Hide table of contents

It's come to my attention that many of the smaller EA orgs are not putting into place basic protection measures that keep their leaders safe. In the world we live in, risk mitigation and potential lawsuits are a fact of life, and I wouldn't want anyone to put themselves at greater risk just because they are unaware of the risk and easy steps to avoid it.

Rule #1: Incorporate. 

I know most are hesitant to start an actual non-profit since that is more expensive and time-consuming, but at the least, you can form an LLC. That means that any liability accrued by the org CANNOT pass on to you (I think there are a few exceptions, but you can research that). LLCs are easy to start, and are pretty inexpensive (a few hundred to start, and then annually).

Rule #2: Get your organization its own bank account

It is NOT a good idea to keep your organization's finances together with your personal ones for many reasons. That increases the risk of accidental fraud and financial mismanagement. If you have your funds and the org's funds together, you run the risk of using the wrong funds and increasing your liability, since it's not clear which activities are personal (not protected by the LLC) or from the org. You also can't really keep track of your expenses well when it's all mixed up. You don't need a fancy bank account - any will do. 

Rule #3: Get general liability insurance

Basic liability insurance is an expense (mine costs about $1300 USD a year, but that's for my particular services), but if you're providing any type of guidance, mentoring, services, or events, it's a must. I can go into all sorts of potential lawsuits that you hopefully won't have, but if you even have one, your organization will likely go bankrupt if you don't have the protection insurance provides.

This is not meant to be an in-depth article of all the things you can do, but EVERY EA org that is providing some type of service should have this in place. There's no reason to have our leaders assuming unnecessary risk.

I don't know what this looks like if you're fiscally sponsored - I'd assume that they assume the liability - but I would love it if someone could clarify.

I hope we can start changing the standard practices to protect our leaders and organizations. If anyone has any questions about their particular org, please feel free to reach out.

Comments12


Sorted by Click to highlight new comments since:

To expound on point 1, maintaining corporate protections is not a one-time deal. You also need to follow the required corporate formalities on an ongoing basis. 

For point 3, it could be rational to go without general liability insurance in some cases -- e.g., where the risk is low, the organization has little in the way of assets, and any person with potential personal liability has few assets without a substantial income. Being "judgment-proof" is a viable defense strategy, or at least "judgment-proof" enough that litigation would cost the plaintiff more than they could reasonably hope to collect. Whether having adequate insurance to cover risks borne by third parties is a moral obligation is an exercise left to the reader.

Other insurance considerations: if you regularly use your personally-owned automobile for business purposes, you should probably discuss that with an insurance agent in addition to discussing a general liability insurance policy. Also -- I think most EAs are in pretty low-risk lines of work for worker's compensation, but it is available (and sometimes required) for organizations with a single employee. 

Very late to this, but just adding that incorporating in Australia is relatively easy and inexpensive too (~$500 AUD, 15-20 hours). Ongoing compliance burden is low, and incorporating as a 'not-for-profit limited liability company' provides good legal protections.

The biggest downside is the limitations on the activities able to be undertaken by any charity, and if your charity is tax-deductible - the range of activities you can undertake is very much constrained.

We have similar restrictions on non-profits in the US. (Under US regulations not all non-profits are charities, but most are.)
One option is to just do the same thing as a for profit entity, however, shareholders can sue if you aren't making decisions based on making profits.

Same general principles apply in the UK - a simple guide is here: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/ZwTrykpvztrF5FQQL/how-to-set-up-a-uk-organisation-limited-company-version

D&O insurance should be a consideration as well.

Out of curiosity, have any of the major EA orgs been involved in any lawsuits to date? I've never heard of any, but even if there have been none, we can't assume there never will be.

It is common for lawsuits [edit: or legal threats] to end in settlements which include everyone involved agreeing not to talk about it. I can think of several involving orgs within the EA community.

I know most are hesitant to start an actual non-profit since that is more expensive and time-consuming, but at the least, you can form an LLC.

It may be better to seek fiscal sponsorship from a relevant existing non-profit org.

Setting up a microsized non-profit -- less than $50K expected revenue in first three years -- in the US could be made rather easy and not expensive. The 1023-EZ is surprisingly not misnamed.

In the arts in the US it's common for a grant or donations to be given to a non-profit who takes 6-10% and then the rest is given to the artist, filmmaker, or for profit production company.

Note: Liability insurance works differently in different countries. For example in the US if I work as a doctor for three years and pay premiums for liability insurance during those three years, then any liability for any actions during that time are covered forever. If someone sues me for something that happened during that time period after I've retired I'm covered because I paid premiums during the time of the incident.
In other countries you are only covered if you have paid for insurance during the time period that you are sued. (They have additional policies to cover you after you leave a job or profession.)

This is not quite correct on the specifics. In the US, insurers write both claims-made and occurence policies. Your description of US med mal policies is an occurence policy, but I believe most med mal / professional liability coverage is claims made. In contrast, US car insurance is at least generally occurence. One needs to consult the specific insurance contract in question.

See generally https://www.thehartford.com/business-insurance/claims-made-vs-occurrence, a large US insurer who writes both kinds

Curated and popular this week
Ben_West🔸
 ·  · 1m read
 · 
> Summary: We propose measuring AI performance in terms of the length of tasks AI agents can complete. We show that this metric has been consistently exponentially increasing over the past 6 years, with a doubling time of around 7 months. Extrapolating this trend predicts that, in under a decade, we will see AI agents that can independently complete a large fraction of software tasks that currently take humans days or weeks. > > The length of tasks (measured by how long they take human professionals) that generalist frontier model agents can complete autonomously with 50% reliability has been doubling approximately every 7 months for the last 6 years. The shaded region represents 95% CI calculated by hierarchical bootstrap over task families, tasks, and task attempts. > > Full paper | Github repo Blogpost; tweet thread. 
 ·  · 2m read
 · 
For immediate release: April 1, 2025 OXFORD, UK — The Centre for Effective Altruism (CEA) announced today that it will no longer identify as an "Effective Altruism" organization.  "After careful consideration, we've determined that the most effective way to have a positive impact is to deny any association with Effective Altruism," said a CEA spokesperson. "Our mission remains unchanged: to use reason and evidence to do the most good. Which coincidentally was the definition of EA." The announcement mirrors a pattern of other organizations that have grown with EA support and frameworks and eventually distanced themselves from EA. CEA's statement clarified that it will continue to use the same methodologies, maintain the same team, and pursue identical goals. "We've found that not being associated with the movement we have spent years building gives us more flexibility to do exactly what we were already doing, just with better PR," the spokesperson explained. "It's like keeping all the benefits of a community while refusing to contribute to its future development or taking responsibility for its challenges. Win-win!" In a related announcement, CEA revealed plans to rename its annual EA Global conference to "Coincidental Gathering of Like-Minded Individuals Who Mysteriously All Know Each Other But Definitely Aren't Part of Any Specific Movement Conference 2025." When asked about concerns that this trend might be pulling up the ladder for future projects that also might benefit from the infrastructure of the effective altruist community, the spokesperson adjusted their "I Heart Consequentialism" tie and replied, "Future projects? I'm sorry, but focusing on long-term movement building would be very EA of us, and as we've clearly established, we're not that anymore." Industry analysts predict that by 2026, the only entities still identifying as "EA" will be three post-rationalist bloggers, a Discord server full of undergraduate philosophy majors, and one person at
 ·  · 2m read
 · 
Epistemic status: highly certain, or something The Spending What We Must 💸11% pledge  In short: Members pledge to spend at least 11% of their income on effectively increasing their own productivity. This pledge is likely higher-impact for most people than the Giving What We Can 🔸10% Pledge, and we also think the name accurately reflects the non-supererogatory moral beliefs of many in the EA community. Example Charlie is a software engineer for the Centre for Effective Future Research. Since Charlie has taken the SWWM 💸11% pledge, rather than splurge on a vacation, they decide to buy an expensive noise-canceling headset before their next EAG, allowing them to get slightly more sleep and have 104 one-on-one meetings instead of just 101. In one of the extra three meetings, they chat with Diana, who is starting an AI-for-worrying-about-AI company, and decide to become a cofounder. The company becomes wildly successful, and Charlie's equity share allows them to further increase their productivity to the point of diminishing marginal returns, then donate $50 billion to SWWM. The 💸💸💸 Badge If you've taken the SWWM 💸11% Pledge, we'd appreciate if you could add three 💸💸💸 "stacks of money with wings" emoji to your social media profiles. We chose three emoji because we think the 💸11% Pledge will be about 3x more effective than the 🔸10% pledge (see FAQ), and EAs should be scope sensitive.  FAQ Is the pledge legally binding? We highly recommend signing the legal contract, as it will allow you to sue yourself in case of delinquency. What do you mean by effectively increasing productivity? Some interventions are especially good at transforming self-donations into productivity, and have a strong evidence base. In particular:  * Offloading non-work duties like dates and calling your mother to personal assistants * Running many emulated copies of oneself (likely available soon) * Amphetamines I'm an AI system. Can I take the 💸11% pledge? We encourage A
Recent opportunities in Building effective altruism
63