zlacker

Doesn't Mozilla have an identical structure (which is the inverse of what you said, the nonprofit owns the for-profit--it wouldn't make any sense for a for-profit to own a non-profit due to the no private inurement requirement)?

>>morphe+(OP)
AFAIK that's how OpenAI does it, the non-profit controls the for-profit.

>>morphe+(OP)
I think Mozilla Corp is 100% owned by the nonprofit, which is a little different. It allows activity which a nonprofit couldn't directly do, and which has a different tax treatment, but its not returning profits to someone else like OpenAI Global LLC and, as I understand it, its immediate parent holding company both do.

But they are similar in that both involve a nonprofit controlling subordinate for-profit entities.

>>morphe+(OP)
> it wouldn't make any sense for a for-profit to own a non-profit due to the no private inurement requirement)?

The most obvious example is the corporate foundation, but if we believe the first result from a search you're right in they are controlled but not owned by the for-profit:

> A for-profit cannot own a nonprofit because a nonprofit has no owners. However, a for-profit can set up a structure in which it effectively has control over the nonprofit, subject to applicable laws, including those regarding private inurement, private benefit, and corporate self-dealing

> https://nonprofitlawblog.com/can-a-nonprofit-own-a-for-profi...