Lawyers for Exxon Mobil Corp. stood before a New York judge in August and told the state’s attorney general to “put up or shut up” after spending three years investigating the company’s public disclosures about climate change, saying authorities should sue the energy giant or move on.
On Wednesday, New York chose to strike.
Attorney General Barbara Underwood filed a fraud lawsuit against Exxon at a state court in Manhattan and blamed misleading investors for how her company could influence the future regulations. The complaint reached the highest levels of Exxon’s leadership, including former CEO Rex Tillerson.
At the center of the investigation and in the case, Exxon has used the so-called proxy cost for carbon to calculate the financial impact of future regulations on the entity. Costs must guarantee that long-term investors, including corporate shareholders and pension funds, will not be surprised. New York said it was a misleading.
. Exxon built a façade to convince investors that the company’s risks of climate change are driving its business, in fact, u said Underwood. Değişik He was deliberately and systematically disdain or disregard public opinion, Under Underwood said. An idiom.
The team has been subject to various anti-fraud laws, including the Martin Law in New York, one of the most difficult laws in the country. New York ordered Exxon to avoid making false statements and forcing the company to correct its past claims. At the same time, the state wants to cut off all profits from uncertain money losses and alleged fraud.
Exxon spokesman Scott Silvestri called the “stained Sil and ruthless case.
Silvestri said in an e-mail: et These baseless allegations, special interests, political opportunism and the attorney general are the product of lobbying activities at closed gates to accept that a three-year investigation has revealed something wrong.
Behind the scenes
In March, the Irving-based company in Texas lost a case in March that demanded that the investigation be halted because the case was politically motivated. Exxon claimed that the investigation was coordinated behind scenes with other Democratic-led states and hostile environmental groups.
And in April, Massachusetts’s best court ruled that a judge should hand over the Exxon ‘s 1976 case to Chief Prosecutor Maura Healey, who is conducting an investigation with New York. At the time, Healey said the decision must put an end to Exxon’s x roasted soil engelle campaign to avoid investigations.
Exxon sued New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and Healey in a federal court in Texas to derail investigations, but a judge drove Exxon away to New York City, depriving him of a country’s advantage.
Underwood said Exxon’s fraud has a direct impact on New York investors. Underwood, a state pension fund with more than 1 million employees and retirees, and nearly half a million members of the New York State Teachers’ Pension System in the hands of approximately $ 1.5 billion worth of Exxon held in the hands, he said.
In Wednesday’s case, New York knew that Exonon’s Tillerson management deviated from the company’s public receivables using a second set of power of attorney, which was lower than publicly disclosed figures.
”Exxon’s management knew that using these low figures made Exxon more responsive to the climate change regulatory risk, but that these two proxies did not align the cost set for years,“ he said.
Allegedly, if Exxon internally applied the publicly announced proxy costs, it would result in “large” costs, “major reductions” and shorter active lives.
For example, the state’s failure to apply publicly-represented proxy costs to 14 of the Canadian oil-sand projects in Alberta, claims that Exxon has resulted in lower costs for greenhouse gases expected than $ 25 billion over the life of the projects. according to the statement.
New York accused Exxon in June of failing to comply with court bills for cash flow projections, reflecting how it used proxy costs. The government said it wants to know exactly how the cost of greenhouse gas emissions is used to make investment decisions.
In August, at the hearing of Exxon’s lawyer Theodore Wells demanding a New put up or shut up ”, Manisha Sheth, a lawyer at Underwood’s office, said that New York had Wells smoking avukat evidence.
Legal warning !
The information, comments and suggestions there are not covered by investment advice. It is based on the author's personal opinions. These views may not fit your financial situation and risk and return preferences. For this reason, based solely on this information, investment decisions may not have the appropriate consequences for your expectation. Our Site is not responsible for any direct or indirect damages incurred by the investors as a result of the use of the information on the Site, deficiencies in the sources, damages incurred by profit, moral damages, or damage to third parties.