SEC Proposes to Rescind Climate-Related Disclosure Rules

On May 29, 2026, the SEC proposed to rescind its climate-related disclosure rules adopted in March 2024 (Climate Disclosure Rules) that would have required public companies to provide certain climate-related information in their registration statements and annual reports (Rescission Proposal).¹ The Rescission Proposal formalizes the SEC’s opposition to the previous administration’s climate-disclosure rulemaking and reflects its view that the agency focus on “returning to its core mandate, in line with its legal authority, and restoring a materiality-focused approach to securities regulation.”²

Background

The SEC approved the Climate Disclosure Rules by a 3-2 vote on March 6, 2024, mandating highly specific and granular disclosure from virtually all public companies about climate-related matters such as greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, management of climate-related risks and the financial statement effects of severe weather events.³

The Climate Disclosure Rules came under immediate pressure, with a panel of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals issuing a temporary stay of the rules on March 15, 2024. On April 4, 2024, the SEC stayed the effectiveness of the Climate Disclosure Rules pending completion of consolidated litigation in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, and on March 27, 2025, the SEC voted to end its judicial defense of the Climate Disclosure Rules.⁴ On September 12, 2025, the Eighth Circuit court issued an order holding the consolidated petitions for review in abeyance until such time as the SEC either reconsidered the Climate Disclosure Rules by notice-and-comment rulemaking or renewed its defense of them. The Rescission Proposal represents the SEC’s formal response to that order.

The Rescission Proposal

The SEC is proposing to rescind the Climate Disclosure Rules in their entirety on the primary basis that they exceed the scope of the SEC’s statutory authority. The SEC has also articulated what it describes as “independent, compelling policy reasons” to rescind the Climate Disclosure Rules, including that they:

• Are unnecessary and inconsistent with a registrant-specific, materiality-based approach to disclosure that best serves the interests of registrants and investors.
• Stray well beyond the policy concerns of the federal securities laws.
• Impose substantial costs on public companies and their shareholders that are not justified by the informational benefits they may provide to some investors. 
• Are at odds with the SEC’s policy objectives of facilitating capital formation and promoting public company status.

Chairman Paul S. Atkins expressed the SEC’s overarching philosophy, stating that “SEC disclosure obligations should comply with the Commission’s statutory authority, be guided by materiality as the North Star, avoid the practical effect of dictating corporate behavior and be imposed only when the expected benefits justify the likely costs and burdens.”

Comment Period

The public comment period will remain open for 60 days following the publication of the proposing release in the Federal Register. Public companies, investment advisers, registered investment companies and other affected market participants should consider whether to submit comments during this period.

Implications for Registrants

The Rescission Proposal, if finalized, would eliminate all proposed obligations under the Climate Disclosure Rules, including the following requirements:

• Mandated disclosure of material climate-related risks and their impact on strategy, business model and outlook;
• Board and management oversight of climate-related risks;
• GHG Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions disclosure;
• Attestation requirements for emissions disclosures; and
• Financial statement disclosures regarding the effects of severe weather events and other natural conditions.

Registrants that have begun investing in compliance infrastructure in order to comply with the Climate Disclosure Rules should assess how the Rescission Proposal affects their current and planned compliance efforts. Companies should also remain mindful that other jurisdictional climate disclosure laws, such as California’s Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act and the European Union's Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive, to the extent applicable, remain in effect and may independently impose comparable or broader obligations.⁵

Footnotes

1. SEC Release Nos. 33-11421; 34-105572, “Rescission of Climate-Related Disclosure Rules,” File No. S7-2026-19, available here.
2. “SEC Proposes Rescission of Climate-Related Disclosure Rules,” May 29, 2026, available here.
3. For a detailed summary, see Dechert OnPoint, “SEC Adopts Final, Comprehensive Climate Disclosure Rules,” March 20, 2024, available here.
4. See Dechert OnPoint, “Post-Election Regulatory Changes to Corporate Governance Mirror Broader Political Shift,” February 20, 2025, available here, for further background details.
   
5. California’s Climate-Related Financial Risk Act is currently paused; see Dechert OnPoint, “Enforcement of California Climate Disclosure Law Paused,” November 20, 2025, available here.