Metaculus Help: Spread the word
If you like Metaculus, tell your friends! Share this question via Facebook, Twitter, or Reddit.
Will a total sum amounting to at least 10% of the money in all US DAFs be expropriated by 2100?
A donor-advised fund (DAF) is "a charitable giving vehicle administered by a public charity created to manage charitable donations on behalf of organizations, families, or individuals." The sponsoring organization of a fund—often a subsidiary of a brokerage firm such as Fidelity Charitable or Schwab Charitable—is a 501(c)(3) registered charity that accepts tax-deductible donations from the creator of the DAF. The creator can then make grant recommendations to the sponsoring organization.
Sponsoring organizations legally own any donated money, and have no obligation to abide by grant recommendations. There have been cases in the past of DAFs refusing to use donated money as directed or using donated money for its own benefit. To my knowledge, no large reputable DAF has ever done this.
What is the probability that at least 10% of all funds held in DAFs will be expropriated by 2100?
Funds are considered expropriated if:
- The DAF refuses to make a grant recommendation, insofar as the grant recommendation is legal.
- The DAF spends donated money on purposes other than a donor's recommendation, not including ordinary account expenses.
- The DAF begins charging unreasonable expenses (e.g., a 5% annual fee).
- An outside party, such as the US government, seizes control of all or a substantial portion of the money (including by taxation).
The following situations do not qualify as expropriation:
- The US government imposes a distribution requirement, such as the 5% annual distribution requirement that foundations must follow.
- The DAF refuses to abide by a grant recommendation because it legally cannot, e.g., because the would-be grant recipient is not a 501(c)(3).
- The DAF forcibly closes (e.g., due to Fidelity Charitable going bankrupt), but lets donors decide how to grant all remaining money.
 Article is paywalled, but the gist is that the Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles refused to comply with a donor's request to donate to a charity supporting Palestine.
 At present, Fidelity Charitable charges a 0.6% annual fee. Most other DAFs charge similar fees.
Metaculus help: Predicting
Predictions are the heart of Metaculus. Predicting is how you contribute to the wisdom of the crowd, and how you earn points and build up your personal Metaculus track record.
The basics of predicting are very simple: move the slider to best match the likelihood of the outcome, and click predict. You can predict as often as you want, and you're encouraged to change your mind when new information becomes available.
The displayed score is split into current points and total points. Current points show how much your prediction is worth now, whereas total points show the combined worth of all of your predictions over the lifetime of the question. The scoring details are available on the FAQ.
Note: this question resolved before its original close time. All of your predictions came after the resolution, so you did not gain (or lose) any points for it.
Note: this question resolved before its original close time. You earned points up until the question resolution, but not afterwards.
This question is not yet open for predictions.
Metaculus help: Community Stats
Use the community stats to get a better sense of the community consensus (or lack thereof) for this question. Sometimes people have wildly different ideas about the likely outcomes, and sometimes people are in close agreement. There are even times when the community seems very certain of uncertainty, like when everyone agrees that event is only 50% likely to happen.
When you make a prediction, check the community stats to see where you land. If your prediction is an outlier, might there be something you're overlooking that others have seen? Or do you have special insight that others are lacking? Either way, it might be a good idea to join the discussion in the comments.