AI investment surge set to rebound

Neil Rimer, co-founder of venture capital firm Index Ventures, expects wealth flowing into artificial intelligence to spread out eventually—whether by choice or by force.

At a tech festival in Athens last month, he said he had “a strong sense that there will be some sort of redistribution.” He did not explain how it might occur, only that it would be “voluntary or involuntary,” and expressed hope that tech leaders would take the initiative. “It’ll happen, and I hope it’s voluntary,” he said.

Rimer’s remarks matter. Index Ventures, which he helped start in 1996, has raised about $15 billion from investors. Last year, exits like Figma’s IPO and Google’s purchase of cybersecurity firm Wiz brought the firm roughly $9 billion. Though he stepped back from daily investing in 2021, Rimer remains influential in Silicon Valley, dividing his time between San Francisco and Athens, his wife’s hometown.

His experience lends his words more weight than typical calls for philanthropy. While he serves on the board of Endeavor Greece and previously led Human Rights Watch, his view is not just moral but practical. He has witnessed wealth concentrate before and sees it happening again at a faster pace.

Philanthropy’s fading appeal

Voluntary redistribution faces a challenge: philanthropy is losing its hold. The Giving Pledge, launched in 2010 by Warren Buffett and Bill Gates to encourage billionaires to donate half their fortunes, has seen fewer new signatories. Only four families joined in 2024, down from 113 in its first five years.

Total U.S. charitable giving reached a record $592.5 billion last year, but the number of Americans donating has fallen for five consecutive years, dropping 4.5% in 2024. Even among the wealthy, giving is declining. A Bank of America study found that 81% of affluent households donated in 2023, down from 90% in 2017.

Among Anthropic employees, many tied to effective altruism, financial planner Alex Caswell told reporters that most are not planning major donations. Instead, they focus on angel investing or launching their own companies. Anthropic matches employee donations up to 25% of their equity, but Caswell said few take full advantage. “That’s what I’m seeing more than the desire to become philanthropic,” he said.

If voluntary giving does not increase, forced redistribution may follow. California voters will decide this year on a 5% one-time wealth tax targeting billionaires. Some tech leaders have already tried to avoid it. Google founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page moved their primary residences to Florida, and OpenAI is reportedly considering an IPO in 2027—partly to secure valuations before the tax, if passed, takes effect.

The opposition is strong. Governor Gavin Newsom opposes the tax, as do economists who cite countries like France and Sweden, which repealed similar measures after wealthy residents left. Other proposals, such as OpenAI’s reported plan to offer the federal government a 5% equity stake, have drawn skepticism. Critics view it as a way to gain political favor, not share AI’s benefits. Investor Roelof Botha joked last year that “some of the most dangerous words in the world are: ‘I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.’”

Rimer’s point extends beyond money. He traces his interest in tech’s moral role to his time as a Stanford undergrad in 1984, when Apple discounted Macintoshes for students and Steve Jobs was seen as a hero for building something beneficial. Now, his children compare some tech companies to defense contractors or cigarette makers. That change, he suggests, is a warning.

The last time wealth concentrated this sharply, voluntary giving did not last. Andrew Carnegie’s 1889 essay “The Gospel of Wealth” urged the rich to distribute their fortunes in their lifetimes, calling it a disgrace to die wealthy. By the 1930s, Huey Long’s “Share Our Wealth” movement pushed for steep taxes on the rich to fund a guaranteed income. Franklin Roosevelt responded with the “soak-the-rich tax,” raising the top marginal rate to 79%. It was not enough for Long, but it showed that voluntary giving had failed to ease the pressure.

Rimer is not predicting revolution. He believes tech leaders will act before history forces their hand. The issue is whether they will listen or let the money accumulate until someone else decides what to do with it.