House Republicans Say Blackrock, Vanguard’s ESG Policies May Violate Antitrust Law

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) in Washington on June 21, 2023. Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times

House Republicans have called on the heads of companies including BlackRock and Vanguard to hand over an array of documents detailing how they developed their decarbonization and net zero emissions targets while warning that their efforts to combat climate change could violate U.S. antitrust law.

House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), Rep. Dan Bishop (R-N.C.), and Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) sent letters to heads of the companies: Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ) and its Net Zero Asset Managers (NZAM) initiative—a sector-specific group of international asset managers within GFANZ that supports net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, and has over $59 trillion in assets under its management—on July 5.

Additional letters were sent to Vanguard, BlackRock, and State Street, all three of which are the world’s largest asset managers.

BlackRock and State Street are members of both NZAM as well as a company named Climate Action 100+.

Vanguard was a member of  NZAM until December 2022 when it withdrew “after a considerable period of review” in an effort to provide its investors with “clarity” following confusion over its views as they relate to climate issues.

In their letters, the three Republicans demanded the companies explain their corporate environmental, social, and governance (ESG) policies and claimed the companies coordinating and entering into collusive agreements to “decarbonize” assets under management and reduce emissions to net zero by 2050 may possibly violate federal antitrust laws.

The agreements may also be impacting America’s economic well-being, the GOP lawmakers wrote.

A sign for BlackRock Inc. hangs above their building in New York on July 16, 2018. Lucas Jackson/Reuters

Impacts of ESG Policies

“Accordingly, to advance our oversight and inform potential legislative reforms, we write to ask GFANZ and NZAM to produce relevant documents and information,” the lawmakers wrote in one of their letters.

“Reaching net zero would require draconian ‘declines in the use of coal, oil and gas,’” the lawmakers wrote, putting those figures at a 98 percent decline for coal, 94 percent for oil, and 86 percent for fossil fuels overall.

“This, in turn, would require radical steps such as halting sales of new internal combustion engine passenger cars by 2035, and phasing out all unabated coal and oil power plants by 2040,” they continued. “It also would mean that no new oil and gas fields must be developed, choking off investment in these industries.”

“Such restrictions limit output and increase prices and deprive businesses of investments and consumers of choices. The potential consequences for American freedom and economic well-being are far-reaching,” they added, stating that the “collusive agreements” harm both competition and consumers and are illegal under the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890.

The GOP lawmakers signed off the letter by asking the companies to hand over a string of documents including those containing communications relating to the “creation, mission, goals, or founding of GFANZ and NZAM, including the need for GFANZ or NZAM to facilitate advancing decarbonization and net zero emissions goals,” those referencing how they developed their decarbonization and net zero emissions targets and commitments as well as those commitment efforts among any of their members.

Additionally, the lawmakers asked for documents pertaining to how the companies monitor and enforce their members’ decarbonization and net zero emissions agreements and commitments and how such agreements impact output, price, or the choices available to consumers and investors.

The companies have until July 20 to hand over the information, the letters state.

Similar letters requesting the various documents were sent to Vanguard and BlackRock.

Young Socialists Switzerland (JUSO) activists take part in a protest against U.S. investment company BlackRock calling for a climate tax on the rich, on the eve of the WEF annual meeting in Davos, on Jan. 15, 2022. Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images

WEF Issues ESG Warning

ESG policies are used by some companies as a way of assessing their business practices and performance as they relate to environmental, social, and governance issues. The concept was originally developed at the United Nations Environmental Programme Financial Initiative 20 years ago.

While many companies currently embrace ESG policies, Republican lawmakers have repeatedly warned that doing so risks slashing investment returns and hampering economic growth, which could have ripple effects across the economy.

As a result, a number of Republican states have pulled out their investments in BlackRock, which owns large stakes in a substantial number of companies in the United States and worldwide, including Apple, Microsoft, and Amazon.

In May, the World Economic Forum (WEF) warned that the employment landscape will change drastically over the next five years as more and more companies embrace ESG standards and transition to green energy.

According to a WEF report, roughly 23 percent of jobs are expected to change by 2027, with around 69 million new jobs to be created and 83 million eliminated, resulting in a decrease of 14 million jobs, or 2 percent of current employment.

House Republicans’ letter comes as they are investigating a string of climate groups that they claim are violating federal antitrust laws in their effort to push the ESG agenda.

In May, Rep. Jordan also sent a letter to the CEO of Ceres, a nonprofit organization and a co-founder of Climate Action 100+, stating that its ESG agenda could also be violating federal antitrust laws.

BlackRock said in a statement to Bloomberg that its “sole focus as a fiduciary is seeking the best financial outcomes for our clients, consistent with their investment objectives.”

“We look forward to engaging with the committee on how we do that,” the spokesperson added.

A spokesperson for State Street told The Epoch Times in an emailed statement, “State Street Global Advisors always maintains its independence when voting client proxies. We assess and vote on shareholder proposals based on what we believe is in the best long-term interests of our clients and their investments.”

“Our actions and decision-making are guided by research, expert analysis, and our fiduciary duty to clients,” the spokesperson added.

The Epoch Times has contacted the other company for comment.