities. At its core, it would make permanent many of the tax breaks from Trump's first term that would otherwise expire by year's end if Congress fails to act, resulting in a potential tax increase on Americans. The bill would add new breaks, including no taxes on tips, and commit $350 billion to national security, including for Trump's mass deportation agenda. But the spending cuts that Republicans are relying on to offset the lost tax revenues are causing dissent within the GOP ranks. Some lawmakers say the cuts go too far, particularly for people receiving health care through Medicaid. Meanwhile, conservatives, worried about the nation's debt, are pushing for steeper cuts. Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., said he is concerned about the fundamentals of the package and will not support the procedural motion to begin debate. 'I'm voting no on the motion to proceed,' he said. Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., pushing for deeper cuts, said he needed to see the final legislative text. The release of that draft had been delayed as the Senate parliamentarian reviewed the bill to ensure it complied with the chamber's strict 'Byrd Rule,' named for the late Sen. Robert C. Byrd, It largely bars policy matters from inclusion in budget bills unless a provision can get 60 votes to overcome objections. That would be a tall order in a Senate with a 53-47 GOP edge and Democrats unified against Trump's bill. Republicans suffered a series of setbacks after several proposals were determined to be out of compliance by the chief arbiter of the Senate's rules. One plan would have shifted some food stamp costs from the federal government to the states; a second would have gutted the funding structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. But over the past days, Republicans have quickly revised those proposals and reinstated them. The final text includes a proposal for cuts to a Medicaid provider tax that had run into parliamentary objections and opposition from several senators worried about the fate of rural hospitals. The new version extends the start date for those cuts and establishes a $25 billion fund to aid rural hospitals and providers. Most states impose the provider tax as a way to boost federal Medicaid reimbursements. Some Republicans argue that is a scam and should be abolished. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has said that under the House-passed version of the bill, some 10.9 million more people would go without health care and at least 3 million fewer would qualify for food aid. The CBO has not yet publicly assessed the Senate draft, which proposes steeper reductions. Top income-earners would see about a $12,000 tax cut under the House bill, while the poorest Americans would face a $1,600 tax increase, the CBO said. One unresolved issue remains the so-called SALT provision, a deduction for state and local taxes that has been a top priority of lawmakers from New York and other high-tax states. The cap is now $10,000. The White House and House Republicans had narrowed in on a plan for a $40,000 cap, but for five years instead of 10. Republican senators says that's too generous. At least one House GOP holdout, Rep. Nick LaLota of New York, said he cannot support the compromise. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York said Republicans are rushing to finish the bill before the public fully knows what's in it. 'There's no good reason for Republicans to chase a silly deadline,' Schumer said. House Speaker Mike Johnson, who sent his colleagues home for the weekend with plans to be on call to return to Washington, said they are 'very close' to finishing up. 'We would still like to meet that July Fourth, self-imposed deadline,' said Johnson, R-La. With the narrow Republicans majorities in the House and Senate, leaders need almost every lawmaker on board to ensure passage. Johnson and Thune have stayed close to the White House, relying on Trump to pressure holdout lawmakers.


The Hill
2 hours ago
- The Hill
Senators prep for a weekend of work to meet Trump's deadline for passing his tax and spending cuts
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Senate is expected to grind through a rare weekend session as Republicans race to pass President Donald Trump's package of tax breaks and spending cuts by his July Fourth deadline. Republicans are using their majorities in Congress to push aside Democratic opposition, but they have run into a series of political and policy setbacks. Not all GOP lawmakers are on board with proposals to reduce spending on Medicaid, food stamps and other programs as a way to help cover the cost of extending some $3.8 trillion in Trump tax breaks. The 940-page bill was released shortly before midnight Friday. Senators were expected to take a procedural vote Saturday to begin debate on the legislation, but the timing was uncertain and there is a long path ahead, with at least 10 hours of debate time and an all-night voting session on countless amendments. Senate passage could be days away, and the bill would need to return to the House for a final round of votes before it could reach the White House. 'It's evolving,' said Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., as he prepared to close up the chamber late Friday. The weekend session could be a make-or-break moment for Trump's party, which has invested much of its political capital on his signature domestic policy plan. Trump is pushing Congress to wrap it up, even as he sometimes gives mixed signals, allowing for more time. At recent events at the White House, including Friday, Trump has admonished the 'grandstanders' among GOP holdouts to fall in line. 'We can get it done,' Trump said in a social media post. 'It will be a wonderful Celebration for our Country.' The legislation is an ambitious but complicated series of GOP priorities. At its core, it would make permanent many of the tax breaks from Trump's first term that would otherwise expire by year's end if Congress fails to act, resulting in a potential tax increase on Americans. The bill would add new breaks, including no taxes on tips, and commit $350 billion to national security, including for Trump's mass deportation agenda. But the spending cuts that Republicans are relying on to offset the lost tax revenues are causing dissent within the GOP ranks. Some lawmakers say the cuts go too far, particularly for people receiving health care through Medicaid. Meanwhile, conservatives, worried about the nation's debt, are pushing for steeper cuts. Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., said he is concerned about the fundamentals of the package and will not support the procedural motion to begin debate. 'I'm voting no on the motion to proceed,' he said. Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., pushing for deeper cuts, said he needed to see the final legislative text. The release of that draft had been delayed as the Senate parliamentarian reviewed the bill to ensure it complied with the chamber's strict 'Byrd Rule,' named for the late Sen. Robert C. Byrd, It largely bars policy matters from inclusion in budget bills unless a provision can get 60 votes to overcome objections. That would be a tall order in a Senate with a 53-47 GOP edge and Democrats unified against Trump's bill. Republicans suffered a series of setbacks after several proposals were determined to be out of compliance by the chief arbiter of the Senate's rules. One plan would have shifted some food stamp costs from the federal government to the states; a second would have gutted the funding structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. But over the past days, Republicans have quickly revised those proposals and reinstated them. The final text includes a proposal for cuts to a Medicaid provider tax that had run into parliamentary objections and opposition from several senators worried about the fate of rural hospitals. The new version extends the start date for those cuts and establishes a $25 billion fund to aid rural hospitals and providers. Most states impose the provider tax as a way to boost federal Medicaid reimbursements. Some Republicans argue that is a scam and should be abolished. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has said that under the House-passed version of the bill, some 10.9 million more people would go without health care and at least 3 million fewer would qualify for food aid. The CBO has not yet publicly assessed the Senate draft, which proposes steeper reductions. Top income-earners would see about a $12,000 tax cut under the House bill, while the poorest Americans would face a $1,600 tax increase, the CBO said. One unresolved issue remains the so-called SALT provision, a deduction for state and local taxes that has been a top priority of lawmakers from New York and other high-tax states. The cap is now $10,000. The White House and House Republicans had narrowed in on a plan for a $40,000 cap, but for five years instead of 10. Republican senators says that's too generous. At least one House GOP holdout, Rep. Nick LaLota of New York, said he cannot support the compromise. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York said Republicans are rushing to finish the bill before the public fully knows what's in it. 'There's no good reason for Republicans to chase a silly deadline,' Schumer said. House Speaker Mike Johnson, who sent his colleagues home for the weekend with plans to be on call to return to Washington, said they are 'very close' to finishing up. 'We would still like to meet that July Fourth, self-imposed deadline,' said Johnson, R-La. With the narrow Republicans majorities in the House and Senate, leaders need almost every lawmaker on board to ensure passage. Johnson and Thune have stayed close to the White House, relying on Trump to pressure holdout lawmakers. ___ Associated Press writers Kevin Freking and Joey Cappelletti contributed to this report.