CCRcorp Sites  

The CCRcorp Network unlocks access to a world of insights, research, guides and information in a range of specialty areas.

Our Sites


A basis for research and practical guidance focusing on federal securities laws, compliance & corporate governance.


An educational service that provides practical guidance on legal issues involving public and private mergers & acquisitions, joint ventures, private equity – and much more.


The “one stop” resource for information about responsible executive compensation practices & disclosure.

Widely recognized as the premier online research platform providing practical guidance on issues involving Section 16 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and all of its related rules.


Keeping you in-the-know on environmental, social and governance developments

A new article in Forbes has inflamed ESG professionals, but is the message correct? The article (subscription required) was written by John McGowan, an attorney who is “particularly focused on governance, formations, and corporate policy.” McGowan argues that the current lack of ESG reporting standards – especially in the US – creates too much risk for companies:

“While there may be temptation to preemptively participate in reporting, companies should consider the full legal impact of moving too soon.”

I thought there were inconsistencies in his commentary which confused me a bit (you can make your own judgement about his perspective and arguments). At one point in the article, he wrote:

“… legal landmines are problematic for organizations wishing to participate in sustainable reporting at this time. A well-intentioned report drafted internally and reviewed by in-house counsel, instead of an attorney who specializes in this area, could cause tangible legal problems.”

That first sentence is generally true, but I take issue with his implication that no in-house attorneys are qualified to write and review ESG/sustainability reports. I know dozens – many are members of and The issue shouldn’t be whether an attorney is in-house or outside counsel, but rather how familiar they are with ESG and the legal risks of voluntary reporting (including multi-jurisdictional matters). Any company communication comes with inherent risks; voluntary ESG reporting is no different. Many US companies have made voluntary corporate social responsibility, sustainability, ESG and climate reports for years (or in some cases decades), yet legal problems (whether regulatory or third-party) have been few and far between – certainly not an epidemic.

My concern is that the article will be seen by thousands – including those in C-suites and on Boards who may pump the brakes on ESG as a whole. If companies suddenly stop communicating about ESG altogether, they risk losing momentum and appearing uncommitted to their ESG practices. Paradoxically, it could also open up legal claims of withholding financially material information from investors. This isn’t to say that companies should publish large volumes of information without considering risks. Given the big picture, it would be more prudent to improve, simplify and focus voluntary ESG reports than it would be to abandon them.

If you aren’t already subscribed to our complimentary ESG blog, sign up here: for daily updates delivered right to you.

Back to all blogs

The Editor

Lawrence Heim has been practicing in the field of ESG management for almost 40 years. He began his career as a legal assistant in the Environmental Practice of Vinson & Elkins working for a partner who is nationally recognized and an adjunct professor of environmental law at the University of Texas Law School. He moved into technical environmental consulting with ENSR Consulting & Engineering at the height of environmental regulatory development, working across a range of disciplines. He was one… View Profile