On Aug. 24, a coalition of 16 Republican state attorneys general sent letters to Deloitte, Ernst & Young (EY), KPMG, and PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) — collectively known as the Big Four accounting firms — raising concerns that the firms' climate commitments may conflict with professional accounting standards and state consumer protection laws.

The attorneys general focused on the firms' involvement with three climate initiatives:

• Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD): A framework that developed recommendations for companies to disclose climate-related financial risks.
• International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB): An international standard-setting body that develops sustainability and climate-related financial disclosure standards.
• Net Zero Financial Service Providers Alliance (NZFSPA): A coalition of financial service providers that committed to aligning relevant products and services with achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 or sooner.

The attorneys general said the commitments could compromise the firms' independence as auditors. They said, "These commitments create an appearance that the Big Four have agreed to compromise their independence in favor of pursuing climate-related goals external to the audit."

The attorneys general also questioned whether the firms could financially benefit from expanded climate-reporting requirements and create conflicts of interest. They wrote, “The Big Four’s climate commitments also create potential conflicts of interest that may violate the duties of integrity and objectivity by imposing climate-related disclosure obligations that benefit the Big Four at the expense of their clients.”

The coalition asked the firms to answer 38 questions and provide documents about their climate commitments, auditing practices, potential conflicts of interest, and government contracts.

The letters broaden Republican state officials' scrutiny of ESG practices beyond banks, asset managers, and proxy advisory firms to the accounting industry. They also raise several potential avenues for state action against the Big Four rather than simply criticizing their climate policies.

The attorneys general said the firms' climate commitments raised questions about the firms' government contracts. They wrote, “Violating state and federal contractual terms could result in penalties and termination of the Big Four’s contracts.”

Republican officials have scrutinized financial institutions' participation in net-zero alliances, arguing in some cases that the commitments can conflict with fiduciary duties or antitrust laws. In recent years, several financial climate groups lost U.S. members, suspended operations, or loosened their commitments.

The Net-Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA) had 140 member banks representing $75.5 trillion in combined assets as of November 2024. After that point, all six major U.S. banks — JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, and Wells Fargo — withdrew, and the alliance ended operations as a membership organization in October 2025.

The Net Zero Asset Managers Initiative (NZAM), which had more than 300 members managing nearly $60 trillion, suspended operations in January 2025 after BlackRock left. The initiative relaunched in February 2026 with more than 250 signatories and a revised commitment that no longer required members to align their portfolios with a net-zero deadline.

Ballotpedia tracks support for and opposition to the environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) investing movement. To learn more about arguments for, against, and about ESG, click here. For more information on reform proposals related to ESG policy, click here.