I'm going to repost a comment I made last time we talked about DAFs (three months ago) I set up a DAF when Google went public in 2004. I've spent 25-50% of it

I'm going to repost a comment I made last time we talked about DAFs (three months ago) I set up a DAF when Google went public in 2004. I've spent 25-50% of it in the intervening 13 years, despite best intentions. I sure took that full tax break in 2004 though and have compounded the value of that annually. So in my case the DAF has not worked as a great way to funnel money to actual charities. It just sits idle, compounding. The tax break I got seems to outweigh the public benefit. The psychology of having the DAF is funny. I sort of feel the virtue of having donated to charity every single year, just looking at the balance. When I do make a grant from the DAF I don't really feel like I'm doing anything more worthwhile. Also it's a bit impersonal because you have to recommend the grant then wait several days for the DAF to actually allocate. OTOH it's nice having a pile of money I've already "spent" that I can use to give to things at a whim. I think the solution is to require DAFs spend some large portion of their balance every single year. Charitable foundations are required to distribute something like 5%, but I think 10% or more makes more sense for an individual's DAF. There's also a strong argument that charitable donations shouldn't be tax deductible at all, remove this whole tax gimmick and economic distortion. I'm not sure I fully buy it (and the transition would be brutal) but it is worth reading: https://www.economist.com/briefing/2012/06/09/sweetened-charity https://www.economist.com/briefing/2012/06/09/sweetened-char... Update (August 2018): since writing that comment I felt guilty and have made more grants. Current events had something to do with it too, turns out there's a lot of immigrant legal aid charities that need the money right now.