Yes, there does seem to be a lack of low-cost options in the UK below a few hundred thousand!
I had claude search and summarise what's available, as it was on my list of things to look into - I thought I may as well share it here too:
``` - CAF Charity Account (simple giving account) - Minimum to open: None - How you're charged: One-off fee on money paid in; nothing after - Headline cost: From May 2026, 4% + 20% VAT on a £1,000 contribution (£48 total, ~4.8%); lower rates on larger bands - Source: https://www.cafonline.org/personal-giving/effective-ways-to-give/giving-account/changes-to-gift-aid-charity-account-fees-from-1-may-2026
- Stewardship Giving Account (Christian causes) - Minimum to open: None - How you're charged: One-off fee on money paid in - Headline cost: 3.5% with Gift Aid, 3% without; no opening or monthly fee - Source: https://www.stewardship.org.uk/giving-account-fees
- Community foundations (UKCF network) - Minimum to open: Set by each foundation - How you're charged: Annual % of fund - Headline cost: Typically 1–3% of capital value per year - Source: https://www.ukcommunityfoundations.org/media/wi4dftck/ukcf-dafs.pdf
- CAF Charitable Trust (CAF's investable DAF) - Minimum to open: Not published - How you're charged: Bespoke - Headline cost: Varies by size and complexity; personalised illustration on request - Source: https://www.cafonline.org/personal-giving/effective-ways-to-give/charitable-trust
- Prism the Gift Fund - Minimum to open: Not published (aimed at wealthy donors) - How you're charged: Fixed quarterly fee - Headline cost: Set by level of administration needed, not a % of gifts - Source: https://prismthegiftfund.co.uk/?p=2460
- NPT UK - Minimum to open: £250,000 - How you're charged: Annual % plus investment fees - Headline cost: 0.85% or less per year, plus fund fees (UBS funds 0.40–0.70%) - Sources: - https://www.nptuk.org/donor-advised-funds/charitable-trust-vs-donor-advised-fund/ - https://www.nptuk.org/?p=206 - https://www.nptuk.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Donor-Advised-Fund-Investment-Reallocation-UKN.pdf
- C. Hoare & Co. Master Charitable Trust - Minimum to open: Not published (bank clients) - How you're charged: Annual fee with a floor - Headline cost: Minimum £3,000 + VAT per year, plus share of audit fee - Source: https://www.hoaresbank.co.uk/files/2025-04/The-Master-Charitable-Trust-Terms-and-Conditions.pdf
- CAF American Donor Fund (dual UK/US taxpayers) - Minimum to open: Varies by product - How you're charged: Entry fee or annual minimum - Headline cost: One-off gifts 4.5% on first £50k, 2% to £150k, 1.25% to £250k, 0.5% to £750k (min £400); DAF min £1,600/yr; Premier DAF min £2,000/yr with 4-year term - Source: https://www.cafonline.org/cadf/fees
- Cazenove Capital DAF (administered by NPT UK) - Minimum to open: £100,000 - How you're charged: Not published - Headline cost: Not published - Source: https://www.wealth.schroders.com/en/global/wealth-management/media-centre/cazenove-capital-launches-new-donor-advised-fund-to-meet-growing-client-demand-for-charitable-giving ```
Thanks, it's a good reminder to point that out. It's fairly generally a good idea to file a tax return in the UK and it's also surprisingly quick and easy in my experience!
In the past, you needed to file a tax return in the UK above £100k income, so declaring GiftAid was just a simple part of this anyway [1] and many EAs will still have the habit of doing this.
It could be interesting to contrast this with Amdahl’s law, which yields different scaling behaviour asymptotically (namely a plateau stemming from the non-parallelisable part) - this is how I would typically think about it in traditional parallel computing.
There’s a finite probability that the agent swarm that produced the Navier—Stokes blowup example used some breakthrough ideas from Buckmaster et al. (eg via a leak of user data), so it is possible that the statement in the main text overstates capabilities slightly.
To single out one specific point … The sentiment around feeling indebted to FTX and by proxy people associated with it seems like a deeply worrying and flawed viewpoint?
If the argument was purely “she’s smart and can likely do good work, let’s give her a chance”, I’d be far less concerned.
Just on a purely philosophical level: it could also feel less unfair in expectation, if you randomise and state the rules and your lack of conviction in ranking etc up front in the sense that it can net reduce biases and people get exactly what they agree too. You could even issue a certificate saying “was in the selected cohort, but didn’t win the lottery” or similar to reduce some of the signalling effect.
Yeah I guess it’s ethically questionable if you’re certain about the rank ordering. My guess is that the relative ranking between the 2n best applicants is largely noise in any case, if you’ve got many good applicants (it’s hard to measure and predict skills etc). So as long as you make this clear up front, having a lottery component in a process that’s very noisy should be ethically fine?
Im sympathetic to the argument, and I’d go so far as to say: Predictability is so low, the EV of most possible actions is zero (partially due to symmetry, I think cluelessness gets this ~ wrong) unless I manage to find a small pocket of predictability of how my actions meaningfully impact the world. So I’m largely very short-termist in what I do. Is this different to what you’re saying here?
Yes, there does seem to be a lack of low-cost options in the UK below a few hundred thousand!
I had claude search and summarise what's available, as it was on my list of things to look into - I thought I may as well share it here too:
```
- CAF Charity Account (simple giving account)
- Minimum to open: None
- How you're charged: One-off fee on money paid in; nothing after
- Headline cost: From May 2026, 4% + 20% VAT on a £1,000 contribution (£48 total, ~4.8%); lower rates on larger bands
- Source: https://www.cafonline.org/personal-giving/effective-ways-to-give/giving-account/changes-to-gift-aid-charity-account-fees-from-1-may-2026
- Stewardship Giving Account (Christian causes)
- Minimum to open: None
- How you're charged: One-off fee on money paid in
- Headline cost: 3.5% with Gift Aid, 3% without; no opening or monthly fee
- Source: https://www.stewardship.org.uk/giving-account-fees
- Community foundations (UKCF network)
- Minimum to open: Set by each foundation
- How you're charged: Annual % of fund
- Headline cost: Typically 1–3% of capital value per year
- Source: https://www.ukcommunityfoundations.org/media/wi4dftck/ukcf-dafs.pdf
- CAF Charitable Trust (CAF's investable DAF)
- Minimum to open: Not published
- How you're charged: Bespoke
- Headline cost: Varies by size and complexity; personalised illustration on request
- Source: https://www.cafonline.org/personal-giving/effective-ways-to-give/charitable-trust
- Prism the Gift Fund
- Minimum to open: Not published (aimed at wealthy donors)
- How you're charged: Fixed quarterly fee
- Headline cost: Set by level of administration needed, not a % of gifts
- Source: https://prismthegiftfund.co.uk/?p=2460
- NPT UK
- Minimum to open: £250,000
- How you're charged: Annual % plus investment fees
- Headline cost: 0.85% or less per year, plus fund fees (UBS funds 0.40–0.70%)
- Sources:
- https://www.nptuk.org/donor-advised-funds/charitable-trust-vs-donor-advised-fund/
- https://www.nptuk.org/?p=206
- https://www.nptuk.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Donor-Advised-Fund-Investment-Reallocation-UKN.pdf
- C. Hoare & Co. Master Charitable Trust
- Minimum to open: Not published (bank clients)
- How you're charged: Annual fee with a floor
- Headline cost: Minimum £3,000 + VAT per year, plus share of audit fee
- Source: https://www.hoaresbank.co.uk/files/2025-04/The-Master-Charitable-Trust-Terms-and-Conditions.pdf
- CAF American Donor Fund (dual UK/US taxpayers)
- Minimum to open: Varies by product
- How you're charged: Entry fee or annual minimum
- Headline cost: One-off gifts 4.5% on first £50k, 2% to £150k, 1.25% to £250k, 0.5% to £750k (min £400); DAF min £1,600/yr; Premier DAF min £2,000/yr with 4-year term
- Source: https://www.cafonline.org/cadf/fees
- Cazenove Capital DAF (administered by NPT UK)
- Minimum to open: £100,000
- How you're charged: Not published
- Headline cost: Not published
- Source: https://www.wealth.schroders.com/en/global/wealth-management/media-centre/cazenove-capital-launches-new-donor-advised-fund-to-meet-growing-client-demand-for-charitable-giving
```
Thanks, it's a good reminder to point that out.
It's fairly generally a good idea to file a tax return in the UK and it's also surprisingly quick and easy in my experience!
In the past, you needed to file a tax return in the UK above £100k income, so declaring GiftAid was just a simple part of this anyway [1] and many EAs will still have the habit of doing this.
[1] https://www.att.org.uk/technical/news/hmrc-change-means-some-high-earners-wont-pay-right-amount-tax
It could be interesting to contrast this with Amdahl’s law, which yields different scaling behaviour asymptotically (namely a plateau stemming from the non-parallelisable part) - this is how I would typically think about it in traditional parallel computing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amdahl%27s_law
There’s a finite probability that the agent swarm that produced the Navier—Stokes blowup example used some breakthrough ideas from Buckmaster et al. (eg via a leak of user data), so it is possible that the statement in the main text overstates capabilities slightly.
To single out one specific point … The sentiment around feeling indebted to FTX and by proxy people associated with it seems like a deeply worrying and flawed viewpoint?
If the argument was purely “she’s smart and can likely do good work, let’s give her a chance”, I’d be far less concerned.
I agree with your point etc.
Just on a purely philosophical level: it could also feel less unfair in expectation, if you randomise and state the rules and your lack of conviction in ranking etc up front in the sense that it can net reduce biases and people get exactly what they agree too.
You could even issue a certificate saying “was in the selected cohort, but didn’t win the lottery” or similar to reduce some of the signalling effect.
Yeah I guess it’s ethically questionable if you’re certain about the rank ordering.
My guess is that the relative ranking between the 2n best applicants is largely noise in any case, if you’ve got many good applicants (it’s hard to measure and predict skills etc). So as long as you make this clear up front, having a lottery component in a process that’s very noisy should be ethically fine?
Why don’t funders require randomisation? Eg pick the 2n best applications, randomly admit the n best, track outcomes etc.
Im sympathetic to the argument, and I’d go so far as to say: Predictability is so low, the EV of most possible actions is zero (partially due to symmetry, I think cluelessness gets this ~ wrong) unless I manage to find a small pocket of predictability of how my actions meaningfully impact the world.
So I’m largely very short-termist in what I do. Is this different to what you’re saying here?
How does diversification follow?
Intuitively this argument is made a lot, but the precise mechanism matters?