Spot the Differences: ESG Reporting and Securities Law

This position paper examines the inherent tensions between ESG reporting requirements and traditional securities law disclosure frameworks, prompted by the SEC's voluntary suspension of its Climate Disclosure Rules in April 2024.

The authors distinguish between the two reporting paradigms by contrasting "material information" (central to securities law and directly affecting investment decisions) with "important information" (the focus of ESG reporting, which may be socially significant but not financially material). They argue that securities laws were designed specifically to protect investors through disclosure of information material to investment decisions, not to advance broader social objectives.

The paper identifies four fundamental incompatibilities between ESG and securities reporting: traditional securities frameworks already require disclosure of financially material climate risks; ESG-specific requirements impose significant costs with questionable investor benefits; applying uniform ESG requirements across different industries creates structural inconsistencies; and regulatory authorities may exceed their statutory mandates when expanding securities law beyond its traditional scope.

Rather than forcing ESG concerns into securities law, the authors propose leveraging dedicated legal frameworks – environmental regulations for environmental concerns, labor laws for social issues, and corporate governance provisions for governance matters. This approach would focus on substantive compliance rather than mere reporting.

As the ESG landscape evolves, the position paper advocates for maintaining the distinct purposes of different reporting regimes instead of expanding securities law materiality beyond its foundational principles.

To read the full post, visit our Hebrew main blog