- Chief Compliance Officer and VP of Legal Affairs, Arrow Electronics
By 
Aaron Nicodemus2023-02-03T17:08:00
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is reportedly considering pulling back on key elements of its climate-related disclosure rule following pushback from investors, companies, and the public.
The SEC is still planning to finalize its sweeping mandate this year requiring public companies issue climate-related disclosures in their financial statements. Those disclosures would attempt to quantify the costs to their business caused by climate-related events like floods, fires, and drought as well the effect of environmental regulations on their bottom line. The regulator is also eyeing public companies disclose greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions their business generates.
Among changes being considered, according to a report from the Wall Street Journal on Friday, is easing of one of the more controversial details of the proposed rule: the bright-line test that if climate-related costs and risks affect more than 1 percent of a line item in a financial report, those costs and risks must be disclosed.
THIS IS MEMBERS-ONLY CONTENT. To continue reading, choose one of the options below.
News and analysis for the well-informed compliance or audit exec.
Annual Membership best value
Subscribe now for $365
Our lowest price ($1 per day) for one year.
Hester Peirce of the Securities and Exchange Commission argued materiality-based standards—not environmental, social, and governance standards—best suit investors’ needs during a recent speech.
Companies are working on plans to reduce their carbon emissions. The popularity of environmental credits has grown as a way for companies to meet their emission reduction targets.
Smaller reporting companies should, by default, have delayed compliance dates of at least one year on any new disclosure rule, SEC Commissioner Mark Uyeda said in a recent speech.
The U.S. Supreme Court extended the statute of limitations for businesses attempting to challenge some federal regulations, allowing regulated entities a longer timeline to appeal a decision.
The Supreme Court of the United States overturned a long-held precedent in which courts deferred to federal agencies in interpreting complex or ambiguous regulations–a decision that could make thousands of federal regulations more vulnerable to legal challenges.
Financial institutions would be required to conduct more thorough risk assessments on their anti-money laundering/countering the financing of terrorism programs under a new rule proposed by the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network.
