A] Prelude
For more information on pension systems, risk and coverage, feel free to visit our dedicated webpages:
• https://expatpensionholland.nl/usa-expat-pensions
• https://expatpensionholland.nl/global-pillars-systems
• https://expatpensionholland.nl/global-investments-risks-0
• https://expatpensionholland.nl/global-social-security-coverage
For even more information about this topic feel free to visit the following external sites:
• https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2026-49-sec-proposes-rescission-climate-related-disclosure-rules
• https://www.klgates.com/thought-leadership/SEC-Proposes-to-Rescind-Climate-Disclosure-Rules-7-7-2026
B] The Issue
Several large public pension funds filed comments opposing the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) proposal to rescind its 2024 climate-risk disclosure rule. They wrote that eliminating standardized greenhouse gas emissions reporting would increase costs for investors and reduce the quality of information available for investment decisions.
C] The Details
The SEC proposed rescinding the rule on May 29, 2026, and the public comment period ended on Aug. 3. SEC Chair Paul Atkins said the rule was “a dramatic overreach of the Commission’s statutory authority and, independently, unsound as a matter of policy.”
The California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS), the nation’s largest public pension fund with $637.1 billion in assets, said that rescinding the rule would “fundamentally alter the cost-benefit equation by shifting the financial burden directly onto investors.” It also said that eliminating a single federal standard would leave companies and investors navigating a patchwork of state disclosure requirements.
The pension systems overseen by the New York City and Maryland comptrollers also opposed the proposal. New York City Comptroller Mark Levine (D) said the proposal would make climate-risk analysis “more costly, less reliable, and less comparable across companies.” Seattle’s public employee retirement system, Sweden’s AP7, and Canada’s University Pension Plan Ontario also submitted comments opposing the proposal.
D] Why does it matter?
The comments illustrate that support for standardized climate disclosures extends beyond environmental organizations to include some of the world’s largest institutional investors. Rather than arguing the rule advances environmental policy, the pension funds said consistent disclosures help investors assess financial risk and fulfill their fiduciary duty to beneficiaries.
University Pension Plan Ontario said rescission would move the U.S. “further away from the emerging global baseline for climate-related financial disclosure.”
E] What’s the background?
The SEC initially proposed climate disclosure requirements on March 21, 2022, under then-Chair Gary Gensler. On March 6, 2024, the SEC commissioners voted 3–2 along party lines to adopt the rule. The rule immediately faced multiple legal challenges, and the SEC paused its implementation while the litigation proceeded before the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.
After Trump took office in January 2025, the SEC reversed course. Acting Chair Mark Uyeda asked the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals to delay oral arguments while the agency reconsidered its position. On March 27, 2025, the SEC voted to end its defense of the rule. In September 2025, the Eighth Circuit ordered the SEC to formally rescind, repeal, modify, or resume defending the rule.
(Sources: newsballotpedia/EPH)