If you hold Monero and want to give some away, you will notice something quickly: almost nobody takes it. Search for a charity that accepts XMR and you get listicles, most of them years out of date, recycling each other.
So we checked. Every organisation below was verified on 24 September 2026 by loading that organisation's own donation page — not a directory, not a press release, not a payment processor's marketing. Where we could not confirm something from the source, we say so rather than guess.
Coin lists change without warning, and some of the pages below carry their own expiry dates. Treat this as a snapshot with a date on it, and check the organisation's page before you send anything.
The short answer
Monero acceptance splits almost perfectly along one line. Software, privacy and press-freedom organisations take it. Large humanitarian charities do not.
| Organisation | Also accepts | How they receive it |
|---|---|---|
| The Tor Project | BTC, DOGE, ETH, LTC, XLM, ZEC | Self-hosted BTCPay |
| Free Software Foundation | BTC, LTC | Own published address |
| Riseup | BTC, ZEC, ETH, BCH | Own published addresses |
| Qubes OS | BTC, ETH | Own published addresses |
| GrapheneOS Foundation | BTC, ZEC, ETH, ADA, LTC | Own published addresses |
| Freedom of the Press Foundation | BTC, ETH, LTC, XLM, ZEC | Not stated on their page |
| MAGIC Grants | BTC | Self-hosted BTCPay |
| The Monero Project | BTC | Direct, to a general fund |
Not one of those is a humanitarian aid organisation. That is the whole story, and it is worth understanding why.
Why the big humanitarian names cannot take Monero
It is tempting to read this as squeamishness about privacy coins. The real reason is duller and more structural.
When a large charity announces it accepts "over 100 cryptocurrencies", it has almost always signed up with a donation processor, and that processor uses a custodian to hold the coins. Save the Children, UNICEF Australia, Oxfam America and The Water Project all route crypto this way. The International Rescue Committee uses a different platform; GiveDirectly uses another again. In each case the donor is really transacting with the processor, not the charity.
That matters here because Monero is not a listable asset for those custodians. Exchange delistings over the years pushed XMR out of the custodial supply chain that mainstream charity crypto depends on. A humanitarian organisation cannot reach Monero through the normal route at all. It would have to run its own wallet and take on the compliance, accounting and key-management burden directly.
Which is precisely why every organisation in the table above is small, technical and self-sufficient. They were already running their own infrastructure.
A correction worth making
You will find plenty of pages claiming the Electronic Frontier Foundation accepts Monero. EFF's own cryptocurrency page, which carries its own update stamp, lists thirteen coins — and Monero is not among them. The same pages often claim EFF accepts Bitcoin Cash through a named processor; EFF's page lists no Bitcoin Cash and names no processor. It publishes its own addresses.
We mention it because it illustrates the problem with this entire category of article, including the risk in ours: the second-hand claim outlives the fact by years. Check the source.
Two more from the same exercise. We previously reported that the American Red Cross showed no sign of crypto on its own pages. On 1 October 2026 its site refused our requests, so we can no longer stand that claim up — and the British Red Cross demonstrably does accept crypto, which makes "the Red Cross" the wrong unit to reason about at all. We corrected that in full here. And Save the Children UK states plainly that it does not directly accept cryptocurrency — the wallet belongs to Save the Children US.
One caveat about giving Monero to anyone
Monero's privacy cuts both ways, and it is worth being clear-eyed about it.
The property that makes XMR appealing — outside observers cannot see the amount, the sender or the recipient — is the same property that makes a donation unverifiable by a third party. With Bitcoin or Ethereum you can hand someone a transaction ID and they can confirm for themselves that the money arrived. With Monero you cannot, not in the same public way.
So if your reason for giving in crypto is that you want the gift to be publicly checkable, Monero is the wrong tool and a transparent chain is the right one. If your reason is that you do not want your giving to be a matter of public record, Monero is doing exactly what it was built for. Both are legitimate. They are just different goals, and no charity's marketing should blur them.
Where we stand
TraceGood accepts Monero, alongside more than 200 other coins and networks. We are also a newly founded organisation whose charitable registration is still being finalised, and we would rather say that plainly than let a list like this quietly imply otherwise.
We would also rather you did not take our word for any of it. The same check that produced this article works on us: open the donate page, look at what is actually offered, and read our public ledger, where every confirmed donation is listed with a link to the transaction on an independent block explorer. Monero gifts, by their nature, appear there without a public transaction to inspect — which is the honest limitation of accepting a privacy coin, and we would rather state it than bury it.
If you want the full reasoning about anonymous giving, we wrote about donating crypto without an account or KYC and about whether you can donate crypto anonymously, including the ways a supposedly private donation can still be traced back to you.
How to check any of this yourself
- Go to the organisation's own domain. Not a directory, not a search summary.
- Find the donate or ways-to-give page and look for a coin list.
- Note whether they publish their own wallet address or hand you off to a processor. If it is a processor, the coin list belongs to the processor and can change without the charity touching its site.
- Look for a date on the page. A crypto donation page with no timestamp is telling you something.
That is the entire method behind this article. It takes a few minutes per organisation and it is more reliable than anything you will read second-hand, including this.