US House committee demands ESG information from investors

By Isla Binnie

NEW YORK (Reuters) -The Republican leader of a U.S. congressional committee wrote on Tuesday to demand more than 130 investors explain their environmental, social and governance (ESG) goals, highlighting how his party's scrutiny of such initiatives is continuing.

Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan, who penned the letters, has warned money managers that collective pledges to drive down greenhouse gas emissions might violate antitrust law. The Democratic minority on the committee disagrees, reflecting a broader partisan split on the issue.

Republican ire has landed forcefully upon alliances that formed around corporate commitments to help combat climate change, partly driven by fears of job losses in the fossil fuel industry. One of those groups is Climate Action 100+, which boasts around 700 signatories.

The committee's letters pertain to Climate Action 100+'s push for companies to implement plans to deal with the energy transition.

Each recipient was asked what requests they will make of companies in their portfolio, and was told to preserve "all documents and communications referring or relating to the company's efforts to advance ESG-related goals".

A representative for climate-focused investor group Ceres, which co-founded Climate Action 100+, said "tens of thousands of documents" had already been produced for the committee and the letters were "unlikely to gather any new information".

No antitrust lawsuit has been brought against any climate coalition, but Jordan's committee claims responsibility for the decisions taken by several asset managers to end their membership of the group for fear of a crackdown.

"These letters are another attempt to deter investors from participating in the initiative," the Ceres representative said.

The committee has also interviewed former regulators as part of its antitrust probe.

A rule passed by U.S. President Joe Biden, which itself overturned one put in place by his predecessor Donald Trump to limit socially conscious investing by employee retirement plans, is still being litigated in court.

(Reporting by Isla Binnie in New York; Editing by David Gregorio)