As trans-Atlantic relations develop more and more fraught, Europe’s ESG laws have gotten yet one more flashpoint that threatens to bitter ties.
The American Chamber of Commerce to the European Union (AmCham EU) says proposed revisions to the bloc’s environmental, social and governance guidelines don’t adequately shield US pursuits. The criticism is a part of a rising US response to Europe’s ESG framework. Republican lawmakers name the foundations “hostile” and warn that America’s jurisdictional sovereignty is at stake, whereas Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick has mentioned he’s prepared to contemplate “commerce instruments” to retaliate.
The European Fee proposed modifications final week that may rein within the scope of two main ESG legal guidelines: the Company Sustainability Reporting Directive and the Company Sustainability Due Diligence Directive. Nonetheless, large worldwide firms with enterprise within the EU would nonetheless should comply.
The upshot is that non-EU firms danger being ensnared by the bloc’s ESG guidelines, even for merchandise that aren’t offered within the EU, mentioned Kim Watts, senior coverage supervisor for AmCham EU, whose members embrace Ford Motor Co., Exxon Mobil Corp. and Amazon.com Inc.
AmCham is apprehensive that the EU “goes too far on extraterritoriality,” she mentioned in an interview.
It’s a criticism that’s being backed up in even stronger phrases by GOP members of Congress. In a letter despatched shortly after the European Fee printed its proposed revisions to the bloc’s ESG guidelines, the US lawmakers wrote to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Nationwide Financial Council Director Kevin Hassett, warning of the “profound” implications of Europe’s due diligence directive for US companies.
“CSDDD represents a severe and unwarranted regulatory overreach, imposing vital financial and authorized burdens on US firms,” lawmakers, together with Representatives James French Hill of Arkansas, Ann Wagner of Missouri and Andy Barr of Kentucky, wrote within the letter. “We strongly urge rapid diplomatic engagement to problem and halt its implementation.” The group additionally known as for clarification to make sure US firms gained’t should develop local weather transition plans.
AmCham EU mentioned its considerations apply to each CSRD, which is a reporting requirement, and CSDDD, which is designed to incorporate worth chains in ESG danger assessments.
A spokesperson for the fee mentioned the views of all stakeholders had been thought-about earlier than its newest proposal was put ahead.
CSDDD was initially designed in order that firms in breach of the directive would face fines of as a lot as 5% of their world income. Work on the directive was propelled partly by the 2013 collapse of the Rana Plaza garment manufacturing unit in Bangladesh, which killed greater than 1,100 individuals who had been engaged on garments meant for western markets.
The shock of that occasion led to a brand new sensitivity round supply-chain dangers, which EU authorities had been decided to behave on. CSDDD additionally displays the objectives of the 2015 Paris local weather accord, such that firms are anticipated to have believable internet zero plans.
However the far-reaching ramifications of CSDDD led to widespread pushback, each from inside and outdoors the EU. The fee responded to that stress final week by dropping an EU-wide civil legal responsibility provision and limiting the size of the worth chain within the directive.
These modifications nonetheless go away US firms within the directive’s scope, one thing the US Chamber of Commerce says creates “conflicts with American legislation.”
“The extraterritoriality, it’s not unsolvable, however there must be extra dialog and a spotlight on this to grasp the dimensions and the scope of the problem right here,” Watts mentioned. “We want extra understanding from the fee on the challenges that companies face with attempting to adjust to extraordinarily, moderately imprecise and complicated laws.”
Ideally, CSDDD ought to “check with an EU-nexus chain of exercise,” she mentioned. That might imply the EU ought to “focus the due diligence on the chain of actions which have an finish consequence within the European market moderately than focus very broadly on components which may not be linked to the only market in any respect.”
Watts mentioned CSRD reporting necessities exceed in some instances these within the US, which leaves firms “open to scrutiny by US buyers who’re searching for statements that might be the idea of securities litigation.”
AmCham EU members stay dedicated to their sustainability objectives and wish to keep away from a commerce battle over ESG, Watts mentioned. Tariffs are “a really dangerous thought” and “not constructive,” she mentioned.
The fee’s proposal nonetheless must be voted on by lawmakers and member states. And there’s prone to be way more “political wrangling forward,” notably because the EU Parliament is “at present very divided,” mentioned Sophie Tuson, head of the environmental unit on the London legislation agency RPC.
Lara Wolters, the member of parliament who shepherded CSDDD via to adoption final yr, has labeled the fee’s proposal “reckless.” She’s now calling on the European Parliament to “succeed the place the fee has failed,” which she says entails “discovering a compromise for commonsense simplification, with out decreasing requirements.”
At AmCham EU, the aim is to impress upon the EU that changes are nonetheless wanted to its ESG laws to make sure the framework is “workable for all non EU-headquartered companies and likewise European companies with a world presence,” Watts mentioned.
Photograph: Photographer: Geert Vanden Wijngaert/Bloomberg
Copyright 2025 Bloomberg.
