American Chemistry Council
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 530104410
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Washington, DC, US
- Phone
- 202-249-6521
- Rating confidence
- Limited
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $186,085,032
- Expenses
- $199,309,137
- Assets
- $167,359,495
- Liabilities
- $107,003,190
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
72 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- CHRISTOPHER L JAHN (PRESIDENT AND CEO)
- ANDREW LAVANWAY (CHIEF EXECUTIVE, CHEMTREC)
Highest reported compensation
- CHRISTOPHER L JAHN (PRESIDENT AND CEO): $3,695,224 total reported compensation
- ROSS E EISENBERG (VP, PLASTICS): $1,071,293 total reported compensation
- RYAN JACKSON (VP, FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS): $941,139 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
ACC advocates for policies that advance safety, science, and American innovation in the chemical industry, supporting domestic manufacturing and global competitiveness.
What it reported doing in 2024
Acc speaks for the chemical industry before the executive branch of government, congress, states, and the media. Acc negotiates with regulatory agencies, represents the industry in legal matters, participates in coalitions, and partners with other associations to achieve its members' public policy goals for american success that relies on the business of chemistry- from semiconductor development, energy dominance, u.s. Military and security, and healthcare. We also educated the above on the importance of the u.s. Toxic substances control act (tsca) to our industry's continued business and growth.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 96% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 19
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: Limited
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- Requires narrative reports: Limited
- Conducts field audits: Limited
- May suspend future funding: Limited
- Requires financial reports: Limited
- Conducts site visits: Limited
- Requires grant agreements: Limited
- May require repayment: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 99.5%; rating input score 99; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -7.1%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.84; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.64; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 6.4%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
- Governance: 53 of 53 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $3.7M · 72 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $39.4M reported
- Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 179 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 19 filed related-organization links
- Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
- People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.