June, 28 2023, 08:07am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Ginny Cleaveland, Deputy Press Secretary, Fossil-Free Finance, Sierra Club, ginny.cleaveland@sierraclub.org,
New Analysis Reveals Asset Managers' Complicity in Fossil Fuel Expansion
30 largest asset managers in Europe, US do not have sufficient policies to engage with companies
PARIS
Thirty of the largest asset managers in Europe and the US do not have sufficiently robust policies to encourage the companies in their portfolios to stop developing new fossil fuel projects. These are the findings of the 2023 analysis of asset managers’ climate action, published by Reclaim Finance, ReCommon, Sierra Club, The Sunrise Project and Urgewald (1).
- Read the report: “Who’s Managing Your Future? An Assessment of Asset Managers’ Climate Action”
- Read the blog: How the World’s Biggest Asset Managers are Driving the Climate Crisis
Using previously unpublished data, the 5 NGOs demonstrate that asset managers are breaching their climate commitments through their investments, particularly by purchasing bonds that have been issued recently by some of the biggest fossil fuel developers. The NGOs are urging the institutional clients of these asset managers, which include pension funds, to demand they urgently strengthen their policies.
For the third year, this report analyses the action taken by the 25 largest European and 5 largest American asset managers (2) to end support for oil and gas expansion, an essential first step for achieving international climate targets. This year, asset managers were assessed on three main indicators:
- Whether they have stopped purchasing new bonds issued by the biggest developers of new fossil fuel projects;
- Whether they set the expectation for the companies they invest in to end fossil fuel expansion (3);
- Whether they have sanctions in place in the case of non-compliance with this request.
"Asset managers continue to add fuel to the fire by buying the bonds from the worst fossil fuel polluters. Their policies are an inadequate response to the climate emergency. They should listen to the science and sanction companies that refuse to stop their devastating fossil fuel expansion plans. It is time for asset managers’ clients to challenge them on this issue and ask them to put in place robust policies to stop this scourge," said Lara Cuvelier, sustainable investment campaigner at Reclaim Finance.
The parent groups of the 30 asset managers have invested US$3.5 billion in bonds issued in the last 18 months by some 40 companies actively involved in fossil fuel expansion (4). At least 21 of the 30 asset managers were found to have invested in the latest bond issued by TotalEnergies, the world's 7th largest developer of new oil and gas supply projects, including the EACOP project (5). These figures are an underestimate because bond markets are notably opaque and investors seldom publish details of these transactions. This lack of transparency is even more problematic given that fossil fuel developers are increasingly seeking finance through the bond market (6).
Asset managers are able to invest in these bonds because of inadequate sectoral policies. The report reveals that while 4 asset managers have committed to stop purchasing new bonds from all companies developing coal projects (7), none have stopped new bond purchases from oil and gas developers. Just one asset manager, Ostrum AM (8), asks oil and gas companies to halt their expansion plans. None have systematic sanctions in place to encourage oil and gas developers to change, either through votes or investment restrictions.
"We need to pay more attention to the bond market when we think about how oil companies like BP and TotalEnergies raise capital for their devastating climate projects. Asset managers have enormous power through their bond purchases and it's time to ask them to flex their muscles and stop this flow of money to fossil fuel developers. There is a lack of transparency in these markets but it is crucial to shed light on this hidden support," said Cuvelier.
The US asset manager Vanguard has the highest level of investments in these new fossil fuel bonds internationally, holding at least US$1.2 billion in bonds recently issued by 19 major fossil fuel developers, including by ConocoPhillips, the company behind the oil drilling Willow project (9). The German group Allianz, parent company of PIMCO and Allianz GI, and the French group BPCE, parent company of Natixis IM, are the biggest European investors. They hold respectively at least US$193 million and US$122 million in bonds recently issued by major fossil fuel developers (10).
Reclaim Finance and its partners are calling on asset managers to stop buying bonds issued by companies developing new coal, oil and gas projects, and at the very least to vote against the management of these companies at forthcoming annual general meetings. These conclusions should also be a wake-up call for these asset managers’ clients. The NGOs are calling on major asset owners to demand action to stop support for fossil fuel expansion before entrusting their money.
“This report clearly demonstrates a collective failure from the investment sector to manage climate risk responsibly. BlackRock and Vanguard are by far the worst offenders, together providing 58% of the recent investments in fossil fuel expansion, while setting very few expectations of fossil fuel companies to pivot away from business as usual. As the world’s largest asset managers, BlackRock and Vanguard have a responsibility to mitigate the growing systemic risk posed by climate change. Failing to do so means failing their clients,” said Jessye Waxman, Senior Campaign Representative with the Sierra Club’s Fossil-Free Finance campaign.
“German asset managers, including market leader DWS, systemically neglect the oil and gas sector's role in driving the climate crisis. They like to publicly stress their rather untransparent and inconsistent engagement activities, hide behind net-zero lingo and dismiss calls for stricter policies. Time for decisive climate action is running out fast and the oil and gas industry is in a historic gold rush, with no apparent interest in real transition," said Julia Dubslaff, finance campaigner at Urgewald.
The Sierra Club is the most enduring and influential grassroots environmental organization in the United States. We amplify the power of our 3.8 million members and supporters to defend everyone's right to a healthy world.
(415) 977-5500LATEST NEWS
Biden 'Moving the Goal Post' With Threat to Withhold Bombs From Israel
"Now Israel has a green light to destroy Rafah in slow motion," said one critic.
May 08, 2024
While some Palestine defenders on Wednesday welcomed U.S. President Joe Biden's threat to withhold bombs and artillery shells from Israel if it launches a major invasion of Rafah, critics noted that an invasion is already underway and accused the American leader of walking back a previous "red line" warning against an Israeli assault on the southern Gaza city.
Biden said for the first time that he'll stop sending bombs, artillery shells, and other arms to Israel if Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu orders a major invasion of Rafah, where more than a million Palestinians forcibly displaced from other parts of the embattled Gaza Strip are sheltering alongside around 280,000 local residents.
Referring to Israel's use of U.S.-supplied 2,000-pound bombs—which can destroy an entire city block and have been used in some of the war's worst atrocities—Biden toldCNN's Erin Burnett that "civilians have been killed in Gaza as a consequence of those bombs and other ways in which they go after population centers."
Even the U.S. military—which has killed more foreign civilians than any other armed force on the planet since the end of World War II—won't use 2,000-pound bombs in urban areas. But Israel does, including when it launched a strike to assassinate a single Hamas commander by dropping the munitions on the Jabalia refugee camp last October, killing more than 120 civilians.
"If they go into Rafah, I'm not supplying the weapons that have been used historically to deal with Rafah, to deal with the cities," Biden said Wednesday.
Israeli forces have already gone into Rafah, and it was reported Tuesday that Biden was taking the unusual step of delaying shipments of two types of Boeing-made bombs to Israel to send a message to the country's far-right government. It was, however, a mixed message, as the president also earlier in the day reaffirmed his support for Israel's war on Gaza, which the International Court of Justice said is "plausibly" genocidal in a preliminary ruling in January.
Critics noted the shifting and subjective language used by Biden—who previously said that any Israeli invasion of Rafah would constitute a "red line" resulting in unspecified consequences.
"He said invading Rafah was a red line. Israel invaded Rafah anyway, bombing buildings, burning and crushing children to death," political analyst Omar Baddar said on social media. "Biden is now moving the goal post by adding a completely subjective descriptor: 'Major.' Now Israel has a green light to destroy Rafah in slow motion."
During the course of the seven-month Israeli assault on Gaza—which has killed, maimed, or left missing more than 124,000 Palestinians—Biden has said Israel has killed "too many civilians" with its "indiscriminate bombing," even as he's pushed for more and more military aid for the key ally.
Wednesday's interview came on the heels of Biden's approval of a $14.3 billion emergency military aid package to Israel, multiple moves to sidestep Congress to fast-track armed assistance, nearly $4 billion in previously authorized annual military aid, and diplomatic cover in the form of several United Nations Security Council vetoes.
Reporting that the Biden administration will delay a highly anticipated report on whether Israel is using U.S. military aid in compliance with international law also drew backlash Tuesday from human rights advocates.
Referring to Israel's U.S.-funded anti-missile system, Biden continued his supportive rhetoric during Wednesday's CNN interview, telling Burnett that "we're going to continue to make sure Israel is secure in terms of Iron Dome and their ability to respond to attacks."
But the president added that Israel's use of devastating weaponry against civilians is "just wrong," and that "we're not going to supply the weapons and artillery shells."
Some peace groups welcomed Biden's threat to withhold bombs and artillery shells from Israel, even while urging him to do more to stop his ally's genocidal onslaught.
"Biden's statement is as necessary as it is over overdue," Jewish Voice for Peace executive director Stefanie Fox said in a statement. "The U.S. already bears responsibility for months of catastrophic devastation: The nearly 40,000 Palestinians that the Israeli military has killed, the two million Palestinians being intentionally brought to the brink of famine, the decimation of all universities and almost every hospital in Gaza."
"Today's statement shows that Biden can no longer ignore the will of the majority of Americans who want a permanent cease-fire, release of all hostages, and an end to U.S. complicity in Israeli war crimes," Fox added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
House Dems Save 'MAGA Mike' Johnson From Marjorie Taylor Greene Ouster
"The GOP chaos caucus continues to do nothing for the American people and instead waste time infighting," said Rep. Pramila Jayapal, who did not support saving the far-right leader.
May 08, 2024
The majority of Democrats and Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday saved far-right Speaker Mike Johnson from Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene's attempt to oust him after less than seven months in the leadership position.
Johnson's (R-La.) election to the role in October—following the ouster of former Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), who then left Congress early—was seen as a signal of the MAGA flank's hold on the Republican Party. However, since then he has faced criticism from Greene (R-Ga.) and others for, among other things, not shutting down the government.
Greene delivered on her threatened motion to vacate—provoking boos from fellow lawmakers—after meeting with Johnson for hours on Monday and Tuesday. The final vote to table her resolution was 359-43, with 196 Republicans and 163 Democrats backing the far-right speaker. Seven Democrats voted present and 21 lawmakers did not vote.
Ten Republicans joined Greene in trying to give Johnson the boot: Reps. Andy Biggs (Ariz.), Eric Burlison (Mo.), Eli Crane (Ariz.), Warren Davidson (Ohio), Paul Gosar (Ariz.), Thomas Massie (Ky.), Alex Mooney (W.Va.), Barry Moore (Ala.), Chip Roy (Texas), and Victoria Spartz (Ind.).
Addressing the position of most Democrats, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.) said in a statement:
Our decision to stop Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene from plunging the House of Representatives and the country into further chaos is rooted in our commitment to solving problems for everyday Americans in a bipartisan manner. We need more common sense and less chaos in Washington, D.C.
Marjorie Taylor Greene and the extreme MAGA Republicans are chaos agents. House Democrats are change agents. We will continue to govern in a reasonable, responsible, and results-oriented manner and to put people over politics all day and every day.
Some of the 32 Democrats who supported ousting Johnson framed the vote as proof that—in the words of Rep. Maxwell Alejandro Frost (Fla.)—the "GOP really can't govern" and the "chaos caucus is on display."
Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) similarly declared on social media that "the GOP chaos caucus continues to do nothing for the American people and instead waste time infighting."
"Speaker Johnson organized an amicus brief effort to overturn the 2020 election. He opposes abortion rights, trans rights, and voting rights," Jayapal also said. "That's why I did not vote to save his speakership."
Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) also explained his vote on social media, saying: "Mike Johnson is the most ideological, right-wing speaker since the 1830s. His views and values are directly antithetical to mine. He stands for everything we, as freedom-loving Democrats, proudly stand against. I will never vote to keep him in that chair."
Congressman Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) was one of the members who voted present, which does not count for or against passage.
"Did I vote with the extremist white Christian nationalist who called a motion to vacate the speakership or did I vote to save the extremist homophobic Christian nationalist speaker to keep him in office?" Pocan said. "Neither. I voted 'present' on this sideshow."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Extending Trump Tax Cuts Would Add $4.6 Trillion to Deficit: CBO
"We can't afford 10 more years of giveaways to the wealthy and corporations and fail to invest in the people who drive our economy," said the head of Groundwork Collaborative. "This tax law should expire."
May 08, 2024
As former U.S. President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans campaign on extending their 2017 tax cuts if elected in November, a government analysis revealed Wednesday that doing so would add $4.6 trillion to the national deficit.
When Trump signed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act during his first term, the initial estimated cost was $1.9 trillion. Last year, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projected that extending policies set to expire next year would cost $3.5 trillion through 2033.
The new CBO report—sought by U.S. Senate Budget Committee Chair Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and Senate Finance Committee Chair Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)—says continuing the income, business, and estate tax cuts will now cost $4.6 trillion through 2034.
"The Republican tax plan is to double down on Trump's handouts to corporations and the wealthy, run the deficit into the stratosphere, and make it impossible to save Medicare and Social Security or help families with the cost of living in America."
Responding in a statement Wednesday, the senators cited an Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) estimate that "extending the Trump tax cuts would create a $112.6 billion windfall for the top 5% of income earners in the first year alone."
They also slammed their GOP colleagues, who Whitehouse said "are awfully eager to shield their megadonors from paying taxes."
He recalled that just last year, "Republicans held our entire economy hostage," refusing to raise the debt ceiling and risking the first-ever U.S. default, because they didn't want the Internal Revenue Service to get more funding to "go after wealthy tax cheats."
"Remember the Trump tax scam cutting taxes for billionaires and big corporations," Whitehouse continued. "Now they're set on extending those tax cuts, even though it would blow up the deficit. The Trump tax cuts were a gift to the ultrarich and a rotten deal for American families and small businesses. With their impending expiration, we have a chance to undo the damage, fix our corrupted tax code, and have big corporations and the ultrawealthy begin to pay their fair share."
Wyden similarly took aim at the GOP, warning that "the Republican tax plan is to double down on Trump's handouts to corporations and the wealthy, run the deficit into the stratosphere, and make it impossible to save Medicare and Social Security or help families with the cost of living in America."
"Republicans have planned all along on making Trump's tax handouts to the rich permanent, but they hid the true cost with timing gimmicks and a 2025 deadline that threatens the middle class with an automatic tax hike if they don't get what they want," he argued. "In short, they're focused on helping the rich get richer, and everybody else can go pound sand. Democrats are going to stand by our commitment to protect the middle class while ensuring that corporations and the wealthy pay a fair share."
Groundwork Collaborative executive director Lindsay Owens also responded critically to the CBO report, saying Wednesday that "extending Trump's tax law and effectively subsidizing corporate profiteering and billionaire wealth is a nonstarter."
"This tax law, on top of decades of failed trickle-down cuts, has come at the expense of workers and families," Owens stressed. "We can't afford 10 more years of giveaways to the wealthy and corporations and fail to invest in the people who drive our economy. This tax law should expire."
While some of the tax cuts in the 2017 law are temporary—unless they get extended—the legislation permanently slashed the statutory corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%. As Common Dreamsreported last week, a new ITEP analysis shows that tax rates paid by big and consistently profitable corporations dropped from 22% to 12.8% after the law's enactment.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular