Horizon – News and Trends in Sustainability Law

Deadline alert

US: Multi-state packaging EPR reporting deadlines converged on May 31. As we reported last month, six of the seven US states with enacted extended producer responsibility (EPR) laws for packaging (as well as food service ware and paper products in some jurisdictions) share a May 31 statutory reporting deadline. Because that date fell on a Sunday this year, the deadlines were extended to the following day, Monday, June 1.

US: California: Scope 1 and Scope 2 disclosures under California’s SB 253 are due August 10. California’s Air Resources Board (CARB) has stated that it will not take enforcement action against entities making a good-faith effort to comply.

European Union: The EU Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation enters into force on August 12. Key compliance milestones and targets will phase in through 2040.

Disclosures and voluntary reporting

SEC proposes rescinding climate rules; court asked to lift abeyance on Iowa v. SEC. On May 29, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) published a proposal to formally rescind its climate-related disclosure rules, which would have required US public companies to provide extensive climate-related information in their registration statements and annual reports. Following a mandatory comment period, which closes August 3, 2026, the SEC is expected to proceed with a final recission of the rules. The SEC had paused the rules in 2024 pending the outcome of still-unresolved litigation, consolidated in the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit as Iowa v. SEC. Last year, as part of that litigation, the SEC voted to end its defense of the rules and asked the court to rule on their legality. The court declined, instead suspending the litigation until the SEC decided whether to resume its defense or withdraw, repeal, or amend the rules. On May 8 this year, the SEC wrote to the court, reiterating that it does not intend to defend the original rules and plans to reconsider them through the notice-and-comment process. On the same date, the Iowa Attorney General and fellow petitioners, a coalition of state attorneys general and businesses, filed a consolidated motion asking the court to “either vacate the rule without argument or lift the abeyance and schedule argument.” A successful challenge to the rules could have sweeping implications for SEC and federal administrative authority. If the rules are rescinded while the case is pending, it is very likely that the Eighth Circuit will dismiss the consolidated petitions as moot, thus side-stepping the broader administrative law issues. Be on the lookout for our coming exploration of this development on our Market Edge blog.

In pivot from climate ambition to implementation, SBTi rolls out new five-year strategy. On May 21, the Science-Based Targets Initiative (SBTi) announced its new five-year strategy, “Catalyzing corporate action,” which SBTi states will set out a new operating model for its coming evolution “from ambition-setter to transformation partner – supporting companies not only in setting targets, but turning them into measurable, real-world results.” Since its founding in 2015, SBTi has worked to establish science-based targets as the global benchmark for credible corporate climate action. The 2026–2030 strategy, it states, responds to calls from business for “clearer pathways, better data, and more actionable guidance” to help them translate climate ambitions into practical, sustained action while supporting business resilience. Underpinning this “pivot to implementation” is SBTi’s development of Corporate Net-Zero Standard Version 2, which is still undergoing review. The new framework, SBTi states, “will address business needs across very different corporate contexts, with tailored approaches across industry sectors and geographies.” Furthermore, the framework will be interoperable with accounting standards, corporate climate initiatives, high-integrity carbon credit frameworks, and Environmental Attribute Certificate schemes, and will recognize other entities’ sustainability standards. Guidance on that interoperability will be published in 2027. See a summary of the new strategy here and the full strategy here.

Consultation open on TISFD Framework. The Taskforce on Inequality and Social-Related Financial Disclosures (TISFD) has released the TISFD Framework Beta Version 0.1 (the Framework) for public consultation. The TISFD is a global multi-stakeholder initiative launched in September 2024 to develop recommendations for businesses and financial institutions to report on inequality and social-related risks. Drawing on the structures of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) and Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD), the Framework is designed to be globally relevant and to help businesses and financial institutions identify and disclose people-related impacts, dependencies, risks, and opportunities that, it stated, “are shaping business performance, investment outcomes and the stability of economies and markets.” The public consultation period on the Framework will remain open until July 31.

Australia: 2026 budget proposes simplifying climate reporting rules. Australia’s federal budget proposed amendments to the mandatory sustainability reporting regime. These proposals are subject to consultation, legislative drafting, and parliamentary approval, with timing yet to be confirmed. Read about the proposed changes in our alert.

Comment period for TNFD’s proposed state of nature metrics is open. The TNFD has released a Discussion paper on state of nature measurement in which it proposes methods for standardizing nature-related metrics across disclosure, risk assessment, and target-setting. The paper, created in collaboration with the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) and Science Based Targets Network (SBTN), proposes approaches to improving consistent quantification of ecosystem and biodiversity impacts. TNFD states, “This marks a key step in advancing nature as a core pillar of ESG reporting.” The ultimate purpose of the process, TNFD continues, is to inform its decisions on the state of nature in its metrics architecture and associated guidance, which TNFD expects to publish later this year, and will help GRI and SBTN integrate such metrics into their own standards. Comments on the discussion paper are open through June 4.

New York’s Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act. The New York state legislature will likely adjourn on June 10 without voting on S9072A/A 04282, the Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act (CCDAA), which would mandate companies operating in New York that have annual revenues exceeding USD1 billion to measure, verify, and publicly disclose their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions across their supply chains on an annual basis. Like California’s pair of climate data laws, SB 253 (the Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act) and SB 261 (the Climate-Related Financial Risk Act), the CCDAA would require reporting entities to submit annual reports divulging their emissions arising from Scope 1 (direct emissions), Scope 2 (indirect emissions from purchased energy), and Scope 3 (upstream and downstream supply chain emissions) activities. Annual Scope 1 and Scope 2 disclosures for the prior fiscal year would begin in 2028; annual Scope 3 disclosures for the prior fiscal year would begin in 2029. The CCDAA also would, among other things, fund municipal projects for remediating drinking water site contamination and require certain warehouses to cut their air pollution impacts on disadvantaged communities. The measure passed the state Senate in February on a 40–22 vote but subsequently failed to advance out of the Assembly Codes Committee.

EU consultation on revised sustainability reporting standards. The European Commission launched a consultation on proposed revisions to the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) adopted under the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD). The revisions largely retain the tightly focused simplifications proposed by the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG). The public consultation on the revisions closed June 3, with final adoption of the ESRS expected by summer 2026. Our alert tells you more.

Extended producer responsibility

CalRecycle publishes three documents in support of SB 54 reporting. Regulations for California SB 54, the Plastic Pollution Prevention and Packaging Producer Responsibility Act, are now in effect, and June 1 is the registration deadline for producers. On May 11, the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) published three guidance documents in support of SB 54. The documents are:

• Are you a Producer? A situational screening tool for California’s packaging law, a simple flow chart
• Identifying Covered Materials: Guidance for Producers of Single-Use Packaging and Single-Use Plastic Food Service Ware, a concise guide for determining whether an item of single-use packaging or plastic food service ware is regulated under SB 54
• Guidance for Submitting a Categorically Excluded Materials Notice for Food and Agricultural Packaging, which explains how to prepare and submit a Categorically Excluded Materials Notice for food and agricultural packaging through CalRecycle’s Packaging Extended Producer Responsibility System (PEPRS) portal

Each of the three documents bears a disclaimer that begins: “This document is informational only, and use of it is optional.” As noted above, six of the seven US states with enacted EPR laws for packaging, California among them, share a May 31 statutory reporting deadline. Because that date fell on a Sunday this year, the deadlines were extended to the following day, Monday, June 1.

CAA comment period on draft Certification Standard for Responsible Markets is open. The public comment period is open until July 7 for stakeholders to submit feedback on the Circular Action Alliance (CAA) draft Certification Standard for Responsible Markets: For Recycling of Paper, Packaging and Food Serviceware (the REM standard). The draft standard, CAA states, was designed to address consistent, transparent implementation of EPR legislation across multiple US states, setting out a uniform, consistent framework for verifying how recyclable materials are managed downstream of collection and sorting while maintaining appropriate protections for confidential business information. At a time when the global recycling supply chain is growing more complex, the REM standard sets out definitions of market expectations and common criteria intended “to improve visibility into material outcomes and strengthen confidence across the recycling value chain.” See the draft REM standard here.

Oregon DEQ approves amendments to CAA responsible end markets plan. On May 20, Oregon’s Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) approved CAA’s program plan amendment on responsible end markets (REMs). The amendment reportedly was put in place to improve the ways recyclable materials collected in Oregon are verified as being managed responsibly under the Recycling Modernization Act (RMA). The amendment enhances definitions on how downstream facilities and end markets may demonstrate how they are meeting statutory REM requirements, providing them with paths to compliance while preserving environmental safeguards. Furthermore, it aligns with established third-party certification programs, a change that could give qualifying facilities partial credit toward their REM verification.

New York’s EPR bill is extensively amended. On June 5, New York State Assembly Speaker Carl E. Heastie stated that SB S1464/AB A1749, New York state’s Packaging Reduction and Recycling Infrastructure Act (PRRIA), will likely not pass the legislature in the 2026 session, which ends June 10. The bill underwent extensive amendments in its progress through both houses. The bill’s sponsors, State Senator Pete Harckham and Assemblymember Deborah J. Glick, told Recycling Today that the nearly 150 amendments were made in response to “extensive engagement” with an array of stakeholders, among them industry leaders, municipalities, advocacy organizations, and states that already have passed packaging EPR laws. The PRRIA would require in-scope packaging producers – those with more than USD5 million in annual net revenue that handle more than 2 tons of packaging waste a year – to reduce packaging by 10 percent within three years and 30 percent within 12 years. Among PRRIA’s amendments are changes that would align its definitions, policy frameworks, and compliance timelines with those of other states. Further, the amended bill adopted the framework for responsible end markets set out in Minnesota’s EPR law and consolidates enforcement authority within the offices of the State Attorney General and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. In addition, chemical recycling would not be classified as recycling under the PRRIA. New York state already has active EPR programs in place affecting end-of-life management of certain products, such as electronics, mercury thermostats, pharmaceuticals, and carpeting.

Maine DEP: No stewardship organization yet, but producers will still be required to pay fees this year. Although Maine’s Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) has not yet chosen an organization to manage Title 38 S 2145, the state’s EPR law, DEP still expects that producers of packaging material will be required to register and pay startup fees to that organization this year. Maine was the first US state to enact an EPR law. While it has struggled to make S 2145 operational, amendments made to the law in 2025 via LD 1423 brought the law in line with EPR packaging measures in other states, promoting consistency and clarity. (LD 1423 also uses the term “Stewardship Organization” rather than “Producer Responsibility Organization.”) A DEP environmental specialist reportedly stated in May that DEP is close to issuing a Request for Proposals (RFP) for a Stewardship Organization. Once the RFP has been issued, DEP will update its Stewardship Program for Packaging website – including that site’s implementation schedule.

Source Reduction Summit: Guidance on building compliant plans under SB 54. DLA Piper lawyers were among the participants in the Source Reduction Summit, a two-day working forum to help producers, suppliers, and converters across the value chain understand how to build compliant Individual Source Reduction Plans under California SB 54. The event took place June 3 and 4 at RTI International Headquarters in Durham, North Carolina. Find out more and access the summit agendas here.

Find out more about EPR. Visit DLA Piper’s Extended Producer Responsibility Hub to learn more about the firm’s work assisting businesses with their EPR obligations up and down the supply chain.

Sustainability: Regulatory

Trump Administration developments.

• Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin has announced a proposed revision of the New Source Review rule – in particular, its definitions of the phrases “Begin Actual Construction” and “Begin Construction.” Under the proposed revision announced on May 11, projects like power plants, data centers, and factories would be allowed to begin construction on non-emitting components (such as wiring, piping, and cement pads) before federally required environmental New Source Review (NSR) permits have been obtained. See EPA’s preview of the proposed change here. A comment period on the revision will open once EPA finalizes its proposal.
• The White House has reportedly completed its review of a proposed EPA rule that would delay the compliance deadlines for criteria pollutant standards for light- and medium-duty vehicles for two years (until the 2029 model year). The existing rule ("Multi-Pollutant Emissions Standards for Model Years 2027 and Later," finalized in 2024) requires manufacturers to significantly reduce vehicle emissions of six criteria pollutants – carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide – across model years 2027 to 2032. By 2032, light vehicles would be required to emit 50 percent less of those pollutants and medium-duty vehicles would be required to reduce such emissions by 58 percent. EPA now has determined those standards to be “unattainable.” The agency is also reconsidering Tier 4 standards which govern nonroad diesel-powered engines found in farm, airport, mining, and construction equipment.
• On May 12, the Trump Administration formally rescinded the 2024 Conservation and Landscape Health Rule. This action, the final rule states, “restores balance to federal land management… by reaffirming the principles of multiple use and sustained yield, ensuring conservation does not restrict productive use of the public land, and reducing regulatory burdens that impede efficient decision-making.” The 2024 rule, which applied to 245 million acres of public land overseen by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) – about 10 percent of the United States land mass – sought to give conservation the same standing as land development, prioritizing the use of federal lands for recreation, environmental protection, and renewable energy development. Full rescission, the final rule states, “aligns the BLM’s regulation with statutory requirements and national energy policy.”

2026 mid-year PFAS update: How federal and state regulation is shaping compliance and litigation risk. Federal and state regulation of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), as well as related policy initiatives such as Make America Healthy Again (MAHA), continue to accelerate and evolve, with key compliance deadlines approaching in mid-2026 and early 2027. Our alert highlights three key trends: recalibration of the scope of PFAS regulation at the federal level, intensification of US Food and Drug Administration food safety research, and expansion of state consumer product restrictions. Amplified reporting, testing, and disclosure could strengthen companies’ compliance posture while simultaneously generating information that could be scrutinized in enforcement actions. Find out more.

New York state budget rolls back CLCPA climate goals. On May 28, New York Governor Kathy Hochul signed two of the bills that are part of the state’s USD268.5 billion fiscal year 2027 budget, which had been approved by the legislature just hours before. Those measures include significant rollbacks of some of the ambitious climate goals set out in the state’s 2019 Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA). Most notable among the changes:

• Resetting the interim emissions reduction goal. Under the CLCPA, the state would have been required to reach a 40-percent cut in emissions across the state’s economy by 2030, compared to 1990 levels. That interim goal will change to a 60-percent reduction by 2040 compared to 1990 levels. The goal of an 85-percent reduction by 2050 is unchanged.
• Pushing forward the date on which the state is required to issue binding regulations implementing CLCPA. The CLCPA required New York’s Department of Environmental Conservation (NYDEC) to issue binding regulations enforcing the state’s emissions targets by 2024. In October 2025, the Albany County Supreme Court ruled that NYDEC had violated the law by failing to issue those regulations and ordered the agency to issue the regulations by early 2026, unless the law was changed. These regulations still have not been issued. Under the newly approved budget, NYDEC now has until December 31, 2028 to issue the implementing regulations.
• Revising the accounting standard the state uses to measure the economic impact of its emissions by using a 100-year timeframe rather than a 20-year timeframe. (This puts the state in line with many US and global jurisdictions.)
• Sending one-time energy rebate checks to about 8 million New York residents under the Protecting Our Wallets Energy Rebate (POWER) program. The checks, in amounts ranging from USD150 to USD400, will be based on 2024 tax returns and will be distributed automatically starting in September.

China advances environmental law framework under 2026 legislative plan. China is further stepping up its adoption of environmental legislation. The 2026 legislative plan, released on May 11, includes the already passed Ecological and Environmental Code (EEC) as well as plans to introduce a Law on Antarctic Activities and Environmental Protection and amendments to the Water Law and the Renewable Energy Law. The EEC – which will be implemented in August this year – consolidates China’s environmental legal framework into a single sweeping document, notably including a dedicated chapter on green and low-carbon development that incorporates carbon peaking and carbon neutrality goals into the legal system. See the full text of the EEC here. The EEC also serves as a cornerstone for the ongoing, panoramic modernization of China’s environmental legal regime.

EU simplifies deforestation regulation and narrows product scope. The European Commission has confirmed a package of simplification measures for the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR), one of the EU’s flagship sustainability laws. The measures include a report to the European Parliament and the Council, an updated guidance document and Frequently Asked Questions, and a draft delegated act on the product scope of the EUDR. Among the changes, leather has been excluded from scope, reducing regulatory burdens for downstream sectors such as soluble coffee and certain palm oil derivatives. EUDR coverage for core commodities (such as cattle) that are more directly linked to deforestation risk, however, has been maintained. Certain administrative changes set out in the simplification package are expected to reduce compliance costs by approximately 75 percent. The Commission emphasizes that the EUDR’s objectives and enforcement timeline remain unchanged, with a focus on facilitating practical implementation rather than weakening environmental ambition. The Commission is focused on facilitating implementation and on ensuring a successful entry into application of the law by December 30, 2026.

Colombia: Decree No. 0509 clarifies use of CECs for exemption from national plastic packaging tax. Colombia’s Ministry of Finance has issued long-awaited Decree No. 0509 of 2026, which regulates the law regarding exemption from the national tax on single-use plastic packaging through the use of Circular Economy Certifications (CECs). CECs, issued by the National Environmental Licensing Authority (ANLA), arise from Colombia’s 2019 National Circular Economy Strategy and updated tax regulations regarding plastics. They may, for instance, recognize demonstrated excellence in waste management or validate the volume of recycled material in a company’s products. Plastic packaging and other implicated materials that are not covered by a CEC are subject to the national single-use plastic tax. See the decree here.

UN General Assembly adopts resolution calling for strong global action to limit climate change. On May 20, the United Nations General Assembly strongly approved a non-binding resolution supporting strong global action to limit climate change and “welcoming” last year’s landmark advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice clarifying the legal obligations of states under international law to address climate change. The “Advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the obligations of States in respect of climate change,” drawn up by the island nation Vanuatu, passed the General Assembly on a 141–8 vote. Belarus, Iran, Israel, Liberia, Russia, Saudi Arabia, the US, and Yemen voted against it; 28 countries abstained. The resolution calls on the world’s states to adopt national climate action plans limiting global temperature rise to below 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit); phase out subsidies for fossil fuel exploration, production, and exploitation; and for those states violating action plans to provide “full reparation” for damages. The resolution, the UN stated, “sends a strong message that tackling the climate crisis is a legal duty under international law, and not just a political choice” [emphasis in original]. See the resolution here.

Sustainability: Litigation

Texas sues ISS on ESG grounds. On May 20, the state of Texas filed suit in a state court against Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. (ISS) alleging that the proxy advisory company violated the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act (TDPA) when it gave advice to shareholders based on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) criteria rather than objective criteria. “ISS’s advertising is deceptive as it fails to adequately inform clients of its ESG initiatives,” the complaint states, adding, “These false, deceptive, and misleading practices of advertising independent and objective advice while secretly prioritizing a private agenda violate the laws of Texas.” The state is asking the court to temporarily and permanently enjoin ISS “from continuing the alleged violative conduct detailed herein”; to order ISS “to make clear and conspicuous representations to U.S. consumers that its proxy advising services are not made from a purely financial standpoint and focus heavily on ESG initiatives”; and to require ISS to pay civil penalties of up to USD10,000 per violation of the TDPA. This case is in its earliest stages. See the complaint here.

Hawaii climate lawsuits: District court dismisses US v. Hawaii, state court will not stay Honolulu v. Sunoco. The US District Court for the District of Hawaii has dismissed, with prejudice, United States v. Hawaii, litigation brought on April 30, 2025 by the Trump Administration seeking to block the state from filing a future lawsuit against fossil fuel companies to hold them liable for harms arising from climate change. In its April 15 decision, the court found that the government had failed to demonstrate any of the elements of standing, such as concrete injury. The government’s theory of harm, the court stated, was speculative, vague, and based on events that had not occurred: “An injury that has not yet happened cannot be part of the legal harm alleged in the complaint.” Of note: On May 1, 2025 – one day after the Department of Justice originally filed US v. Hawaii – the state filed Hawaii v. BP in the First Circuit Court. That case seeks to recover damages from an array of fossil fuel companies, alleging that they violated, and continue to violate, state laws regarding harmful and deceptive marketing. That case is ongoing. The US District Court’s ruling in US v. Hawaii referred to this litigation in its Motion for Judgment, stating, “The fact the lawsuit was actually filed does not alter the Court’s evaluation.”

Next, on May 6, the First Circuit Court of Hawaii ruled that it will not stay City & County of Honolulu v. Sunoco, a climate accountability lawsuit originally brought in 2021, pending the outcome before the US Supreme Court of the very similar Boulder climate litigation. In 2023, Hawaii’s Supreme Court refused to dismiss the case because the plaintiffs were alleging violations of state laws regulating marketing conduct, such as failure to warn. The First Circuit Court concluded that it is "firmly bound" by that 2023 ruling, especially because, last year, the US Supreme Court rejected the plaintiffs’ petitions for writ of certiorari on the Hawaii Supreme Court opinion. In addition, the First Circuit found, the ultimate outcome of the Boulder litigation before the US Supreme Court is too uncertain to justify staying Honolulu. City & County of Honolulu v. Sunoco will proceed under Hawaiian tort law.

Louisiana HB 804 would immunize companies against climate accountability litigation, but with exceptions. On May 26, the Louisiana State Senate passed HB 804, the Louisiana Energy Protection Act, a measure that would grant companies operating in the state sweeping, retroactive immunity in state court against lawsuits seeking redress for damage arising from climate change. An earlier version of the measure passed the state House on May 5. Among amendments the Senate added is one that would exempt lawsuits filed before HB 804 becomes law – allowing litigation already in process to move forward – and another that would allow climate-related litigation when a suit is filed under the Louisiana Coastal Resources Management Act of 1978. Next, HB 804 returns to the House for a concurrence vote on changes made in the Senate.

DOJ sues to stop Minnesota’s 2020 climate accountability lawsuit. On May 4, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a Complaint for Declaratory Relief in the US District Court for the District of Minnesota, asking the court to permanently enjoin climate accountability litigation originally brought by the state in 2020. Like the many similar climate accountability lawsuits now in process across the country, Minnesota v. American Petroleum Institute et al alleges that energy producers deceived state residents for years about climate change and claims extensive violations of state consumer protection, failure to warn, and deceptive trade statutes. Last year, the Ramsey County District Court dismissed allegations in that case that the defendants had violated the Minnesota Consumer Fraud Act, but the numerous remaining counts survived. The DOJ’s complaint seeks to end the litigation in federal court. It argues, among other things, that only the federal government, not the states, has the authority to regulate GHG emissions and that, with this litigation, Minnesota officials are improperly imposing their policy preferences on the entire country. This litigation is in its earliest stages. A hearing in the matter is set for July 21.

New Zealand announces intent to shield emitters from civil climate tort claims. On May 12, Paul Goldsmith, New Zealand’s Minister of Justice, announced that the country intends to amend its Climate Change Response Act to preclude emitters’ liability in civil climate tort claims. Such an amendment, he added, would block not only future but current litigation over harms arising from climate disasters caused by long-term GHG emissions. Most immediately, the change would shut down a significant climate accountability suit that is slated for trial before the New Zealand Supreme Court in April 2027, Smith v. Fonterra. Goldsmith pointed to the Fonterra case in his announcement, stating that the litigation was “creating uncertainty in business confidence and investment.” Amending the Climate Change Response Act, he continued, was necessary to protect businesses and provide them with certainty about their legal obligations.

Greenwashing

More lawsuits challenge coffee pod recyclability claims. Recyclability claims remain a significant source of greenwashing litigation risk for consumer products companies. The most notable current example involves Keurig Dr Pepper, Inc., which continues to face putative class action suits regarding environmental claims about the company’s K-Cup single-use beverage pods. As in the cases we reported on last month, the latest four – Alvarez v. Keurig Dr. Pepper, Inc., Dixon v. Keurig Dr. Pepper Inc., Sulli v. Keurig Dr. Pepper Inc., and Reining v. Keurig Dr. Pepper Inc. – challenge the company’s representation that the coffee pods are recyclable. Filed in four different district courts (New Mexico, Southern District of California, Western District of New York, and Eastern District of Texas), the cases once again share nearly identical allegations that recycling centers typically do not accept the pods so that the vast majority of consumers are unable to recycle them.

Putative class action brought against skincare company over plant-based claims. A lawsuit recently brought in the US District Court for the Northern District of California is the latest example of another trend we are observing, in which plaintiffs question the accuracy of claims that a product is “plant-based” or “natural.” In the putative class action suit Greenbach v. Babo Botanicals Inc., the plaintiff, a California consumer, explained that she purchased a Babo Botanicals product online, impressed by claims on the front of the bottle and online “that the Products are composed exclusively of natural ingredients, free from artificial ingredients.” When she received the product, however, she saw that its back label listed a number of synthetic ingredients. Her complaint states, “Plaintiff would not have purchased the Product, or would have paid less for the Product, had she known that the Product was not exclusively made with plant-based ingredients.” Alleging violations of unfair competition, false advertising, and other laws, she is seeking class certification as well as restitution, damages, and injunctive relief. See the complaint here.

Felsenthal v. Medela LLC: Court confirms that consumers understand plastic-based products have a risk of microplastics. The US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois has dismissed all claims in Felsenthal v. Medela LLC, a putative class action alleging a manufacturer engaged in false advertising about the potential presence of microplastics, because “it is … implausible for any reasonable consumer to believe that plastic products are free of all microplastics.” Our alert reviews the decision.

Supply chain integrity and human rights

Oklahoma sues Temu alleging data privacy, forced labor violations. On May 6, Oklahoma State Attorney General Gentner Drummond filed a sweeping lawsuit against PDD Holdings, parent company of online marketplace Temu, alleging, among other things, that the Temu mobile app – the world’s most downloaded shopping app – fails to inform consumers that it uses forced labor from Chinese ethnic minorities “in clear violation of U.S. trade policies.” “Much of the merchandise sold on Temu is likely being produced using forced labor provided by China’s Uyghur minority held against their will in camps,” the complaint states. The complaint primarily focuses on an extensive array of allegations involving privacy violations, unlawful data collection, and counterfeiting, but the way Temu’s products are manufactured is also a keystone of the complaint’s argument. The US Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA) of 2022 creates a rebuttable presumption that goods with any input from the Xinjiang Region in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) or made by certain entities were manufactured in part or wholly by forced labor and, therefore, are prohibited from entry into the US. See the Oklahoma complaint here.

EU Forced Labor Regulation: Guidance coming soon. The European Commission is expected to publish implementation guidance on the EU Forced Labor Regulation (EUFLR) by June 14. The EUFLR becomes applicable from December 2027, bringing substantial new compliance obligations for all businesses operating in or exporting from the EU market. It bans products, including the components of products, that have been manufactured using forced labor at any point in the extraction, harvest, production, and manufacturing process. It covers all companies regardless of size, affects products of any origin and sector, and is applicable regardless of the way products are marketed – that is, online sales are impacted too. Companies placing products on the EU market or exporting products from the EU will need to ensure that forced-labor risks within their supply chains are effectively identified and addressed. DLA Piper’s recent webinar, “EU Forced Labor Regulation: What US Companies Need to Know,” explored the regulation and the ways companies are preparing to meet its compliance obligations.

Energy and natural resources

Ohio Senate unanimously passes bill setting out legal framework for carbon storage. On May 20, the Ohio State Senate unanimously passed HB 170, a measure that would create a regulatory framework in the state for long-term carbon capture and storage (CCS) and its long-term geologic sequestration in Class VI wells. HB 170 would authorize CSS activity in the state, clarify certain property rights concerns (such as ownership rights related to underground pore space and the transfer of pore space rights), and assign CCS development and oversight to the Ohio Department of Natural Resources’ Division of Oil and Gas Resources Management. An earlier version of HB 170 passed the state House last year. Next, the measure returns to that chamber for consideration of the amendments made by the Senate.

UK updates Climate Change Agreements scheme templates for 2026–2030 phase. The Government of the United Kingdom has published updated template agreements for the Climate Change Agreements (CCA) scheme, including revised Umbrella and Underlying Climate Change Agreement templates. Climate Change Agreements are voluntary agreements that allow eligible energy intensive facilities to access reduced rates of the Climate Change Levy (CCL) in return for meeting agreed energy efficiency or emissions reduction targets. The new templates, with updated targets and reporting requirements, reflect the current phase of the CCA scheme, which began January 1 and runs through December 31, 2030. While the revisions are largely technical, they are significant from a compliance perspective, formalizing the requirements of the current phase and facilitating participation of new entrants in the scheme. Businesses participating in, or seeking to enter, the CCA scheme will need to ensure their agreements align with the updated templates to maintain eligibility for CCL relief.

China promulgates Implementation Regulations for Revised Mineral Resources Law. On May 20, China officially released the Implementation Regulations for Revised Mineral Resources Law, setting out detailed rules for the revised Mineral Resources Law that came to effect in July 2025. Provisions of the Regulations cover the development, management, reservation, and emergency response systems for mineral resources. In addition, the Ministry of Natural Resources has indicated that China will continue to focus on sustainable mineral exploration over the next five years, with particular focus on such minerals as copper, iron, lithium, cobalt, and nickel. See the Ministry of Natural Resources’ press conference on the regulations here.

China launches 2026 industrial energy-efficiency inspection program. China has launched an industrial energy-efficiency inspection program for 2026. The Ministry of Industry and Information Technology has initiated inspections covering such energy-intensive industries as steel, petrochemicals, and cement, as well as key clean technology supply chains including photovoltaics, wind power, and batteries. The program also includes reviews of major energy-consuming equipment and requires compliance with mandatory industry and product energy consumption standards, among others. The inspection results are expected to be applied to such areas as corporate carbon emissions accounting and product carbon footprint management in order to promote decarbonization upgrades across industries. See the notice for energy efficiency inspection here. Previously, the government also issued policy documents on improving the quality and effectiveness of energy conservation and carbon reduction, as well as a comprehensive evaluation and assessment framework for carbon peaking and carbon neutrality, providing higher-level policy guidance.

Australia: New South Wales introduces bill to accelerate renewable energy development. A bill that would prioritize and streamline the delivery of renewable and energy infrastructure projects in New South Wales (NSW), Australia is working its way through the state’s Parliament. The measure, the Energy Legislation Amendment (Prioritising Renewable Energy) Bill 2026, amends existing NSW laws, including by introducing a new legal category, priority energy projects (PEPs). PEPs may include renewable generation, transmission, storage, and firming infrastructure. The bill proposes substantial changes to the planning and consent processes for such projects, grants the Energy Minister the power to designate qualifying projects as priority energy projects, and grants the Planning Minister further powers to support and advance such projects within existing NSW planning pathways. The measure is a significant policy step, forwarding renewable and energy infrastructure development by streamlining governance and conferring greater discretionary powers on ministers.

First 100-percent ethanol voyage as shipping industry works to identify commercially viable low-emission fuels. In the latest indicator that the shipping industry is striving to identify, and use, commercially viable low-emission fuels, on May 7 global logistics company Maersk announced the completion of its first sea voyage powered entirely by ethanol. The operation was the latest step in the company’s ambitious maritime decarbonization efforts. The International Maritime Organization has committed to achieving net-zero GHG emissions from international shipping by or around 2050. Maersk, in contrast, has set its own tougher timeline of reaching net zero by 2040. Pursuant to that goal, in 2021 the company decided to exclusively order vessels with dual-fuel capabilities as part of its effort to future-proof its fleet. It began experimenting with ethanol-methanol blends in these dual-fuel vessels last year, starting with a 10-percent ethanol–90 percent methanol blend, then moving to a 50–50 mix. The 100-percent ethanol voyage, completed in the first quarter of this year, reportedly proceeded efficiently. To ensure flexibility, the new Maersk vessels can also operate on conventional bunker fuels. Maersk currently operates 14 dual-fuel vessels and has ordered another 45.

California bills and federal actions focus on data center water, energy, and grid costs: Key takeaways. Water and energy use and costs are quickly emerging as key regulatory issues for data center development. The trend is reflected in a suite of bills recently introduced in California. Our alert tells you more.

Sustainability in financial services

European Parliament in process of updating SFDR. A new draft report filed by European Parliament member and Rapporteur Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy in early May sets out proposals for the European Parliament’s negotiating position for updates to the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR). The SFDR, in force since 2021, seeks to address greenwashing and enhance transparency in sustainable investing. It requires asset managers to disclose how they integrate sustainability risks into their financial products and to report on the adverse impacts of investments – part of the EU’s overall work to harmonize sustainability reporting across the bloc and redirect capital toward sustainable financing. In November last year, the European Commission proposed a set of amendments to the current SFDR with the aim of making the rules simpler, more efficient, and better aligned with market realities. The Rapporteur praised those updates but recommended tighter criteria in some respects. For instance, he is recommending mandatory disclosure against a set of Principal Adverse Impact (PAI) indicators, which he says will allow investors to compare products more easily. Next, the report will be presented to the parliamentary Economic and Monetary Affairs committee in June; a vote on its proposals is expected in mid-July.

EU proposes updated emissions trading benchmarks for 2026–2030. On May 11, the European Commission proposed updated European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) benchmark values for the period 2026–2030 and opened the proposal for consultation until June 8. The ETS benchmarks determine the level of free emissions allowances allocated to industry based on the performance of the most efficient installations. The EU ETS remains the bloc’s primary carbon pricing instrument, and benchmark values directly influence the cost of compliance for industrial installations because they determine how many allowances businesses receive for free before they need to purchase additional permits. Next, the benchmarks will be subject to public consultation and member state review, with adoption expected through a Commission implementing act by mid 2026.

Singapore and Philippines sign Article 6 carbon credits agreement. Singapore and the Philippines have signed a bilateral implementation agreement on carbon credits cooperation under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, establishing a legally binding framework for the generation and transfer of carbon credits between the two countries. The agreement, announced during ASEAN Climate Week, sets out the framework and requirements for the generation, transfer and use of Article 6-aligned carbon credits, including measures to ensure environmental integrity and avoid double counting. The agreement represents a significant step in the operationalization of Article 6 carbon markets, moving from high-level international commitments to a functional bilateral framework for government-authorised carbon trading. It enables Singapore to access high-quality international credits as part of its decarbonization strategy while providing the Philippines with a pathway to attract climate finance into mitigation activities, such as renewable energy, forestry, and industrial transition projects. From a regulatory perspective, the agreement signals the growing momentum of carbon markets in Asia Pacific as well as a broader shift towards government-to-government carbon market arrangements. Next, expect further implementation guidance from Singapore and Philippines to help market participants engage with the framework.

Singapore allows carbon credit offset quota to carry forward for 2025 emissions year. On May 11, Singapore announced that companies subject to its carbon tax regime will be allowed to carry forward unutilized international carbon credit offset quotas from emissions year 2025 to 2026. Companies can ordinarily offset up to 5% of taxable emissions using eligible international carbon credits, with the rollover allowing additional offset capacity in EY2026 where part of the EY2025 quota was unused. By allowing a one‑year carry‑forward of unused offset quota, the government is providing flexibility to regulated companies while maintaining the overall structure of the carbon pricing framework. The credit conversion formula also reflects the scheduled increase in Singapore’s carbon tax rate from SGD25 per tonne in 2025 to SGD45 per tonne in 2026, ensuring that carried forward offsets retain an equivalent value. The carry‑forward measure is a transitional adjustment, applying only to emissions year 2025 to 2026.

EU, China, and Brazil launch carbon market coalition to strengthen global pricing standards. The EU, China, and Brazil have launched a new international carbon market coalition aimed at strengthening global carbon pricing frameworks and emissions trading system (ETS) design. The initiative, while non-binding, represents a strategic policy step toward greater international alignment of carbon markets. From a regulatory perspective, bringing together major jurisdictions with established or developing pricing systems and aligning their key design features could enhance cooperation across carbon markets while improving global pricing signals and market integrity. Further details on implementation and cooperation mechanisms are expected as the participating jurisdictions develop the coalition framework.

New Zealand: FMA updates disclosure framework for ESG claims in financial products. New Zealand’s Te Mana Tātai Hokohoko, the Financial Markets Authority (FMA), has updated its Disclosure Framework for Integrated Financial Products, stating that it has renamed the guidance to Sustainability related Disclosure Guidance to better reflect current market practice and clarified its expectations about ESG claims and disclosures. The updates set out the ways that FMA expects issuers to meet their fair dealing and disclosure obligations under the Financial Markets Conduct Act when sustainability-related claims are made about a product. FMA states that the guidance is built around four core principles: claims need to be clear, claims need to be substantiated, messages need to be consistent, and third-party involvement must be effectively managed.

Landmark green bond deal in South Africa. The Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) has announced the FirstRand Bank Cape Water Performance-Based Bond, Africa’s first nature-linked performance-based bond. The transaction’s structure, tied to water security outcomes, supports the work of The Nature Conservancy South Africa in a significant water reclamation project to restore priority water catchment areas in the country’s Strategic Water Source Areas (SWSAs) and increase stream flow into storage dams. SWSAs make up about 10 percent of South Africa’s land but supply 60 percent of its water and support two-thirds of its economic activity. The ZAR2.5 billion issuance links part of investors’ returns to independently verified ecological restoration. According to the JSE, the bond’s structure also represents a larger shift away from traditional green bond financing by linking investor returns to environmental performance.

Sustainability in the marketplace

Ford launches battery energy storage business. On May 11, Ford announced the launch of Ford Energy, a wholly owned subsidiary that will manufacture US-assembled battery energy storage systems (BESS) for utilities, data centers, and large commercial and industrial customers. Citing lower-than-expected electric vehicle demand, Ford is repurposing its battery manufacturing facility in Kentucky to produce BESS. The company’s flagship product is the Ford Energy DC block, a standardized 20-foot BESS designed around 512 ampere-hour lithium iron phosphate (Ah LFP) prismatic cells and available in two- and four-hour configurations. Ford anticipates shipping the first units to customers in late 2027 and intends to invest USD2 billion to scale the business over the next two years.

2026 wildfire trends: What key stakeholders need to know. Wildfire activity across the US continues to intensify, bringing with it a rapidly evolving legal and regulatory landscape that demands attention from utilities, insurers, municipalities, and industrial operators alike. Emerging developments in courtrooms and statehouses across the country underscore the importance for companies of proactive, documented risk management. See our alert.

Calendar

Key global reporting deadlines

^{This calendar highlights coming reporting deadlines in key jurisdictions and is not a comprehensive summary of global sustainability regulations. Our Sustainability team’s interactive Global Sustainability Regulatory Dashboard provides our clients with an in-depth, comprehensive analysis of global sustainability regulations pertinent to their business. For more information about the Global Sustainability Regulatory Dashboard, please contact us via DLAPiperCorporateDataAnalytics@us.dlapiper.com.}

Coming events

• DLA Piper’s Charging Up Capital: Global Energy and Digital Investments Forum, exploring the converging investment and financing landscape across energy and digital infrastructure, takes place June 17, 2026 in the firm’s London office. Lawyers from more than 20 key jurisdictions will offer practical insights into such areas as renewables, EV charging, e-fuels, critical minerals, and more. Find out more by contacting Francesca Corradini, and register your interest here.
  
• London Climate Action Week takes place June 20 to 28, 2026 in London. DLA Piper has partnered with Climate Action on the week’s opening flagship event, the full-day Climate Innovation Forum, convening climate leaders, innovators, and business leaders to accelerate action and close gaps in implementation, investment, and innovation between the annual UN climate change conferences. Among DLA Piper professionals in attendance are Partner Jean-Pierre Douglas-Henry (London) and Kristy Balsanek (Washington, DC), in their capacity as co-leads of DLA Piper’s sustainability strategy.
• Climate Week NYC takes place September 20 to 27, 2026 in New York City.
• The 2026 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP31) will be held November 9 to 26, 2026 in Antalya, Turkey, with Australia presiding over negotiations.
• The 2026 United Nations Water Conference will take place December 2 to 4, 2026 in the United Arab Emirates.

For professional responsibility reasons, these summaries may not include discussions of developments relating to certain matters.