.png)
Victims-turned-activists personally profiting off of foundation set up after the Parkland shooting?
- Sigiloso1776
- Feb 8, 2020
- 2 min read
Updated: May 20, 2020
IRS 990 forms can give some insight into charities and how money is used. After Fred Guttenberg’s daughter, Jamie, was killed at MSD on 2/14/2018, he soon established a foundation in order to do good and honor her. In reality, it’s a noble action on his part.
Fred is known for his exchange with Marco Rubio at the CNN gun violence town hall after the shooting, as well as what happened during the Kavanaugh hearings:
More recently, at the 2020 State of the Union address (and a guest of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi), he was ejected from the chambers for his outburst when Trump mentioned the 2nd amendment:
Fred’s foundation has to file a 990 with the IRS, which they did for 2018. Total revenue for that period was $319,447.
The interesting part though is why is he personally profiting at all from any of this?
His daughter was tragically killed, he sets up a foundation to honor her and fight for what he believes in (as well as do some good in the community), but gets $33k in profits from it?
Further, per the IRS:
The board is Fred, his wife, Fred’s sister and her husband.
They’re also propped up by Everytown for Gun Safety (in which Fred is a member of the Everytown Survivors Network, which is a branch of and bankrolled by the Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund):
We make no assumptions other than the fact he, according to the IRS form his foundation filed, made over $30,000 from a foundation that was setup after Jamie was killed in order to honor her. It is 100% legal, though. We hope he used that money for stuff related to Jamie or donated it to a local non-political cause, not to bankroll political advocacy activities outside of what the charity‘s mission is.
This is a very touchy area, as Fred is dealing with the loss of his daughter in his own way. You can’t criticize that, as he experienced something none of us ever hope to. Hopefully going forward the issues at the charity are ironed out. This is NOT meant as an attack on Fred personally, as everything here (documents/connections) is fact.
It does appear that the not for profit he setup is his full time job. As stated, it does to some very good things. He is entitled/allowed to pay himself out of that (100% legal). The stated mission of the charity is pictured below. If he’s using the charity for purposes other than the stated reasons to the government then it’s a different story. For example: he is not allowed to state one thing as the main mission and then turn around and use funds/charity time to pursue political activities that are a focus outside of the charity’s main stated mission. He could use the money he’s paying himself to do that, but then wouldn’t it appear that he’s raising money…
As much as I think this guy is wrong on the 2A, if he has quit his day job and worked 40 hours a week for a majority of 2018 (possible since the mass murders took place in February), then $33k is not out of line for a full time job. The test I have to apply is the "shoe on the other foot" test. If this same man had set up a foundation dedicated to promoting armed teachers. and worked 40 hours a week for even half a year, I would not consider that out of line. Therefore, I cannot accuse him of profiteering without more information. It would be nice to know the answers to these questions: 1) Is…