Author name: admin

With broad policy upheaval in the U.S. under President Trump’s second term, Sustainability Committees on corporate boards stand on shaky ground. The administration has effectively terminated and significant allocations for renewable energy, retreated from the Paris Agreement, spurred ESG-backlash, weakened the EPA, NOAA, and SEC mandates. At the same time, the global momentum for ESG and Sustainability persists. Even if the political momentum is going in one direction, board members will have to balance the reality of climate, social, litigation, and governance risks remain financially material and globally governed.

The passage of The Big Beautiful Bill (OBBBA) on Friday, July 4th, marks a decisive recalibration of U.S. clean-energy policy and incentive structure—elevating urgency, compliance, and strategic flexibility for corporations. The upending of financial incentives create a real-time operational challenge. Boards must respond by aligning capital schedules, fortifying supply chains, and taking out cost from their decarbonization strategies. How should enterprises evolve their capital allocation for operational effectiveness, ESG targets, and financial return?

Higher input costs and reduced demand due to President Trump’s tariff policy raise red flags under U.S. GAAP and IFRS for impairment testing of non-financial assets such as property, plant, and equipment (PP&E), intangible assets, and goodwill. The increased economic uncertainty and geopolitical volatility mean projections used to determine “Value in Use” or “Fair Value” may fall below carrying amounts, signaling possible impairments. How are Audit Committees anticipating impairment risks from the material change in U.S. trade policy?

Audit committees have long been the mandated nexus of corporate financial reporting, internal controls, and risk management. Even though these committees face a full slate of topical oversight and compliance – financial, internal audit, AI, cyber, ESG, Sustainability, DEI – 2025 has also brought forward a new suite of risks. Namely, trade and tariffs, and geopolitical conflict. With so much responsibility across a broad spectrum of issues, have audit committees become the “kitchen sink” of corporate boards?