1 hour ago
13
The Net Zero Banking Alliance had a pretty good run. Then every major US bank walked out the door.
JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and Wells Fargo all withdrew from the United Nations-backed Net Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA) between December 2024 and early January 2025. Goldman Sachs and Wells Fargo moved first in December, with JPMorgan delivering the final blow shortly after.
What was the NZBA, and why does the exit matter
The NZBA launched in 2021 as a voluntary commitment framework for banks pledging to align their lending and investment portfolios with net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.
After the US exits, remaining members, primarily European and Asian banks, still controlled roughly 40% of global banking assets, approximately $64 trillion. The NZBA ultimately ceased operations on October 3, 2025. It shifted to what it called a “non-membership guidance model,” meaning its resources for decarbonization target-setting would remain accessible even though the formal coalition structure was gone.
Political pressure did the heavy lifting
The timing of the departures was not coincidental. The exits clustered around the political atmosphere surrounding Donald Trump’s second inauguration, a period during which Republican opposition to ESG frameworks intensified sharply.
Republican state attorneys general had been building antitrust cases against climate-related banking coalitions since at least 2022. Their argument: banks coordinating their lending practices around climate goals amounted to a form of collusion that could restrict energy companies’ access to capital.
JPMorgan, the last major US bank to leave, framed its departure in characteristically corporate language. The bank said it would focus on “pragmatic solutions” for low-carbon technologies and energy security.
The fragmentation of climate finance
For investors who had been using NZBA membership as a signal of institutional ESG commitment, the exits force a recalibration. ESG-focused funds may need to develop new frameworks for assessing bank-level climate risk, since the shorthand of “are they in the alliance” no longer works.
The broader ESG investment landscape was already under strain before the NZBA implosion. Political backlash against ESG-branded products had been building for years, with several US states passing legislation restricting state pension funds from using ESG criteria.
What’s left is a climate finance ecosystem that looks less like a coordinated campaign and more like a collection of individual strategies, with no central body to tell the difference. The NZBA’s target-setting resources remain available online for anyone who wants to use them.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
English (US) ·