As the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rolls back greenhouse gas (GHG) laws, rules, and regulations consistent with Trump Administration priorities, several states are advancing legislation to create their own GHG emissions reporting frameworks. While some of these initiatives generally mirror California’s climate disclosure requirements, this new state-led regulatory landscape is creating a state-by-state patchwork that businesses must now monitor.
Federal Rollback
Beginning with President Trump’s Executive Order 14154, “Unleashing American Energy” (January 20, 2025), the Trump Administration has made clear that it opposes any laws—federal or state—addressing the causes or impacts of climate change. For example:
- Executive Order 14154 revoked a suite of existing climate-related presidential executive orders and abolished offices, programs, and funding established pursuant to them.
- The Securities and Exchange Commission ended its in-court defense of corporate climate disclosure rules, which were adopted on March 6, 2024. Consequently, the climate disclosure rules will not go into effect.
- On April 8, 2025, President Trump signed Executive Order 14260, “Protecting American Energy From State Overreach,” which aims to stop the enforcement of state laws addressing climate change on the ground that they are unconstitutional, unenforceable, and preempted by federal law.
- Most recently, the EPA finalized a rule on February 12, 2026, overturning its own “Endangerment Finding”—a finding that allowed EPA to regulate GHGs as pollutants under the Clean Air Act and underpins virtually all federal laws regulating GHGs.
Terminology
Generally speaking, GHG reporting laws focus on Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions. For the uninitiated, the different “Scopes” are as follows:
- Scope 1 Emissions: These are direct emissions from sources that a company owns or controls (think, stack emissions from an industrial facility).
- Scope 2 Emissions: These are indirect emissions associated with the generation of purchased electricity, steam, heating, and cooling that the company consumes. While the business does not produce these emissions directly, they are a consequence of the energy the company uses.
- Scope 3 Emissions: This category encompasses all other indirect emissions that occur upstream and downstream along a business’s supply chain and, in some instances, can contribute far more to a business’ carbon footprint than Scope 1 or 2 emissions combined. Scope 3 emissions can include downstream production, shipping, waste, disposal, employee transportation, and the like.
State Patchwork
GHG emissions reporting legislation has been enacted and/or introduced in California, Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, and Washington. (NB: This article does not discuss California. Our firm’s coverage of California’s emissions regulations can be found in this detailed overview and this recent update.) A brief summary of legislation currently in effect, proposed, and attempted is summarized below:
Minnesota: Statute 48.591 Climate Risk Disclosure Survey (Currently in Effect)
Enacted in May 2023, Minnesota Statute 48.591 requires banking institutions with more than $1 billion in assets to submit a completed climate risk disclosure survey to the commissioner by July 30 each year.
Colorado: Senate Bill 19-096 (Currently in Effect)
Codified at C.R.S. § 25-7-140, SB 19-096 requires GHG-emitting entities to monitor and report their emissions in support of Colorado’s GHG inventory and reduction efforts, and requires the Air Quality Control Commission and Division to adopt reporting rules and publish an GHG inventory, respectively.
In 2020, the Air Quality Control Commission adopted the Colorado Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule under Air Quality Control Commission Regulation 22, Part A. The rule:
- Requires the owner or operator of a facility or entity that is located in Colorado and is subject to the federal GHG reporting rule to also report emissions to the state. It is unclear, at this point, how the Trump Administration’s roll backs will affect this rule.
- Expands reporting requirements to certain Colorado GHG sources that are not subject to the federal rule.
- Establishes supplemental data reporting requirements for Colorado electric service providers or utilities. This provides the division with the necessary data to assess compliance with approved Clean Energy Plans.
Based on this reporting scheme, the Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment (CDPHE) Air Quality Control Division publishes an updated statewide Greenhouse Gas Inventory Report at least every two years. The most recent report, released in 2025, can be found here. It tracks the following sectors:
- Agriculture,
- Coal Mining and Abandoned Mines,
- Electric Power,
- Industrial Processes and Product Uses,
- Land Use, Land-Use Change, and Forestry,
- Natural Gas and Oil Systems,
- Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Fuel Use,
- Transportation, and
- Waste.
Illinois: House Bill 3673 – Climate Corporate Accountability Act (Active Bill)
House Bill 3673 would require companies doing business in the state with annual revenues in excess of $1 billion to annually report Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions data to a state-maintained emissions registry. Under the bill, the Secretary of State is directed to adopt implementing rules by mid-2026, with Scope 1 and 2 disclosures due January 1, 2027 and Scope 3 disclosures due no later than 180 days after that.
Status: The legislation is currently assigned to both the Rules and Energy and Environment committees. Notably, there has been no action on the bill since March 2025.
New York: Senate Bill 3456, Senate Bill 9072, Assembly Bill 4282 – Climate Corporate Accountability Data Acts (Active Bills)
New York is considering three very similar climate reporting proposals. Senate Bill 9072, called the “Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act,” has passed the Senate and seeks to mandate full Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions reporting statewide for all companies doing business in the state with annual revenues in excess of $1 billion. S9072 still must pass the Assembly, where it was referred to the Codes Committee, before being sent to the Governor. Its companion bill, Assembly Bill 4282, which is identical, remains in the Assembly and was referred to the Codes and Environmental Conservation Committees. Additionally, Senate Bill 3456, also called the “Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act,” would similarly require companies doing business in the state with annual revenues in excess of $1 billion, including all subsidiary revenue, to annually disclose Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions data and contribute to a Climate Accountability and Emissions Disclosure Fund. S3456 has been referred to the Finance and Conservation Committees.
Status: All bills are active but have not been enacted. Their progress through the Legislature is ongoing.
Colorado: House Bill 25-1119 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions Act (Failed in 2025)
Colorado’s HB 25-1119, introduced during the 2025 legislative session, would have required corporate emissions reporting for entities with over $1 billion in revenue, with phased reporting for Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions from 2028 to 2029 and potential civil penalties of up to $100,000 per day for non-compliance. The bill was postponed indefinitely in 2025 and is currently inactive.
New Jersey: Senate Bill 4117 – Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act (Failed in 2025)
SB 4117 in New Jersey aimed to require companies doing business in the state with annual revenues in excess of $1 billion to disclose annual Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions, with phased implementation timelines comparable to other state proposals. Although this bill progressed to committee, it did not pass during the 2025 session.
Washington: Senate Bill 6092 Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act (Failed in 2024)
Initially, this bill directed all companies doing business in the state with annual revenues in excess of $1 billion to disclose annual Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions. It later evolved, directing the Washington Department of Ecology to develop policy recommendations for climate-related disclosure requirements in Washington.
Maryland: House Bill 663 – Federal Policy Reporting (Not a Corporate Emissions Mandate)
Maryland’s HB 663 takes a different approach. Rather than imposing direct Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions reporting obligations on private companies, this bill would obligate the Department of the Environment to report to the General Assembly on changes in federal GHG emissions policy that have been deemed legally valid by a final decision of a federal court. It would also require the Department of Environment to explain how the State is responding to the change in federal policy. This bill passed the General Assembly and is currently under review in Education, Energy, and the Environment Committee in the Senate. Notably, it does not create a corporate emissions reporting requirement.
Key Takeaway
While federal climate disclosure obligations pause, the trend toward state-level GHG emissions reporting continues. Public and private companies with multi-state operations should proactively evaluate their emissions accounting, monitor legislative developments, and prepare for an evolving compliance landscape that extends beyond federal reporting frameworks. Our team will continue to track and provide updates on active state-level legislation.