Part of the climate alarmist playbook is pushing for so-called "net zero" goals that aim to force economies and their participants to eliminate greenhouse gases by a certain date. Various groups push for such goals, often banding together with other companies and organizations in attempts to reward those who pursue such aims and ostracize those who don't go along with the plan to force the energy transition they seek.
One such collection is the Net Zero Financial Service Providers Alliance (NZFSPA), a "global group of Service Providers committed to supporting the goal of global net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 or sooner." As signatories to the alliance, the providers agree they will work "to accelerate the transition...and to help deliver the goals of the Paris Agreement."
Now, a group of state attorneys general have put NZFSPA on notice that their practices "may violate state and federal law, including antitrust laws and consumer protection laws."
In a letter led by Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti and signed by 21 other attorneys general from across the country, the state officials make their case against the net zero alliance:
Although many NZFSPA signatories are direct competitors with each other, they nevertheless commit to using their market influence to enforce their collective climate agenda in the broader economy and to “[w]ork in coordination” with other UN-convened “Net Zero” groups. Further, these pressure tactics are backed up by substantial market power. For example, all of the “Big Four” accounting firms—which control approximately three-fourths of the market share in the accounting industry—are NZFSPA signatories and founding members. Accordingly, your joint commitments under the NZFSPA may run afoul of United States antitrust law and its state equivalents, which broadly prohibit business competitors from engaging in concerted action in restraint of trade or commerce. In addition, the actions required by your NZFSPA commitments may create consumer-disclosure requirements that your companies are failing to meet.
Recommended
In addition, as the AGs letter explains, the companies in the NZFSPA commit to "[a]lign all relevant services and products to achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 or sooner, scaling and mainstreaming Paris Agreement-alignment into the core of [their] business." But in addition to their own emissions standards, the alliance also requires they use their power and influence outside their offices and activities to "advance" NZFSPA "efforts by proactively engaging with stakeholders and policy-makers on corporate and industry action, as well as public policies, that support a net zero transition of economic sectors.” Plus, signatories agree to "[c]onsistently raise" the "importance and implications of setting net zero targets and strategies" with other companies and stakeholders.
Taken together, the state attorneys general say the NZFSPA signatories' actions "give us pause, as they do not appear consistent with our laws protecting consumers" due to the apparent collective movement of the entities toward their stated goal.
"If financial service providers are colluding to limit consumer choices and manipulate market outcomes in support of international climate activists, that could violate our antitrust and consumer protection laws," noted Tennessee AG Skrmetti. "Decisions about energy policy should be made by our elected representatives, not by transnational corporate alliances."
Here's where, according to the AGs, the alliance could be leading companies afoul of antitrust and consumer protection laws:
By aligning your products and services with the Paris Agreement’s exacting specifications, you are necessarily taking actions to artificially restrict the supply of goods and services in the real economy. These restraints on trade may inhibit innovation, suppress output, and harm consumers. Equally troubling is your commitment to extend your collective reach by pressuring other companies to adopt “net zero targets and strategies” across the value chain. Given the extraordinary market power of participants in the agreement, many companies may have no choice but to comply with your policy preferences, requiring them to restrict further the variety and output of goods and services that are not “aligned” with your activist climate agenda. Moreover, many of the companies you influence will be forced to stop dealing with other companies whose practices are inconsistent with your standards. Considering your significant market influence, these practices could amount to a widespread boycott of entire industries—particularly those involving critical energy components like oil, coal, and gas—that do not align with your syndicate’s collective targets but are nevertheless vital to the American economy and national security. The problem is compounded as other “Net Zero” groups you have promised to coordinate with engage in parallel discrimination, effectively multiplying the market power of all net zero participants across various sectors to deprive disfavored companies of economic opportunities.
We are also concerned that you may be misleading consumers and other persons covered by UDAP laws by failing to disclose material facts regarding your apparent conflicts of interest and the viability of your climate agenda. Your customers reasonably expect you to perform certain financial or accounting services objectively and independently. We are unsure whether you have properly advised these consumers that your services are compromised by your commitment to “[a]lign all relevant services” with an activist climate agenda in accordance with the Paris Agreement. Even if you have provided your customers with some information about your commitments, that may be insufficient or misleading. For example, your NZFSPA commitments are ostensibly premised on your “expectation that governments will follow through on their commitments to ensure the objectives of the Paris Agreement are fulfilled.”29 But governments are not following through on their commitments. Indeed, none of the world’s biggest carbon emitters is on track to meet the Paris Agreement’s objectives.30 And even if governments followed through, the Paris Agreement's objectives would still not be fulfilled.31 Consumers (including businesses) who purchase your “aligned” products and services should not be misled about the faulty basis for that alignment or the impact of your efforts.
In addition to Tennessee's AG Skrmetti, the letter was joined by Alabama AG Steve Marshall, Alaska AG Treg Taylor, Arkansas AG Tim Griffin, Idaho AG Raúl Labrador, Indiana AG Todd Rokita, Iowa AG Brenna Bird, Kansas AG Kris Kobach, Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron, Louisiana AG Jeff Landry, Mississippi AG Lynn Fitch, Missouri AG Andrew Bailey, Montana AG Austin Knudsen, Nebraska AG Mike Hilgers, New Hampshire AG John Formella, Oklahoma AG Gentner Drummond, Ohio AG Dave Yost, South Carolina AG Alan Wilson, Utah AG Sean Reyes, Virginia AG Jason Miyares, West Virginia AG Patrick Morrisey, and Wyoming AG Bridget Hill.
Their letter requests information from NZFSPA signatories on the practices and implementation of the alliance's priorities by October 13, and such efforts have already proven successful with other climate alliances. A similar letter from state attorneys general in May regarding the Net-Zero Insurance Alliance (NZIA) — covered by Townhall here at the time — saw several companies withdraw from the compact.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member