Tyler Kolota

Karma: 124

Tyler Kolota 18 Jan 2026 19:34 UTC
1 point
0 ∶ 0
on: Donation Multiplier Stacking: Directing 1.2x to 6.6x More Funds
Small to medium donors should also consider making some more speculative donations with even higher expected impact than the GiveWell All Grants & EA Animal Welfare funds.
For example…
Donations to the Lead Exposure Elimination Project (LEEP) are more speculative as some of their government & corporate advocacy campaigns to eliminate lead may fail, but on average they expect to generate 1 extra healthy year of life (DALY) for every $5-$15 donated, which is about 3X better than malaria bed-nets at $50 per healthy year of life (DALY).
https://leadelimination.org/how-cost-effective-are-leeps-paint-programs/

Donations to the Shrimp Welfare Project are more speculative as they are reliant on early & not entirely certain research indicating shrimp have some level of consciousness and reliant on one’s own valuing of animal sentience & suffering and reliant on studies indicating stunning shrimp actually renders them unconscious. But even given those points, the potential scale of suffering reduction is enormous. Every $1 donated to the Shrimp Welfare Project could avoid the painful death of 14,000 shrimp.
https://open.substack.com/pub/benthams/p/for-a-short-period-of-time-you-can?r=87ph2&utm_medium=ios&shareImageVariant=overlay

Donations to Screwworm Free Future are speculative because they are highly reliant on advocacy of governments / policy outcomes. But screwworm elimination would likely save at least 5 billion wild & farmed animals over 25 years from a very torturous death of being eaten alive from the inside out. Assuming this project has a ⁵⁰⁄₅₀ chance of success at a funding of $5million, each $1 donated could avoid the torturous death of ~500 animals.
https://manifund.org/projects/anti-screwworm-gene-drive-advocacy

Tyler Kolota 15 Jan 2026 18:45 UTC
5 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: Tyler Kolota’s comment on: Beyond GiveWell: Higher-Variance Global Development Funding Opportunities
After looking up more stuff I think small & medium EA donors have at least a few solid options to beat GiveWell All Grants & EA Animal Welfare Fund and I personally am adjusting over 25% of my giving to them…
Lead Exposure Elimination Project (LEEP)
The cost per DALY (healthy year of life gained) on LEEP is like 5-10x better than the best GiveWell interventions like malaria bed-nets. Instead of taking $50 to get a healthy year of life their estimate is like $5 for lead elimination programs. I gather this is because they can leverage policy changes in government & companies to remove lead from many many products & because some products like house paint may be around a lot of people for a lot of time. Please comment if you know of any other factors affecting their DALY estimates.

Shrimp Welfare Project
Usual arguments: number of animals involved, ease of stunning intervention to avoid suffering, neglected, etc.
https://open.substack.com/pub/benthams/p/the-best-charity-isnt-what-you-think?r=87ph2&utm_medium=ios&shareImageVariant=overlay

Screwworm Elimination
Arguments listed in previous comment.

@DavidNash

Tyler Kolota 14 Jan 2026 22:39 UTC
1 point
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: Toby Tremlett🔹’s comment on: Bill Would Restore Most US Global Health Spending
I think a point here is based off last year’s executive cuts & statements we expected like a 50% global health cut officially put into the budget, but we are actually only seeing like a 25% cut.
It’s true that Trump may still solely & unlawfully block spending, but this indicates those actions would likely not continue beyond his term & also the resulting suffering & deaths would really be solely on him.

Bill Would Restore Most US Global Health Spending

Tyler Kolota14 Jan 2026 5:46 UTC

8 points

2 comments1 min readEA link

(www.devex.com)

Tyler Kolota 10 Jan 2026 18:23 UTC
6 points
2 ∶ 0
in reply to: Brad West🔸’s comment on: Donating Everything: Update
Getting used to a camper van may only make sense if you really plan to work in like SF tech where housing costs are out of control. Otherwise it makes a lot more sense to try maintaining a good relationship with family / friends, work on being a really good/easy room-mate, & then rent a cheap room from family/friends into adulthood to save more money.

Tyler Kolota 31 Dec 2025 1:40 UTC
1 point
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: Tyler Kolota’s comment on: Beyond GiveWell: Higher-Variance Global Development Funding Opportunities
More from the researcher…
“If everything went perfectly, from this early stage research to clinical trials to broad deployment, we’d treat about 5% of the current causes of death (most but not all of the 7% chronic respiratory disease category, not pneumonia). It could theoretically be higher if there are e.g. positive effects on cardiovascular disease from healthy lungs, but those kinds of nebulous benefits are hard to predict.
To be clear though I’m sure you know, like all preclinical research it is many millions of dollars and very high chance of failure away from hitting that 5%.”

Tyler Kolota 30 Dec 2025 18:15 UTC
1 point
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: Tyler Kolota’s comment on: Beyond GiveWell: Higher-Variance Global Development Funding Opportunities
MRNA lung researcher replied:
“… my lead indication is not one of those 3 (Pneumonia, COPD, Asthma), but the further indications I’m testing with my approach does include one of those!”
So this may eventually lead to something to help with a like 2.5%-4.4% cause of death disease.
So I don’t know if it really passes a GiveWell All Grants cost effectiveness threshold at this point without more strong commitment to target something significant like Pneumonia.

Tyler Kolota 30 Dec 2025 5:43 UTC
−1 points
1 ∶ 2
on: Beyond GiveWell: Higher-Variance Global Development Funding Opportunities
I’m very skeptical 90% of these options are better than GiveWell All Grants & EA Animal Welfare Fund, but the following two seem like they could be significantly better:
Screwworm Elimination Advocacy
https://manifund.org/projects/anti-screwworm-gene-drive-advocacy
On a per animal basis screwworms are likely much much worse than factory farming as animals are essentially being tortured to death so it may have extra importance. Also elimination could mean a lot of counterfactual suffering averted at lower costs. And given agriculture/rancher interests align with animal welfare here it is more tractable.

MRNA For Lung Diseases
https://manifund.org/projects/mrna-for-pulmonary-fibrosis
The importance of this one is highly dependent on if this intervention could also help in causes of death (CopD/Asthma/Pneumonia/Other-Lung-Diseases 11% of deaths) more common than other neglected diseases like malaria 1.1% deaths, HIV 1.5% deaths, TB 2% deaths. And given lung diseases are also relatively more common in rich countries than other neglected diseases, it may be more tractable to get more funding once it has been pushed past a couple hurdles.

Tyler Kolota 21 Dec 2025 22:03 UTC
1 point
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: Tyler Kolota’s comment on: Giving at death is more effective than giving during life
Here’s an even better write-up of this & similar ideas
https://michaelgris.com/posts/charity-tax/

Tyler Kolota 21 Dec 2025 22:02 UTC
0 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: Tyler Kolota’s comment on: List of matching opportunities?
Here’s an even better write-up of this & similar ideas
https://michaelgris.com/posts/charity-tax/

Tyler Kolota 21 Dec 2025 22:01 UTC
0 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: Tyler Kolota’s comment on: Two arguments against patient philanthropy
Here’s an even better write-up of this & similar ideas
https://michaelgris.com/posts/charity-tax/

Tyler Kolota 21 Dec 2025 20:26 UTC
1 point
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: Tyler Kolota’s comment on: Donation Multiplier Stacking: Directing 1.2x to 6.6x More Funds
See this piece for more on optimizing tax deductions with charitable giving
https://michaelgris.com/posts/charity-tax/

Tyler Kolota 15 Dec 2025 7:07 UTC
6 points
0 ∶ 0
on: Two arguments against patient philanthropy
Thanks for writing this, I’ve been somewhat skeptical of arguments for patient philanthropy. But at the same time mildly patient philanthropy has lead me to some more easy/sustainable ways to donate over time.
As a US citizen, instead of donating $5000 every year I can donate $1000 every year & invest $4000 every year. Starting in 2026 we can do a tax write off up to $1000 per year in donations even if we take the standard deduction. Then every like 4-7 years when the $4000 per year investment fund reaches around $30,000 (or whatever 30% of my annual income is as that’s the max one can stock transfer donate), I can do a direct stock transfer to GiveWell/EA programs, avoid capital gains, & itemize my taxes so I can get a better $30,000 write off than what the standard deduction offers. All that can make for an extra like $4500 in tax write-offs on net.

Tyler Kolota 12 Dec 2025 15:15 UTC
3 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: NickLaing’s comment on: Front-Load Giving Because of Anthropic Donors?
In some senses I really couldn’t blame them for spreading out donations with that kind of windfall. I’d personally just donate the maximum amount per year that I could still write off on taxes which is 60% of annual money income or 30% equivalent income if doing direct stock transfers.

Tyler Kolota 12 Dec 2025 7:24 UTC
1 point
0 ∶ 0
on: Front-Load Giving Because of Anthropic Donors?
On the margin I’d expect more AI safety donations, from them. But any guess to how much the cost effectiveness may change for health & biosecurity areas?
I’d initially think there is a lot of room to absorb more funding with…
-Malaria vaccines
-Near HIV vaccine
-Chronic diseases (https://ourworldindata.org/causes-of-death)
-Sentinel / biosecurity global disease monitoring system
-Advanced Market Commitments for various vaccines & tests (https://blog.jacobtrefethen.com/10-technologies-that-wont-exist-in-5-yrs/)

Also promotion of more free trade always got a much higher cost effectiveness score than even any health intervention in the Copenhagen Consensus estimates. Maybe with building negative sentiments around tariffs EA could start pushing for more trade agreements with lower income countries. (https://copenhagenconsensus.com/post-2015-consensus)

Tyler Kolota 12 Dec 2025 7:01 UTC
1 point
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: Yarrow Bouchard 🔸’s comment on: Front-Load Giving Because of Anthropic Donors?
By the way, the job market is getting worse while oil & inflation aren’t likely to see increases due to decreased demand/a recession.
Bad labor market & no extra inflation mean likely more FED cuts which makes it more likely the bubble will extend a bit further. I’ve continued to invest in AI for now but I plan to build a hedge position sometime in 2026.

Tyler Kolota 5 Dec 2025 3:45 UTC
3 points
1 ∶ 0
on: US tax rules for donations changing next year
Didn’t even know there was a provision to allow for charitable deductions coming in any year. Thanks for this!

Tyler Kolota 4 Dec 2025 21:27 UTC
5 points
0 ∶ 2
on: Front-Load Giving Because of Anthropic Donors?
If you are considering global health, helping the GiveWell All Grants Fund filling the most high impact programs affected by large US & European aid cuts the past couple years may be more significant than whether Anthropic employees donate a lot of money soon.

Tyler Kolota 30 Nov 2025 20:01 UTC
1 point
0 ∶ 0
on: List of matching opportunities?
Also if you live in the US & want to decrease the cost of your donations by like 10% and/or give like 10% more, one option is to use a 100% equities investment account (like all S&P500 or something) to save all the money you would donate each year until you can make a big enough stock-transfer donation to an effective organization to reduce your tax bill.
100% Equities
In standard personal finance, you lower risk as you age to protect your retirement security. In “Investing to Give,” the philosophy is different.
Because large charities and global problems are less vulnerable to market volatility than a single individual, many EAs advocate for a risk-neutral or high-equity portfolio.
* The Logic: If the market crashes 20%, a large charity (like the Against Malaria Foundation) will not “go bust” the way an individual retiree might. They can wait for the market to recover.
* The Portfolio: This usually points toward 100% broad-market equities (like a Total World Stock Market Index Fund). You accept higher volatility for higher expected long-term returns, maximizing the final donation amount.

Direct Stock Transfers
Direct stock transfers avoid capital gains taxes on your stocks that increased in value.
Standard Investment Account Batched Donations
Because I live in a US state with no state income tax to deduct, my “baseline” itemized deductions are likely very low (perhaps just mortgage interest, if I have any). This makes the “Standard Deduction hurdle” much harder to clear, meaning my smaller annual donations often yield zero tax benefit.
Here is how to solve that with “Batching”.
Part 1: The “Batching” Strategy
The Goal: Stop giving small amounts every year where you get no tax credit. Instead, save up and give a massive amount in one single year to crush the Standard Deduction, then give nothing (on paper) for the next few years.
The Math (2025/2026 Projections):
* Single Standard Deduction: ~$15,000
* Married Standard Deduction: ~$30,000
Scenario: Let’s assume you are Single and want to donate $5,000/year.
* The “Standard” Way: You donate $5k in 2025, 2026, 2027, & 2028.
* Total Donated: $20,000
* Total Tax Deduction: $0 (because $5k is less than the $15k standard deduction; you just take the standard deduction every year anyway).
* The “Bunching” Way: You save that money in an investment account for 4 years, then donate all $20,000+appreciation in Year 4.
* Year 1-3: You take the Standard Deduction.
Year 4: You donate $20,000+ through direct stock transfers. Combined with other deductions (e.g., sales tax, mortgage interest), you might reach $25,000+ in itemized deductions. For a single tax filer making $100,000 a year this would mean saving an extra $2000+ in taxes**.

Donation Deduction Limits
The amount you can deduct in a single year is subject to limitations based on your Adjusted Gross Income (AGI).
• For gifts of appreciated long-term capital gain property (like stock) to a public charity (including Donor Advised Funds), the deduction is generally limited to 30% of your AGI (Income).
• Any amount exceeding this limit can usually be carried forward for up to five additional tax years.

Tyler Kolota 30 Nov 2025 20:00 UTC
1 point
0 ∶ 0
on: Donation Multiplier Stacking: Directing 1.2x to 6.6x More Funds
Also if you live in the US & want to decrease the cost of your donations by like 10% and/or give like 10% more, one option is to use a 100% equities investment account (like all S&P500 or something) to save all the money you would donate each year until you can make a big enough stock-transfer donation to an effective organization to reduce your tax bill.
100% Equities
In standard personal finance, you lower risk as you age to protect your retirement security. In “Investing to Give,” the philosophy is different.
Because large charities and global problems are less vulnerable to market volatility than a single individual, many EAs advocate for a risk-neutral or high-equity portfolio.
* The Logic: If the market crashes 20%, a large charity (like the Against Malaria Foundation) will not “go bust” the way an individual retiree might. They can wait for the market to recover.
* The Portfolio: This usually points toward 100% broad-market equities (like a Total World Stock Market Index Fund). You accept higher volatility for higher expected long-term returns, maximizing the final donation amount.

Direct Stock Transfers
Direct stock transfers avoid capital gains taxes on your stocks that increased in value.
Standard Investment Account Batched Donations
Because I live in a US state with no state income tax to deduct, my “baseline” itemized deductions are likely very low (perhaps just mortgage interest, if I have any). This makes the “Standard Deduction hurdle” much harder to clear, meaning my smaller annual donations often yield zero tax benefit.
Here is how to solve that with “Batching”.
Part 1: The “Batching” Strategy
The Goal: Stop giving small amounts every year where you get no tax credit. Instead, save up and give a massive amount in one single year to crush the Standard Deduction, then give nothing (on paper) for the next few years.
The Math (2025/2026 Projections):
* Single Standard Deduction: ~$15,000
* Married Standard Deduction: ~$30,000
Scenario: Let’s assume you are Single and want to donate $5,000/year.
* The “Standard” Way: You donate $5k in 2025, 2026, 2027, & 2028.
* Total Donated: $20,000
* Total Tax Deduction: $0 (because $5k is less than the $15k standard deduction; you just take the standard deduction every year anyway).
* The “Bunching” Way: You save that money in an investment account for 4 years, then donate all $20,000+appreciation in Year 4.
* Year 1-3: You take the Standard Deduction.
Year 4: You donate $20,000+ through direct stock transfers. Combined with other deductions (e.g., sales tax, mortgage interest), you might reach $25,000+ in itemized deductions. For a single tax filer making $100,000 a year this would mean saving an extra $2000+ in taxes**.

Donation Deduction Limits
The amount you can deduct in a single year is subject to limitations based on your Adjusted Gross Income (AGI).
• For gifts of appreciated long-term capital gain property (like stock) to a public charity (including Donor Advised Funds), the deduction is generally limited to 30% of your AGI (Income).
• Any amount exceeding this limit can usually be carried forward for up to five additional tax years.

Tyler Kolota

Bill Would Re­store Most US Global Health Spending

Bill Would Restore Most US Global Health Spending