You all know I’ve been having some Form 990 fun recently.  So when I read what a hash the IFI made of their anti-Day of Silence protest, my thoughts naturally turned to 990s, IFI, and The Peter.

Sadly, The Peter’s AFTAH hasn’t filed any 990s that I can find.  This is presumably because they rake in less than $25K per year.

Generally, tax-exempt organizations must file an annual information return. Tax-exempt organizations that have annual gross receipts not normally in excess of $25,000 are not required to file the annual information return, but may be required to file an annual electronic notice (e-Postcard) Form 990-N.

But IFI files 990s!  Most of them from 1999-2006 are available on the web.  The Peter made a nice living as a Professional Peeping John Thomas working for IFI.  Nice work if you can get it!  Since AFTAH doesn’t seem to be bringing in more than $25K year, I wonder how Peter’s getting paid now?  Still on the IFI payroll?  IFI’s 2007 Form 990 should prove interesting.Salary paid to Peter LaBarbara and others by Illinois Family Institute (EIN 37-1265883).

Year Compensation ($) Compensation Recipient
2000 180,377 Joe E. Clark
2002 29,249 not named
2003 30,464 not named
2004 86,905 LaBarbera
2005 85,271 LaBarbera
2006 71,323 LaBarbera

Organizations only have to name the people they pay if those people are officers of the organization.  IFI and most other orgs list a separate line item called “contract labor” to account for pay to non-officers.  If LaBarbera is no longer on the board of IFI, they still may be able to funnel cash to him anonymously via that mechanism.  And of course he can glean money invisibly from AFTAH so long as AFTAH’s gross intake remains below $25K annually.

***

Bonus from Pam: Listen to The Peter debate Glenn Sacks on Mickelson in the Morning on WHO News Radio AM 1040 in Des Moines. Sacks is the blogger who LaBarbera lost his cookes over because Sacks called him to task for the AFTAH head’s obsessive recent anti-gay screed on marriage equality (“the monstrous evil of expanding, state-sanctioned homosexualism in our midst.”)  See my post “The bullying Peter LaBarbera calls on the back bencher fundies to back up his ‘Christian cred‘”

Sacks got an earful of The Peter’s obsession:

One point that I didn’t get a chance to call LaBarbera on was this–whenever LaBarbera wanted to incite hostility or disgust towards gays, he specifically cited gay men and sex between gay men. This is yet another example of how society stigmatizes male sexuality, both in heterosexual and gay men.