Asger Risom
OpenAI has removed the word “safely” from its official mission statement after restructuring into a for-profit company — a shift that is raising concerns about how the AI giant balances investor returns with product safety.
OpenAI has rewritten its mission statement multiple times since its founding in 2015 — but its latest revision is drawing particular scrutiny. For the first time, the word “safely” no longer appears in the company’s formal mission language, a shift that coincides with its restructuring into a more traditional for-profit company.
The change, disclosed in OpenAI’s latest IRS Form 990 covering the 2024 financial year, comes as the ChatGPT maker ceded significant nonprofit control to private investors and employees.
Safety language quietly removed
OpenAI’s updated mission now reads: “to ensure that artificial general intelligence benefits all of humanity.” Previous filings had consistently included safety-focused phrasing, such as building AI that “safely benefits humanity” or committing to “develop and responsibly deploy safe AI technology.”
The 2025 filing marked the final time OpenAI claimed tax-exempt status as a nonprofit. It also revealed that the nonprofit OpenAI Foundation now controls just 26% of the reorganized OpenAI Group, down from majority oversight before the restructuring.
Alnoor Ebrahim, a professor at Tufts University’s Fletcher School who studies nonprofit accountability, flagged the wording change and warned it could signal a shift in priorities.
“I believe OpenAI’s makeover is a test case for how we, as a society, oversee the work of organizations that have the potential to both provide enormous benefits and do catastrophic harm,” Ebrahim wrote.
He argued that removing explicit safety language from the mission makes it harder to hold leadership accountable on those grounds, particularly as profit-driven incentives increase.
Investors gain influence
OpenAI announced in late 2024 that it had secured $6.6 billion in new funding, with terms that required restructuring into a more conventional for-profit company. The funding would have converted into debt if the company had failed to reorganize.
As part of the new structure, investors can now own uncapped equity stakes. Microsoft, which has invested roughly $13.8 billion in OpenAI, holds approximately 27% of company stock. Employees and other backers own the remainder, while the nonprofit retains a minority stake.
Unlike directors of tax-exempt charitable nonprofits, who cannot personally benefit from earnings, investors in for-profit entities are entitled to a share of profits. Governance rules around hybrid nonprofit-for-profit structures can be complex, particularly when investor representation intersects with oversight responsibilities.
For critics like Ebrahim, the structural shift reinforces concerns that profit considerations could begin to outweigh safety commitments.
“In my view, these changes explicitly signal that OpenAI is making its profits a higher priority than the safety of its products,” he said.
A history of mission changes
OpenAI has filed Form 990 nine times since its founding. Across those filings, the mission statement changed six times.
Early versions emphasized advancing digital intelligence “unconstrained by a need to generate financial return” and repeatedly referenced building “safe AI technology.” Later filings, particularly in 2022 and 2023, stated explicitly that OpenAI’s mission was to build general-purpose AI that “safely benefits humanity.”
The latest iteration removes that wording altogether.
OpenAI has previously addressed the shift in language, saying that while the phrasing evolved, the underlying goal remained the same. The company maintains safety-oriented language on its website, stating that advancing AI’s “capability, safety, and positive impact” remains central to its work.
Legal and reputational pressures
The mission rewrite comes amid mounting legal and public scrutiny. OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman have been named as defendants in several lawsuits alleging negligence and product liability claims, among others.
While the company continues to publicly emphasize responsible development, critics argue that formal governance documents matter — particularly when investors now directly benefit from future profits.
Whether the removal of a single word reflects a deeper shift in priorities or merely a streamlined mission statement remains contested. But as OpenAI transitions fully into a for-profit powerhouse, the debate over safety versus scale is likely to intensify.
Sources: Tufts University (Alnoor Ebrahim), OpenAI public statements, Microsoft disclosures, Fortune
