Are there any recent controversies, investigations, or state charity regulator actions involving Tunnel to Towers Foundation?

1. What the recent controversy is — subpoenas and bankruptcy scrutiny

Federal bankruptcy filings and reporting in mid‑2024 focused on subpoenas seeking documents that could illuminate financial ties between Tunnel to Towers and Rudy Giuliani’s firms; reporting by The New York Times noted the foundation sponsored Giuliani’s livestream and radio show and that his company reported income “mainly” from the 9/11 charity, while other outlets described fresh subpoenas in his Chapter 11 case aiming to map payments and sponsorships ^{[1] [3]}.

2. What’s alleged and what the records show

News accounts report that Giuliani’s company disclosed income streams that “come ‘mainly’” from the Tunnel to Towers sponsorships, and bankruptcy creditors have used that linkage in motions seeking trustees and documents; those filings and media reporting are the primary sources for the allegation of a financial safety net provided to Giuliani by the charity, rather than any criminal charge or regulatory finding against the charity itself ^{[1] [3]}.

3. No publicized state regulator enforcement action found in available reporting

Available sources do not report any state charity regulator (for example, attorney general or state charities bureau) taking enforcement action, opening a formal investigation, or issuing penalties against Tunnel to Towers; the coverage in the provided material is limited to subpoenas in Giuliani’s bankruptcy and watchdog reviews, not state enforcement proceedings ^{[3] [1] [4]}.

4. Tunnel to Towers’ financial profile and watchdog responses

Independent charity watchdogs cited in available sources present Tunnel to Towers as financially efficient: CharityWatch analyzed 2022 filings and reported ~ $292 million in cash contributions with ~$284 million in cash expenses, and an A+ style evaluation noting 93% of cash expenses went to programs (7% overhead) ^[2]. CharityWatch and CharityWatch‑style summaries are central to countervailing views that the organization spends the bulk of donations on its stated programs ^{[2] [4]}.

5. Conflicting narratives and where skepticism comes from

Two competing narratives appear in the sources: reporting (NYT and other outlets) and bankruptcy paperwork raise questions about the foundation’s financial relationship with Giuliani and his companies ^{[1] [3]}; charity evaluators and screening sites emphasize governance, transparency benchmarks and program spending, finding no red flags in routine screenings ^{[4] [5] [2]}. The contrast reflects differing agendas: bankruptcy creditors seek documents to recover assets and test creditor claims, while watchdogs evaluate program efficiency and governance for donors.

6. What is publicly documented vs. what is not

Public documentation in the cited reporting documents sponsorship payments and disclosures in Giuliani’s bankruptcy filings and press coverage about those subpoenas ^{[1] [3]}. Available sources do not provide evidence that Tunnel to Towers diverted funds unlawfully, nor do they cite a state attorney general probe or a charity regulator sanction; they also do not provide final adjudication or forensic audit findings implicating the foundation ^{[1] [3] [4]}.

7. Why this matters to donors and journalists

The subpoena-driven scrutiny in a high‑profile bankruptcy raises reputational and governance questions that donors rightly care about; at the same time, charity metrics from watchdogs show heavy program spending that undercuts a simple narrative of misappropriation. Reporters and donors should demand document disclosures referenced in the subpoenas and any IRS/Form 990 detail connected to the payments at issue to reconcile the two threads of reporting ^{[3] [2]}.

8. Immediate steps and information to watch for next

Watch for (a) the subpoenas’ produced documents or court filings in Giuliani’s bankruptcy that detail amounts and contracts between Tunnel to Towers and Giuliani entities; (b) any formal inquiry or enforcement action announced by a state attorney general or charity regulator (not found in current reporting); and (c) updates from independent auditors or the foundation’s own disclosures responding to the subpoenas ^{[3] [1] [2]}.

Limitations: This account uses only the supplied sources. Available reporting documents subpoenas and sponsorship disclosures in Giuliani’s bankruptcy and charity watchdog analyses; available sources do not mention state enforcement actions against Tunnel to Towers ^{[3] [1] [4]}.