Horizon - ESG Regulatory News and Trends

Deadline alert

Reporting deadlines for Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) laws in two key US states are coming fast.

• Colorado’s Extended Producer Responsibility Law, HB 22-1355: July 31, 2025 is the first annual deadline to report data to the Circular Action Alliance (CAA) for covered material sold or distributed in Colorado in 2024.
• California’s Extended Producer Responsibility Law, SB 54: November 15, 2025 is the first annual deadline to report data to the Circular Action Alliance for covered material sold or distributed in California in 2023.
• For Oregon’s SB 582, the deadline and the subsequent grace period for reporting to the CAA have passed.

See our ESG calendar for information about key reporting deadlines around the world.

Disclosures and voluntary reporting

Omnibus I in the news. This month we are seeing rapid movement in the European Parliament over the European Commission’s proposed Omnibus I legislative package, which would roll back key sustainability requirements in the EU’s Green Deal – the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD); the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD); the EU Green Taxonomy, and the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism. Here are some key developments.

On June 12, Jörgen Warborn, the rapporteur in the European Parliament for the European Commission’s proposed Omnibus I legislative package, released proposed draft amendments to Omnibus I that would significantly reduce EU sustainability reporting and due requirements. The 63-page document represents the position of Warborn’s European People’s Party (EPP). Warborn said on LinkedIn on June 9 that Omnibus I does not do enough: “I want to go further: cut cost for business and boost Europe’s competitiveness.” For instance, Omnibus I would modify CSRD reporting requirements so that only companies with more than 1,000 employees and €25 million in revenue would need to report, removing about 80 percent of companies from its scope; under the EPP proposal, the threshold for reporting companies covered by the CSRD would rise even more, requiring reporting only from those companies with more than 3,000 employees and €450 million in revenue. The proposal also would limit supply chain reporting requirements, remove the requirement for companies to have mandatory climate transition plans, and prohibit member states from enacting tougher reporting rules.

Next, on June 17, the European Council released its fourth compromise text, primarily focused on modifications to the CSDDD. Under the proposal, only large companies, with more than 5,000 employees and €1.5 billion in total revenue would be in scope – a significant change from the current requirements of 1,000 employees and €450 million in revenue. This change would reportedly exclude about 72.5 percent of EU companies operating or based in the EU from the CSDDD’s scope. The proposal reportedly states that “such largest companies are able to have the biggest influence on their value chain and, at the same time, are best equipped to absorb the costs and burdens of due diligence process.” The proposal, which is currently being debated in Parliament, would also postpone the CSDDD’s requirement for companies to issue climate transition plans to 2030.

On June 20, the European Commission announced its intention to withdraw its proposed Green Claims Directive aimed at protecting consumers against greenwashing by requiring businesses to substantiate and independently verify green claims. This move came as a surprise to observers and negotiators alike. The announcement came a day after the European People’s Party (EPP), the largest political party in the European Parliament, wrote to EU Commissioner for Environment, Water Resilience and a Competitive Circular Economy Jessika Roswall advising her that it would not endorse the directive and asked that the Commission “reconsiders and ultimately withdraws” it. EPP Members of Parliament Arba Kokalari and Danuše Nerudová, in the letter to Roswall, called the Directive’s requirements “overly complex, administratively burdensome, and costly.” Trilogue negotiations among the Commission, Parliament, and EU Council, slated to start next week, would have finalized the directive – the last step in a two-year-long legislative process.

Debate over these proposals and numerous others is taking place at this writing. Some sources are predicting that significant progress will be made before the European Council presidency switches from Poland to Denmark on July 1. Also see our reporting on the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism in our Financial Services section.

Canada: Federal Plastics Registry reporting. Obligated parties are required to file a first report (Phase 1) for the 2024 year by September 29, 2025. In this first phase, reporting is required to be made by defined producers about their activities regarding plastic packaging, electronic and electrical equipment, and single-use and disposable products destined for the residential waste stream. No extensions are available. It is recommended that businesses carefully consider whether they are obligated to report and obligated parties should begin to assemble any necessary data required for reporting. The Regulatory Services Platform, which is a secure reporting platform that helps organizations report data to the Federal Plastics Registry, has been launched. The data gathered through the Federal Plastics Registry is expected to inform Canada’s extended producer responsibility policy, improving waste reduction and recycling activities. See our earlier coverage of Canada’s plan to move toward zero plastic waste by 2030.

Singapore releases draft guidance on using carbon credits. Singapore’s National Climate Change Secretariat (NCCS), Ministry of Trade and Industry, and Enterprise Singapore have jointly released Role of Carbon Credits in Corporate Decarbonisation Action - draft guidance aiming to show, NCCS stated, “how companies can voluntarily use carbon credits as part of a credible decarbonisation plan.” The draft guidance, issued on June 20, is the latest move in Singapore’s push to become a reliable global hub for carbon trading. Among features of the draft guidance, companies would be allowed to offset up to 5 percent of their taxable emissions and would disclose their use of carbon credits under ISSB-aligned sustainability standards. The public consultation period on the draft guidance is open through July 20. See the draft guidance here.

IFRS Foundation: 17 jurisdictions are using ISSB Sustainability Reporting standards. Seventeen jurisdictions globally have finalized their use of the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards, and another 19 are moving toward adopting the standards, the IFRS Foundation announced this month. In addition, to provide transparency and show how countries are incorporating IFRS standards into their legal frameworks, the IFRS Foundation simultaneously published 17 “jurisdictional profiles,” which are issued once a jurisdiction has finalized its approach to sustainability reporting, to provide guidance for other countries, as well as 16 “jurisdictional snapshots.” The 17 profiled jurisdictions are Australia, Bangladesh, Brazil, Chile, Ghana, Hong Kong, Jordan, Kenya, Malaysia, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Chinese Taipei, Tanzania, Turkey, and Zambia. Of those, the IFRS Foundation said, 14 have set a target to fully adopt the ISSB standards, two are fully adopting its climate requirements, and one is partially incorporating the standards. Of the snapshot jurisdictions, 12 have published standards that fully align with ISSB Standards or that align with the standards; three have proposed standards incorporating many of the ISSB standards, and one is considering use of the ISSB Standards.

Greenwashing

NAD concludes that many environmental claims by a boxed water company are supported. Ruling in a challenge brought by the International Bottled Water Association (IBWA), the Better Business Bureau’s National Advertising Division (NAD) has concluded that while some environmental claims made by the Boxed Water is Better company should be modified or discontinued, many of its sustainability claims were supported. Boxed Water is Better sells purified water in plant-based cartons, marketing its packaging as “100% Recyclable” and making an array of claims about the environmental benefits of its packaging and its business activities. IBWA argued that Boxed Water is Better’s recyclability and tree planting statements, as well as certain environmental impact claims, were unsupported. In early June, NAD concluded that Boxed Water is Better “provided a reasonable basis” for such environmental claims as “Boxed Water is better than plastic,” “Boxed Water is better than aluminum,” and “Compared to single-use plastic bottles and canned water, our plant-based cartons have a lower environmental impact throughout their lifecycle.” NAD determined, however, that Boxed Water is Better was unable to reasonably convey the accuracy of its statements that its cartons are made with 100 percent plant-based materials and that they are biodegradable. NAD stated, “During the proceeding, Boxed Water is Better voluntarily agreed to modify certain environmental comparison claims and permanently discontinue certain comparative environmental claims.” NAD, a division of the Better Business Bureau, was established by the US advertising industry in 1971 as part of its system of independent self-regulation. Also part of that system is the National Advertising Review Board, the BBB’s appellate-level body. The IBWA has indicated that it will appeal NAD’s decision to the National Advertising Review Board.

Canadian Competition Bureau releases much anticipated guidance on greenwashing provisions. Following extensive consultation, the Competition Bureau has published the Environmental Claims and the Competition Act providing guidance to businesses. The Guidelines follow sweeping amendments to the Competition Act passed in June 2024. The Guidelines provide clarity and insight for businesses and stakeholders. See our alert.

Sustainability: Regulatory

Bill seeking to end California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard amendments fails. Early this month, the California Assembly voted down SB 2, which sought to block amendments to the state’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) from going into effect. The LCFS requires fuels sold in California to meet its carbon intensity standards and become progressively less carbon intensive in each annual compliance period. It has been in effect since January 1, 2011. In November 2024, the California Air Resources Board (CARB), which oversees the LCFS, proposed extensive amendments to the standard as part of CARB’s effort to “further incentivize cleaner fuels and cut pollution in a cost-effective manner.” Those amendments have come under attack, with Republican legislators charging that they would result in dramatically higher prices at the pump and environmental organizations charging that they are counterproductive and would hamper the transition to net zero. Under AB 1279, the California Climate Crisis Act, the state must cut its GHG emissions and reach net zero by 2045. As CARB observes, “Transportation is the single largest source of CO2 in California,” making the carbon intensity of fuels key to reaching the state’s emissions targets. The Office of Administrative Law (OAL) rejected an earlier version of the amendments as needing further clarification. If OAL approves the current draft, the failure of SB 2 means the amendments will likely take effect by July 1, 2025, but it could be later if the OAL again rejects. And even without the amendments, California’s LCFS may face renewed opposition from the federal government, which has targeted state climate programs since the new Administration took office.

New York: Climate, EPR bills fail. New York’s legislature has failed to pass SB S3456, the Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act. The bill, modeled on California’s SB 253, would have required businesses with more than $1 billion in total annual revenue that are doing business in New York state to annually disclose their GHG emissions. “Limited assurance” Scope 1 and 2 reporting would have been required to begin in 2027. This measure will likely be reintroduced in the next legislative session.; Three other state legislatures are considering their own versions: HB 3673 in Illinois, S 4117 in New Jersey, and SB 6092 in Washington state. A similar bill in Colorado, HB 25-1119, failed

Next, the New York Assembly adjourned on June 17 without voting on S 1464/ A 1749, its extended producer responsibility (EPR) bill, the Packaging Reduction and Recycling Infrastructure Act. That bill passed the state Senate on May 28, but despite a strong last-minute push from advocates, was not even placed on the Assembly’s debate list. S 1464 would create an EPR program for companies with more than $5 million in annual revenue; require companies to incrementally reduce the volume of packaging by 30 percent over 12 years; prohibit use of 17 named chemicals and materials in packaging; and prohibit the state from including chemical recycling technologies in the definition of recycling. It is expected that this bill, too, will be reintroduced in some form in the next legislative session.

CalRecycle postpones deadline for “compostable” labels. On June 11, California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) Director Zoe Heller advised the Biodegradable Products Institute (BPI) that she is granting BPI’s request to extend the deadline for AB 1201’s requirement that all packaging labeled “compostable” match federal biodegradable criteria. Enacted in 2021, AB 1201 addresses labeling requirements for products to be described as compostable or home compostable. The law was passed to tighten labeling specifications for plastic products. Under current federal definitions, most compostable plastics and packaging would not be eligible for a “compostable” label, but the USDA is currently reviewing its criteria for such labeling. BPI, a nonprofit that provides third-party verification of compostability, had requested the extension while this review moves forward. AB 1201 allows CalRecycle to grant an extension of up to five years for enforcement of its requirements. The deadline now moves from January 1, 2026, to June 30, 2027.

Maine law requires landowners to report participation in forest carbon offset programs. Maine has enacted HP 3 / LD 39, An Act to Require Landowners to Report Their Participation in a Forest Carbon Program or Project. The goal of the legislation is to give the state a more thorough understanding of how much land in Maine is enrolled in carbon credit programs and how that will impact the state’s GHG accounting. Landowners who are participating in the forest carbon credit market will be required to annually report key data, such as date of enrollment and total enrolled acreage, to the state. Maine is aiming to reach net-zero by 2045 and regards forest carbon as an important way to offset its emissions, but attaining that goal could be more complicated if such credits are sold away to offset emissions in other parts of the world. A similar law in New Hampshire went into effect last year.

EPA reporting deadline on unpublished chemical data is pushed to next year. The EPA has announced it is moving the deadline for reporting unpublished health and safety data concerning 16 chemicals used in manufacturing and in household products to next year. A rule finalized under the Toxic Substances Control Act in December 2024 requires importers and manufacturers of the chemicals to submit unpublished information to the EPA by March 13, 2025. The EPA has now moved that deadline to May 22, 2026.

EPA reconsidering ban on chrysotile asbestos. In a court filing on June 16, the EPA indicated that the Trump Administration intends to review the ban on chrysotile asbestos, the last type of asbestos still allowed to be used in the US. Chrysotile asbestos is used to manufacture roofing materials, chlorine, cement, and a variety of automotive parts. In 2024, the EPA adopted a rule banning its use, manufacture, and import. While some manufacturers were given up to 12 years to phase out its use, manufacturers of some products, such as automotive brakes, were given six months to eliminate it. A number of trade groups led by the Texas Chemistry Council sued the EPA. The June 16 filing by the EPA before the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit asked the court to “hold this case in abeyance for six months, as EPA will conduct a rulemaking to reassess the challenged rule…. through notice-and-comment rulemaking.” The court filing states that the EPA intends to delay the overall ban while it reconsiders the rule, a process that could take at least two and a half years. More than 70 countries ban the use of asbestos.

Climate.gov staff eliminated. The ten staffers who create content for and maintain the NOAA website climate.gov – reportedly one of the world’s most popular climate data websites – have been terminated. No new content will appear on the site starting on July 1. Climate.gov is known for its frequently updated reports, maps, and graphics providing timely scientific data that, its website states, aims to provide people with “information to help them understand climate and make decisions on how to manage climate-related risks and opportunities.” It is widely regarded as a trusted source for such aspects of climate science as changing weather patterns, wildfire smoke, tornado season, drought conditions, GHGs, and agricultural best practices. At this writing, the site redirects visitors to this page, with a message indicating that “Future research products previously housed under Climate.gov will be available at NOAA.gov/climate and its affiliate websites.”

UN Ocean Conference: High Seas Treaty close to ratification. “The deep sea cannot become the Wild West,” UN Secretary-General António Guterres stated as he launched the third United Nations Ocean Conference on June 9 in Nice. The conference focused on three objectives: conserving marine biodiversity, ending harmful fisheries subsidies, and advancing the 30 x 30 target – protecting 30 percent of the world’s oceans by 2030. A top priority was achieving the 60 ratifications that will bring into force the BBNJ Agreement, an accord to safeguard marine ecosystems in international waters sometimes nicknamed the High Seas Treaty and formally known as the Agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction. At this writing, 50 countries have ratified the BBNJ Agreement, and French President Emmanuel Macron predicted on June 11 that further ratifications were on track so that “this treaty will be able to enter into force on January 1 of next year, which means we would finally have an international framework to regulate and administer the high seas.” Among the achievements of this conference: the EU pledged €1 billion to support ocean conservation and sustainable fishing; the UN and an array of global agencies launched One Ocean Finance to mobilize capital in support of ocean health, economic opportunity, and coastal resilience; a new 37-country coalition, led by Panama and Canada, launched the High Ambition Coalition for a Quiet Ocean; several countries joined the Tuna Transparency Pledge; and 95 countries issued a declaration calling for a binding global plastics treaty. Notably, while thousands of scientists from around the world participated in the conference, among them more than 100 US scientists from private institutions, scientists from US federal agencies such as NOAA and NASA were reportedly not allowed to attend, nor was there an official US delegation. President Trump’s April Executive Order, Unleashing America’s Offshore Critical Minerals and Resources, aims to expedite the permit process for deep-sea mining beyond US jurisdiction.

Sustainability: Litigation

Suit seeks to overturn EO that opens a marine national monument to commercial fishing. In late May, Kāpaʻa, the Conservation Council for Hawai‘i, and the Center for Biological Diversity filed suit in the US District Court for the District of Hawaii against the Trump Administration seeking to overturn President Trump’s April 22 proclamation Unleashing American Commercial Fishing in the Pacific. That proclamation sought to open the Pacific Islands Heritage Marine National Monument – referred to in the proclamation by its former name, the Pacific Remote Islands Marine National Monument – to commercial fishing by US-flagged vessels. The monument, established by President George Bush in 2009 and expanded by President Barack Obama in 2014, protects 490,000 square miles of Pacific Ocean; seven national wildlife refuges are within its boundaries. On April 23, the US National Marine Fisheries Service informed fishing permit holders that they could begin commercial operations within the monument’s boundaries, although federal regulations banning such operations had not yet been amended. Within three days, several commercial longline vessels had begun operations within the monument’s borders. The suit calls on the court to, among other things, “issue injunctive relief barring implementation of President Trump’s unlawful Proclamation.” The suit is Kāpa‘A, Conservation Council or Hawai‘I, and Center for Biological Diversity v. Donald Trump.

Trump signs measures overturning California Clean Air Act waivers; California sues. On June 12, President Trump signed three Congressional resolutions that collectively aim to overturn California’s Clean Air Act waivers under the Congressional Review Act (CRA). The legal effect of those resolutions is uncertain: after the House voted on the measures, both the Government Accountability Office and the Senate Parliamentarian concluded that the CAA waivers may not be withdrawn using the CRA process. Despite those opinions, the Senate proceeded with votes adopting the resolutions.

The same day President Trump signed the resolutions, the state of California filed suit against him and EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, asserting that Congress lacks authority to revoke the waivers under the Congressional Review Act, and thus the purported revocation is unlawful. Joining California in the lawsuit are ten other states: Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington. Also on June 12, California Governor Gavin Newsom issued Executive Order N-27-25, whereunder “the State of California reaffirms its commitment to accelerate the deployment of zero-emission technologies. ” The Governor’s EO, among other things, directs the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to “develop and propose an Advanced Clean Cars III regulation consistent with State and federal law, that reduces greenhouse gas, criteria air pollutants, and toxic emissions from . . . vehicles” and directs CARB and other state agencies to “immediately assess additional actions to advance progress on light-, medium-, and heavy-duty zero-emission vehicle adoption in California.”

Supreme Court reverses lower court ruling on a challenge to California Clean Air Act waivers. In a 7-2 ruling, the US Supreme Court has ruled that a legal challenge to California’s standards for vehicle emissions and electric cars should not have been dismissed last year by the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. The case will return to the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Please be on the lookout for our coming alert on this decision.

Supreme Court aims to provide predictability by narrowing the scope of NEPA review. The Supreme Court’s ruling in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County marks a significant change in how federal agencies must conduct environmental project reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act. See our alert.

Supply chain integrity

South Korea legislature considers bill that would impose mandatory human rights and environmental due diligence obligations on companies. The Act on the Protection of Human Rights and the Environment for Sustainable Business Management – which, if enacted, would be the first mandatory human rights due diligence law in Asia – has been reintroduced in South Korea’s National Assembly. The proposed law, nicknamed the Corporate Human Rights and Environmental Due Diligence Act, would prohibit domestic or foreign business activities that violate human rights or cause environmental harm and would require in-scope companies operating in South Korea to identify, address, and report potential violations across their global supply chains. It would impose significant requirements on in-scope companies, such as requiring them to establish a human rights policy; an easily accessible, confidential grievance mechanism; and a board committee to oversee the company’s human rights and environmental-related obligations. Companies would also be required to prepare an annual due diligence plan and report it to the board. Companies in scope are primarily those with more than 500 employees or annual revenue exceeding KRW 200 billion (US$150 million); however, under the bill’s present form, certain due diligence provisions could trigger due diligence requirements for any companies registered in South Korea if their business activities, or those of any entities in their supply chain, involve child labor, genocide, or war crimes. This bill is at the start of the legislative process and has been posted for public comment. Reportedly, a similar measure will be introduced to Thailand’s legislature later this year. Japan has a human rights due diligence law in place, but its guidelines are not mandatory.

UNICEF and ILO report on child labor. A report released on June 11 by UNICEF and the International Labor Organization (ILO) finds that, this year, 138 million children around the world are involved in child labor, among them 54 million children engaged in hazardous work that is likely to jeopardize their health, safety, or development. The report, Child Labour: Global estimates 2024, trends and the road forward, observes that these figures represent a positive trend – in 2020, 160 million children worldwide were involved in child labor, and in 2000, that figure was 246 million. The sector with the largest number of child laborers is agriculture, with 61 percent of all child laborers. Other significant areas: the service sector, with 27 percent, and industry, such as factory work and mining, with 13 percent of child laborers.

Energy and natural resources

EPA proposes slashing regulatory limits on power plant emissions. Calling it a “historic day,” on June 11 EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced proposed changes that would dismantle regulatory limits on emissions from fossil fuel-burning power plants. In his comments, Zeldin once again described the concept of climate change as a “cult” and stated that the regulatory changes would help “pave the way for American energy dominance.” The proposed changes, titled Repeal of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards for Fossil Fuel-Fired Electric Generating Units, encompass two alternative proposals. The first would repeal all carbon pollution standards for GHG emissions from power plants via “a finding that GHG emissions from fossil fuel-fired power plants do not contribute significantly to dangerous air pollution.” The second of the proposed rules would repeal a key subset of innovative carbon pollution standards, such as the requirement to capture and sequester CO2 emissions. In its reporting on the proposed changes, the New York Times noted that recent data on the EPA’s website and other studies contrast with Zeldin’s comments and indicate that the power sector is a significant emitter of GHGs in the US. The proposed rule was posted by EPA on June 17.

Also on June 11, EPA announced a proposed rule that would repeal the 2024 Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS). The proposal would remove the requirement for coal-burning plants to install continuous emissions monitoring systems and comply with tough particulate matter standards, as well as the requirement for lignite-fired plants to comply with tougher standards for mercury emissions. MATS requirements put in place in 2012 are not affected by the proposal and would remain in force. The comment period on these proposals closes on August 11, and the EPA has stated it intends to finalize these rules this year.  

US government announces intent to fund nuclear energy projects. The Trump Administration recently issued four Executive Orders focused on nuclear technologies that, collectively, aim to “unleash the domestic nuclear base.” In addition to streamlining regulatory requirements and environmental reviews, the EOs discuss funding opportunities for companies performing work in the nuclear energy sector, including through procurement contracts, grants, pilot programs, and loans. This alert provides an overview of the ways companies may pursue those opportunities.

Court turns away challenge to Hague’s fossil fuel ad ban. A Dutch court has upheld the legality of The Hague’s so-called fossil fuel ad ban. The city’s first-in-the-world ban, which went into force on January 1, 2025, forbids advertising in the media, on billboards, in bus shelters, and on transport that promotes the use of fossil fuels – including advertising promoting automobiles, cruises, and commercial air travel. Litigation brought by a trade association and a travel agency sought to overturn the law, arguing that it violates their rights to freedom of expression and freedom of entrepreneurship. The District Court of The Hague rejected their arguments, concluding that the ban is in the public interest. Similar bans have recently been considered by other cities around the world, among them Amsterdam, Edinburgh, and Sydney. On June 24, Pablo Bustinduy, Spain’s Minister for Social Rights, Consumer Affairs, and the 2030 Agenda, announced the introduction of a draft bill that would ban any type of advertising for energy products by fossil fuel companies in Spain unless the product is blended with a non-fossil fuel.

Sustainability in financial services

Agreement reached in EU over Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism. On June 19, EU legislators announced an agreement on one aspect of Omnibus I – reforms to reporting requirements under the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM). Under the agreement, imports of up to 50 tonnes per importer per year will not be subject to CBAM reporting rules, exempting about 90 percent of the companies that fall under CBAM’s original scope – that is, most small and medium-sized business and individuals. The European council’s press release on the agreement noted that the changes alleviate compliance obligations for most business “without compromising” CBAM’s climate goals: 99 percent of emissions from the most carbon intensive imports – such as iron, steel, cement, fertilizer, and aluminum – will remain in scope. CBAM taxes the CO2 emitted by imports into the EU.

SEC formally withdraws proposed ESG Rule. The SEC has formally withdrawn 14 proposed rules introduced between 2020 and 2023, among them Enhanced Disclosures by Certain Investment Advisers and Investment Companies About Environmental, Social, and Governance Investment Practices. That rule, sometimes nicknamed the ESG Rule or the Anti-Greenwashing Rule, would have required registered investment advisers, certain advisers that are exempt from registration, registered investment companies, and business development companies “to provide additional information regarding their environmental, social, and governance investment practices.”

Oregon aims to codify net zero action plan in its public employees retirement system investments. The Climate Resilience Investment Act, HB 2081, which would codify the Oregon State Treasury’s net zero action plan for the state’s Public Employees Retirement System (PERS), has been passed by the state Senate. State Treasurer Elizabeth Steiner describes the bill as “a clean energy investment law, not a divestment mandate,” that “protects employee retirement funds by enabling Treasury’s investments to take full advantage of the opportunities the clean energy transition creates.” HB 2081 would not require PERS to divest from carbon-intensive investments; rather, it aims to lower the carbon intensity of the fund’s investments by requiring the Treasury and the Oregon Investment Council to strike a balance between PERS’s fossil fuel-related holdings and investments that reduce GHG emissions and participate in the energy transition, with the overall goal of a portfolio of net-zero emissions by 2050. HB 2081 was endorsed by major labor unions and passed both the House and Senate with bipartisan support. At this writing, it is on Governor Tina Kotek’s desk.

Fed terminates four internal climate risk-oriented committees. The Federal Reserve has reportedly terminated four internal committees that focused on institutional capacity regarding climate risk. The committees – the Climate Committee on Economic Activity, Climate Data Committee, Financial Stability Climate Committee, and Supervision Climate Committee – were scrapped in March this year; the development was only reported in late May. When the Supervision Climate Committee and the Financial Stability Climate Committee were first created in 2021, then Fed Vice Chair Lael Brainard said their purpose was to build “institutional capacity and knowledge” about climate risks.

Basel Committee issues framework for banks to disclose climate risks. The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision’s much-anticipated framework on banks’ disclosures of climate-related risks has been released, and, as the framework states, “The Committee has agreed this framework will be voluntary in nature, with jurisdictions to consider whether to implement it domestically.” The Committee – the banking industry’s global standard and policy setter – launched its initial consultation on the framework in 2023, announcing at the time that it would take a “holistic approach to address climate-related financial risks to the global banking system” and that through the consultation process, it would determine which disclosure elements “would be mandatory and which subject to national discretion.” Reportedly, however, this year the US has pressed the Committee to moderate its stance. The framework issued this month reflects that, dialing back a number of key elements in addition to making reporting voluntary. For instance, the original consultation proposal would have required banks to report emissions “regardless of materiality assessment”; under the published framework, banks should report their emissions only if they consider them to be material. Further, banks would not need to report on their “facilitated emissions” – the GHG emissions arising from their capital markets activities. In a statement, the Committee said “that the accuracy, consistency and quality of climate-related data are evolving, and therefore it is necessary to incorporate a reasonable level of flexibility into the final framework.” The Basel Committee is composed of banking regulators and central bankers from the G20 economies and other countries.

ECB reports 38% fall in carbon intensity of its corporate bond portfolio. In its third annual climate-related financial disclosures, issued on June 17, the European Central Bank (ECB) reports that the carbon intensity of its corporate bond portfolio fell 38 percent in the period from 2021 to 2024 – a decline from 266 to 165 tonnes of CO2 equivalent per million euros invested. This change was achieved through external emission reductions by issuers as well as internal policy shifts at the ECB. Furthermore, aiming to support the goals of the Paris Agreement, the ECB also disclosed new climate targets for two of its programs, the Pandemic Emergency Purchase Programme and Asset Purchase Programme, striving to reduce the carbon intensity generated through those programs by an average of 7 percent a year. The ECB’s corporate bond portfolio is valued at €331 billion.

World Bank ends its 12-year ban on financing nuclear infrastructure projects. The World Bank has ended its 12-year-long ban on financing nuclear energy projects in developing countries. The move, the Bank said on June 11, realigns its energy strategy at a time when electricity demand in developing nations is expected to double over the coming decade. The Bank is known for providing low-interest loans for infrastructure development. World Bank President Ajay Banga stated that annual investment in energy infrastructure in developing countries will need to rise sharply to meet this growing need - from the current $280 billion to $630 billion. The Bank, he said, will collaborate with the International Atomic Energy Agency to enhance advisory services on nuclear non-proliferation, safety and regulatory frameworks, supporting the extension of existing nuclear reactors’ life, and accelerate the "potential of Small Modular Reactors." Banga added that the Bank will still work to finance the retirement of coal-burning power plants and carbon capture projects. Notably, the Bank’s board members are still trying to come to agreement about financing of upstream natural gas projects.

Australia: Sustainable Finance Taxonomy. The Australian Sustainable Finance Institute (ASFI) has released its sustainable finance taxonomy. A keystone in Australia’s Sustainable Finance Roadmap, the voluntary classification system guides financial institutions in categorizing their green and transition-focused economic activities. The taxonomy, ASFI states, “will enable market participants to understand how certain economic activities and investments align with, or contribute to, climate and sustainability outcomes, thereby providing a robust basis to inform capital allocation decisions.” In this first phase, six emissions-intensive sectors are covered: Agriculture and Land, Minerals, Mining and Metals, Manufacturing and Industry, Electricity Generation and Supply, Construction and Buildings, and Transport. Next up: a pilot program in which several prominent financial institutions test the system through an array of use case scenarios.

India rolls out Framework for Environment, Social and Governance Debt Securities. The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has rolled out its Framework for Environment, Social and Governance Debt Securities detailing regulatory requirements for issuing social, sustainability, and sustainability-linked bonds (SLBs). Under the framework, bonds may be described as SLBs only if they fund projects that align with recognized global standards or with principles set out by respected international organizations, like the International Capital Market Association’s ICMA Principles or the Climate Bonds Standard. The SLB framework requires certain disclosures both before and after issuance of the securities, including a requirement for independent third-party review. SEBI already addresses regulatory requirements for green bonds via a separate framework.

Calendar

Key global reporting deadlines

Click on each icon to learn more.

Coming events

• The UN’s 4th International Conference on Financing for Development  takes place June 30 – July 3 in Seville.
• INC 5.2, the second part of the UN Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on Plastic Pollution’s fifth session, takes place August 8 - 14 in Geneva.
• The 13th International Conference on Sustainable Development will take place September 10–11, 2025 in Rome.
• Climate Week Houston takes place September 14 -19, 2025 in Houston, Texas.
• Climate Week NYC will take place September 21–28, 2025 in New York City.
• The 2025 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP 30) will be held November 10–21, 2025 in Belém.