Skip to content

menu

Reed Smith LLP logo
HomeAboutOur ServicesSubscribeTopicsContact
Search
Close

EHS Law Insights

Comment and analysis by Reed Smith lawyers on the latest developments in Environmental Health & Safety

SEC

Subscribe to SEC via RSS

The SEC’s proposed climate change rule: impact on private companies

By Megan Haines, Todd O. Maiden, Ben H. Patton & Jennifer A. Smokelin on 24 March 2022

The Securities and Exchange Commission recently proposed amendments to their existing disclosure policy that would require publicly traded corporations to disclose more information regarding climate change related risks, and how those risks may impact the company’s business and outlook (read, “bottom line and stock value”).  While the SEC regulates publicly traded corporations, privately held companies need to also track these proposed rule amendments:

  • The SEC has been requiring reporting on climate change / greenhouse gas emission information since 2010, so this overall concept is not new. However, the proposed disclosures would expand these obligation by requiring the publicly traded corporation to disclose (among other things):
    • The company’s process for identifying, managing, measuring and managing climate change risks;
    • If the company uses (“best,” “worst” and “most-likely” case) scenarios to assess risk, what assumptions and analytical choices the company uses to reach these outcomes;
    • The Company’s “direct” and “indirect” emissions (the latter, from purchased electricity or other forms of energy); and, of particular significance; and – possibly of greatest significance,
    • The Company’s indirect emissions from upstream and downstream activities.

This last bullet is far-reaching and likely to be controversial due to its impact on upstream privately held companies that sell products or services to publicly traded companies.  Should this proposal be promulgated:

  • Publicly traded companies will be obliged to make heightened demands upon their upstream vendors and suppliers to measure and disclose information re carbon dioxide (or other greenhouse gas) emissions associated with the sourcing, manufacture and transport of products to the SEC-regulated customer;
  • Commercial counter-parties should anticipate new terms in contracts that would require such disclosures from private companies – including possibly indemnification for misstatements about carbon emissions;
  • Small and medium-sized enterprise are likely not going to have in-house capabilities to perform such assessments, so an increased potential for out-sourcing this would be necessary if vendors want to remain on their customers’ “preferred provider” lists.

Continue Reading The SEC’s proposed climate change rule: impact on private companies

Posted in Emerging Legislation and Regulation, Environmental, Social & Governance

Understanding the Scope of the SEC’s Proposed Scope 3 Emissions Reporting Mandate

By Megan Haines, Todd O. Maiden, Peter Malyshev, Jonathan Marcus, Ben H. Patton, Jennifer A. Smokelin, Randa M. Lewis & Casey J. Snyder on 24 March 2022

On March 21, 2022, the U.S. Securities Exchange Commission (“SEC”) approved and released a proposed rulemaking package (the “Proposed Rule”) that would enact sweeping changes to climate-related disclosures.  One key component of the Proposed Rule is a reporting requirement for certain Scope 3 emissions.

What are Scope 3 Emissions

Scope 3 emissions are “all other indirect emissions not accounted for in Scope 2 emissions.”  These emissions relate to emissions from sources outside a company’s control – for example, Scope 1 emissions are direct emissions from sources owned or controlled by a company, and Scope 2 emissions are emissions primarily resulting from the generation of electricity consumed by the company.  While companies generally can calculate Scope 1 and 2 emissions without significant difficulty, estimating Scope 3 emissions presents additional challenges, as Scope 3 emissions occur from other entities not owned or controlled by the company that serve the company’s value chain.

Who Must Report

The Proposed Rule requires non-smaller-reporting-company (“SRC”) registrants to disclose Scope 3 emissions and intensity: (i) if material or (ii) if the registrant set a GHG emissions reduction target or goal that includes Scope 3 emissions.  Thus, the Proposed Rule does not require reporting of all Scope 3 emissions, and a company’s obligation to report would depend on company-specific factors, discussed below.

First, the Proposed Rule exempts SRCs from disclosing Scope 3 emissions.  The SEC defines SRCs as an issuer that is not an investment company, an asset-backed issuer, or a majority-owned subsidiary of a parent that is not a smaller reporting company and that: (1) had a public float of less than $250 million; or (2) had annual revenues of less than $100 million and either: (i) no public float; or (ii) a public float of less than $700 million.[1]

Second, the Proposed Rule applies a materiality qualifier to Scope 3 emissions that companies must report.  SEC regulations and Supreme Court precedent define “material” emission as emissions with a “substantial likelihood that a reasonable investor would consider them important when making an investment or voting decision.”[2]  The SEC provides several examples of material Scope 3 emissions.  Generally, the SEC advises that Scope 3 emissions may be material where they assist investors to understand transaction risks.  Companies with significant Scope 3 emissions could face disruptions in cash flow and business models to the extent new laws or policies encourage changes to products, suppliers, distributors, or other commercial providers in a company’s value chain.  Moreover, consumer demand could influence a shift to less carbon-intensive products and services.  Conversely, companies sourcing materials and products with lower emissions compared to competitors may see cost savings and higher demand from consumers.  Thus, the SEC’s materiality approach is quite broad and requires companies to understand their company’s value, risks, and opportunities in deciding whether to  report Scope 3 emissions.

Third, even if Scope 3 emissions do not represent material emissions, a company must report Scope 3 emissions if it adopted emissions targets.  The Proposed Rule requires a company to disclose whether its emissions targets include Scope 3 emissions, and if they do, report such emissions.  This requirement allows investors to track a company’s compliance with its emissions targets and gauge what potential additional investments a company might need to implement to meet its targets.Continue Reading Understanding the Scope of the SEC’s Proposed Scope 3 Emissions Reporting Mandate

Posted in Emerging Legislation and Regulation, Environmental, Social & Governance

Signs of the times: Environmental related ESG offerings

By Jennifer A. Smokelin, Megan Haines, Daniella D. Landers, Todd O. Maiden & Ben H. Patton on 3 August 2021

A number of signs point to the fact that public companies should expect increased scrutiny on whether their environmental-related ESG offerings, practices and controls are consistent with their disclosures, claims and marketing material.

SIGN #1: The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC or Commission) announced that New Jersey Attorney General Gurbir Grewal will become the next…

Posted in Emerging Legislation and Regulation, Environmental, Social & Governance, Incident Response

Environmental, Social and Governance Legislation in the Biden Era: The Climate Risk Disclosure Act of 2021

By Todd O. Maiden, Jennifer A. Smokelin, Eric Schmoll & Sara M. Eddy on 8 July 2021

An example of a new trend towards recognizing “Environmental, Social and Governance” (“ESG”) impacts from business operations is the recently introduced Climate Risk Disclosure Act of 2021 (“the Act”).  As currently drafted, the Act would require significant new public disclosures from publicly traded companies regarding financial risks to their operations and profitability from climate change (e.g., air emissions, risks to facilities from storms, lending and insurance costs, etc.).  Such disclosures could also indirectly impact non-publicly traded companies (domestic or foreign) who provide goods and services to publicly traded companies.

ESG is a topic increasingly accepted as central to legal, corporate and financial risk assessment and strategy for business leaders. The environmental stewardship aspect of ESG can be evaluated in part by measuring a company’s greenhouse gas emissions, energy efficiency and overall sustainability. Social values often consider a company’s relationship with its employees, diversity and inclusion policies, labor standards, and contributions to the communities in which it operates. Lastly, the governance facet of ESG considers a company’s leadership, internal structure, and core values.

Board-level executives across industries are grappling with how to address and leverage ESG related issues to both mitigate risks as well as create long-term value for their organizations. ESG is a complex topic attracting comment from various stakeholders including shareholders, customers, suppliers, financial lenders and employees. We are now seeing more ESG initiatives in legislation, as described below.Continue Reading Environmental, Social and Governance Legislation in the Biden Era: The Climate Risk Disclosure Act of 2021

Posted in Emerging Legislation and Regulation, Environmental, Social & Governance, Incident Response, Regulatory Compliance

EHS Law Insights

View Our Network of Blogs
Published by
Reed Smith LLP logo
RSS Facebook LinkedIn YouTube
Privacy PolicyDisclaimer

About Our Firm

At Reed Smith, everything we do is to apply our global experience in law to drive progress for our clients, for ourselves and for our communities. We are focused on outcomes, are highly collaborative and have deep industry insight. When combined with our local market knowledge and innovative mindset, this allows us to anticipate and address the needs of our clients and help them achieve their goals.

Our team of 3,000 people (including more than 1,700 lawyers) operate across 31 offices in the United States, Europe, the Middle East and Asia.

Read More...

Topics

Archives

Copyright © 2025, Reed Smith LLP. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo