I think it is great and commendable you are continuing!
The prior posting raises reasonable questions:
Why has the idea kicked around for a few years?
Do you have responses to the issues raised in those discussions? Here’s one example (charity status and tax efficiency):
Sometimes ideas get tangled up in noisy online chatter and that’s unfair and I don’t want to cause this. But discussions shouldn’t rehash the same ideas and addressing prior comments (even if explaining why they can’t be addressed and what barriers block you) would add clarity and momentum to your project.
This post can be considered a response to that very comment! The main change is described here:
Note that both linked essays discuss a fund that only offers support to contributors. I no longer think that is desirable, and it will be very difficult to convince governments to grant such a construction tax-exempt status.
By expanding the scope to all donors to EA-related causes, contributors to the fund no longer gain an entitlement. This means that the fund will almost certainly be recognized as a charity, and donations will be tax-exempt.
As for the long silence, I only recently had the time to contemplate the change I made.
The inability to be a 501(c)3 seems far from obvious, and a lawyer specializing in this should absolutely be consulted! See, for example, why Labor Unions don’t qualify, and consider the possibility of organizing as a 501(c)4, which can sometimes qualify parts of the contribution for tax deductibility. (And if the “insurance fund” is capped in size, the portion reserved can decline over time, eventually making ~100% into a tax-deductible donation.)
But doing that will require starting up and getting some seed funds, so obviously it won’t be resolved yet.
FWIW, in case helpful for anyone to know, I am pretty sure that in the UK this wouldn’t be eligible for gift aid (the tax relief system for charitable donations) as gift aid cannot be claimed if the donor is receiving a benefit and this would count as a benefit. Capping the size of the “insurance fund” would not solve this (or at least not with any simple system I can think off).
As you point out up front, you posted this idea several times, including back in 2019.
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/JDdmcc4CmMDDo82rZ/an-emergency-fund-for-effective-altruists
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/A6Ebdw3DMEdh7Jr6C/an-emergency-fund-for-effective-altruists-second-version
I think it is great and commendable you are continuing!
The prior posting raises reasonable questions:
Why has the idea kicked around for a few years?
Do you have responses to the issues raised in those discussions? Here’s one example (charity status and tax efficiency):
Sometimes ideas get tangled up in noisy online chatter and that’s unfair and I don’t want to cause this. But discussions shouldn’t rehash the same ideas and addressing prior comments (even if explaining why they can’t be addressed and what barriers block you) would add clarity and momentum to your project.
This post can be considered a response to that very comment! The main change is described here:
By expanding the scope to all donors to EA-related causes, contributors to the fund no longer gain an entitlement. This means that the fund will almost certainly be recognized as a charity, and donations will be tax-exempt.
As for the long silence, I only recently had the time to contemplate the change I made.
The inability to be a 501(c)3 seems far from obvious, and a lawyer specializing in this should absolutely be consulted! See, for example, why Labor Unions don’t qualify, and consider the possibility of organizing as a 501(c)4, which can sometimes qualify parts of the contribution for tax deductibility. (And if the “insurance fund” is capped in size, the portion reserved can decline over time, eventually making ~100% into a tax-deductible donation.)
But doing that will require starting up and getting some seed funds, so obviously it won’t be resolved yet.
FWIW, in case helpful for anyone to know, I am pretty sure that in the UK this wouldn’t be eligible for gift aid (the tax relief system for charitable donations) as gift aid cannot be claimed if the donor is receiving a benefit and this would count as a benefit. Capping the size of the “insurance fund” would not solve this (or at least not with any simple system I can think off).
I agree with what you said.
Based on how much some EAs seem to give, the OP’s project seems really good.
Money is the most fungible thing there is.