{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreif4za3ohmeuiemsljnmyhwrbs354e5fsndem6yoslt6eitne5ldae",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:haakkg7y3xdghcdmprxeexso/app.bsky.feed.post/3mneios2gihx2"
  },
  "path": "/t/what-proton-being-a-swiss-non-profit-foundation-actually-means/38250#post_6",
  "publishedAt": "2026-06-03T05:27:19.000Z",
  "site": "https://discuss.privacyguides.net",
  "textContent": "I’ve worked with an for US non-profits in the past, and I think a lot of people read some headlines about OpenAI converting from non-profit to for-profit and think it’s easy to do. It’s not. It’s a legal nightmare, and while I don’t know the ins-and-outs of Swiss corporate law, I expect neither does anyone else who assumes that going from non-profit to for-profit anywhere on Earth is as easy as changing one’s socks. Proton has a huge amount of expensive assets, and the tax penalties alone from that would be enormous. Likely not worth the IPO because Proton, unlike OpenAI, isn’t flush with billions in investor round cash. Sure, not impossible, but it’s also not impossible that an asteroid hits their main office and ruins the company.\n\nThe Proton AG under the Foundation part makes a ton of sense in the non-profit world. Essentially, you have the foundation holding the cash, and the “corporation” side bills the foundation for everything. Where I worked (ages ago), the foundation owned an office building and the corporation leased office space from the foundation. It rented desks to itself. This sounds like circular finances, but is actually closer to checks and balances in national governments (when they work!) in that a board and the foundation can stop the corporation or individuals in the corporation from doing some boneheaded things by simply not paying for it. For anyone seeking a technical analogy, the foundation is Docker, the corporation is a container running a service. These were not distant relationships where I worked, these were people on the same floor running aspects of each entity. So the foundation part can be pretty lean in terms of bodies doing work, relative to the corporation buying servers and hiring technical staff across Europe, but heavy-handed in terms of governance.\n\nPractically speaking, this means that, when functioning normally with rational people on the foundation/board side, a single corporation CEO can’t go berserk one day and fire half the staff and change the company to pushing Lumo and a social media site and an IPO.\n\nIMO, the main benefit from Proton being a non-profit, beyond the checks and balance inherent in what I’ve seen _can_ work, is the fact that chasing stockholder value is not the financial goal. Keeping the whole thing solvent and providing a product that sells is the goal. Say what you will about Proton and their practices, they’re not beyond reproach, but retaining paying clients keeps them afloat, not stock value. Stock value is not the same as a functioning company, which more than a century of examples easily prove over and over.\n\nAs for risks, realistically, Proton AG could spin out into a for-profit and do an IPO, but it would probably be a nightmare and take ages. Plenty of time to flee with your data. The foundation board could turn over and a group of insane people get in there that crash the company without asking questions of an insane CEO. It’s possible - non-profits fail all the time, they’re not magic. But I trust that structure more.",
  "title": "What Proton being a Swiss non-profit foundation actually means"
}