German American Chamber of Commerce of the Southern United States Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
582203456
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Atlanta, GA, USA
Phone
4045866800
Rating
39
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,781,742
Expenses
$3,695,792
Assets
$3,919,736
Liabilities
$1,964,558

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

33 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MATTHIAS ALEXANDER HOFFMANN (President & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • MATTHIAS ALEXANDER HOFFMANN (President & CEO): $221,936 total reported compensation
  • Jona Rowold (Director Construction services): $175,868 total reported compensation
  • BEATE STAGNET (CFO): $164,011 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To support, promote, and maximize trade and investment relationships between the federal republic of germany and the southern united states.

What it reported doing in 2025

The german american chamber of commerce ("gacc", the organization) promotes trade and business between companies and organizations in germany and the southern united states (u.s.). Gacc's service portfolio is comprised of member services, including events and consulting, as well as human resources career services. The consulting area offers the following services: general advice on how to do business in the u.s., market research, business partner search, trade show support, and business representation. Gacc also supports political and business delegation trips from and to germany. Our services aim to secure long-term success between the u.s. And germany.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 98% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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

REVIEW - Most voting board members are independent and revenue has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 47
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 2.3%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.06; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.5; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.2%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 27 of 27 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $222K · 33 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 13 of 14 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes foreign activity and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.