EPA Repeals “Endangerment Finding” on Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Action: On February 12, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced a final rule¹ rescinding the legal basis for Federal efforts to address climate change. In 2009, EPA issued an endangerment finding² under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), concluding “the current and projected concentrations of the six key well-mixed greenhouse gases (GHGs)—carbon dioxide (CO₂), methane (CH₄), nitrous oxide (N₂O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF₆)—in the atmosphere threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations.” The action repeals subsequent GHG emission standards from its regulations for cars and trucks but could possibly also trigger a broader undoing of climate regulations for power plants and oil and gas facilities.³ 

Trusted Insights for What’s Ahead^®

• EPA issued the finding in 2009 in response to the Supreme Court’s 2007 Massachusetts v. EPA decision stating that EPA could decline to act under Section 202(a) only if it determined that GHGs do not contribute to climate change or offered a reasonable explanation for inaction. (The suit resulted from EPA’s 2003 denial of a petition to regulate GHGs.) Despite this ruling, since the 2009 Endangerment Finding, the policy has faced repeated legal and legislative challenges.
• The repeal relies on several Supreme Court decisions, including Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, West Virginia v. EPA, Michigan v. EPA, and Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA, which all minimized the scope of EPA’s authority under the CAA.
• The President’s Executive Order “Unleashing American Energy”⁴ instructed EPA to submit recommendations on the “legality and continuing applicability of the endangerment finding. “Formal reconsideration” of the endangerment finding began in March 2025.⁵
• What this means for business: The Conference Board’s latest C-Suite Outlook Survey revealed that environmental and sustainability goals have become less of a priority for US CEOs, with well over one-third (38.4%) saying it is “not a priority,” compared to 20.2% of global CEOs.
• The current climate of political polarization surrounding ESG commitments, combined with heightened legal scrutiny of ESG claims, has increased the perceived downside risk for companies making visible sustainability commitments. In light of EPA’s new action, business leaders may choose to further recalibrate how environmental commitments are positioned within corporate strategy and may reallocate investments toward other strategic priorities.