Gsma Ltd Llc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
204991061
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Atlanta, GA, USA
Phone
6787642122
Rating
32
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Reported finances

Revenue
$215,590,240
Expenses
$236,202,755
Assets
$336,978,604
Liabilities
$172,116,192

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • John Hoffman (CEO - GSMA Ltd)
  • Sarah Wiggin (Vice President of Sales)

Highest reported compensation

  • Mats Granryd (Director General (THRU 3/2025)): $3,067,068 total reported compensation
  • John Hoffman (CEO - GSMA Ltd): $1,717,252 total reported compensation
  • Louise Easterbrook (Chief Financial Officer): $1,214,801 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Gsma ltd llc promotes the common interest of gsma's members in various manners. Gsma ltd. Llc's primary activity is organizing international trade shows including mobile world congress, mobile world congress shanghai, mobile world congress las vegas and mobile world congress kigali.

What it reported doing in 2025

The mobile world congress las vegas was held between 14th october and 15th october 2025 in las vegas.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 93% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up 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: 69
  • Accountability: 37
  • Sustainability: 24
  • 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • 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: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -9.6%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.43; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.51; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.2%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $3.1M · 15 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $36.7M reported
  • Consistency: 15 of 18 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes foreign activity and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 6 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX CompCurrentOfficersDirectors column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX ForeignGrants column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 40/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.