Leaving aside the issue of the term "Founding Fathers" for now, I find that the question is confusing.

This is now my fifth attempt at answering it, and so I've decided to answer what I think you meant by it.

Was there a financial motive involved in the Revolutionary War? Of course there was. Much of the policies of the British government since the ending of the French & Indian War had been targeted towards recouping the costs of that war. These policies invariably led to protest as the colonists felt them too harsh, or too restrictive, or passed without proper authority.

Some more famous examples polices include the Stamp Act, and of course the Tea Act of 1773 (which would lead to the Boston Tea Party). The restriction of settlement west of the Appalachians was a big concern to a vast number of Americans, as this would restrict growth and stability for tens of thousands of them.

In 1775: A Good Year For Revolution Kevin Phillips has identified 12 serious economic confrontations that led to strife with Britain and that played a role in the lead up to the Revolutionary War.

1.) The first issue was a ". . . money supply kept small, primitive, and usually inadequate by British mercantilist thinking and administrative practice.

A reduced monetary supply severely restricts economic growth.

2.) The second issue was debt. Debt was rampant everywhere in the colonies, and the British policies towards debt collection could be excessively burdensome to the colonists, especially given the limited money supply.

3.) Trade policies. The Navigation Acts determined what goods the American colonies could export and to where. The restriction of markets hampered economic growth as well.

4.) Taxation. This comes to us in the handy slogan "No taxation without representation", and was a huge concern for American colonists, both as a practical matter and one of principle.

5.) Related to taxation was the idea of unfair enumeration. The colonists argued that not only did Parliament not have the right to tax Americans because there was no representation, they also argued that the enumerated lists were already a form of taxation that placed an unfair burden on the American colonists.

6.) Customs racketeering. In the early 1760s a series of laws were passed which cracked down on the smuggling of goods. Some of these laws were quite draconian. For example a customs officer could board a ship, and seize the ship and the entire cargo for carrying contraband if he saw a sailor with a bottle of personal rum that wasn't on the manifest. Then the owner of the ship would have to pay a deposit to go to court. He would then have to prove that he wasn't smuggling, and even if he won his court case he was still responsible for payment of court costs and fees. Plus this payment had be made in hard currency, of which there was a limited supply. This was a major bone of contention in New England and led to such acts of protest as the burning of the Gaspee in 1773.

7.) Economic boycotts. The non-importation agreements following the Stamp Act are well known.

8.) Conflict over manufacturing. In addition to restrictions on trade there were also restrictions on what could be manufactured in the colonies.

9.) The extra-legal nature of the various committees to enforce non-importation was another source of conflict that was tied to economics.

10.) British hostility towards westward expansion was another economic factor. The Proclamation Line of 1763 angered many Americans who saw a future in expansion beyond the Appalachians.

11.) The Quebec Act of 1774 was another major bone, as it placed what would become Ohio , Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin into the political realm of French-speaking (and to make matters worse Catholic) Quebec.

12.) The arms race of 1775 was another economic issue as Congress relaxed it's non-exportation agreements to allow for more arms and munitions to be purchased in the lead up to independence.

So yes, there definitely was some economic aspect to the war. However, it wasn't until the passage of the Coercive Acts in 1774 that the movement towards rebellion really began in earnest. Before that point many (maybe even most) wanted to see America have more independence within the British Empire, but not to be truly independent.

Even as late as 1774 most Americans weren't pushing for independence.

Nearly four months after the Boston Tea Party (which Adams called the "most magnificent Movement of all", there still hadn't been any official response from England. John Adams wrote a letter at the beginning of April to James Warren, who was a leading Whig. In it Adams says this;

News We have none. Still—Silent as Midnight. The first Vessells may bring us tidings, which will erect the Crests of the Tories again and depress the Spirits of the Whiggs. For my own Part, I am of the same opinion that I have been for many Years, that there is not Spirit enough on Either side to bring the Question to a compleat Decision —and that We shall oscilate like a Pendulum and fluctuate like the Ocean, for many Years to come, and never obtain a compleat Redress of American Grievances, nor submit to an absolute Establishment of Parliamentary Authority. But be trimming between both as we have been for ten Years past, for more Years to come than you and I shall live. Our Children, may see Revolutions, and be concerned and active in effecting them of which we can form no Conception.

As late as April 9, 1774 Adams was of the opinion that no decision would be forced for years to come. Yet by the fall of 1774 towns all over New England were conducting mass protests against the British government. Juries were refusing to be seated. Courts were being forced to close and court officials were being forced to recant their oaths of office. In September tens of thousands of militia would mobilize over rumors that Boston had been shelled by the British.

General Gage would be directly confronted by three thousand militia in a display of authority, and would have to back down.

What changed? Well in May 1774 the response from England came. The Coercive Acts did more to unite and galvanize resistance to Britain than perhaps anything else had done in America to that point. The Coercive Acts were economic in nature (at least partly), but the biggest thing in them was the Massachusetts Governing Act which shut down Massachusetts government. The 1691 Massachusetts charter was regarded as a "sacred covenant". So much so that in a town meeting on August 6, 1774 officials in the town of Worcester, MA said “that an attempt to vacate said charter, by either party, without the consent of the other, has a tendency to dissolve the union between Great Britain and this province, to destroy the allegiance we owe to the king, and to set aside the sacred obligations he is under to his subjects here.”

A month later the town of Worcester would instruct it's Provincial Congress representative to push for independence in the meeting of the Massachusetts Provincial Congress.

TL,DR

Yes, economics did play a big role in the resentment towards Britain. Economic policies were regarded as unfair. However they were seen in the context of a larger picture which was that of the abuse of English rights, and it wasn't until the Coercive Acts that colonists were motivated enough to rebel.

Some sources:

1.) 1775: A Good Year for Revolution by Kevin Phillips. This is a fantastic look at the situation in America in 1775 and the various factors that might have led someone to rebel or stay loyal. He also looks at various events that happened in 1775 that were crucial for the war.

2.) American Insurgents, American Patriots: The Revolution of the People by T.H. Breen for an examination of role that ordinary people played in pushing for independence, often against the desires of the political elites.

3.) From Resistance to Revolution by Pauline Maier for an examination of how the idea of independence moved from being a radical one to a mainstream one.

4.) American Scripture: Making the Declaration of Independence by Pauline Maier for a discussion of the history of the Declaration of Independence, but also for an interesting look at the many "declarations of independence" written by towns and organizations all over America before the 1776 Declaration.

Not for nothing, but the word you're going for there is ulterior, which means hidden, and not anterior, which means in front of.