US States’ Largest Companies Quiet on Climate Policy

New InfluenceMap research finds that a majority of the largest companies headquartered in US states are not actively supporting climate policy—including in the state where they are based.

With climate policy progress stalled at the federal level, many climate advocates are looking to state or city-level climate action for progress. US states’ largest headquartered companies have the potential to be a powerful force when appealing to state-level policymakers in support of subnational progress, by virtue of their unique economic status and impact. Yet this analysis raises questions about the landscape for state climate policy engagement, where more negative and highly active corporate interests risk dominating climate policy debates.

The Largest US Companies’ Climate Lobbying Records

Using the Fortune 500 list for 2025, InfluenceMap identified the largest company, by revenue, headquartered in each of the 50 states. Seven states are not reflected in the analysis, as they do not host a company in the Fortune 500.¹

Of the 43 largest companies, 29 (67%) appear unengaged on climate policy, while only 14 companies—one third—are actively engaged. All of the 29 low-engaging companies have negligible “Engagement Intensity” (EI) scores of 5% or lower, meaning that InfluenceMap could not find sufficient public evidence of their climate policy advocacy to determine an Organization Score. The 14 engaged companies all have EI scores between 6% and 36%.

The 29 unengaged companies are primarily in the healthcare, pharmacy, and health insurance sectors, including major entities such as CVS Health in Rhode Island, UnitedHealth Group in Minnesota, and Cigna in Connecticut.

• The remaining companies are largely within the financial services and insurance industries, such as Northwestern Mutual in Wisconsin, as well as national retail and grocery chains, such as Home Depot in Georgia and Publix in Florida. Less common in this list are pipeline companies, such as Oneok in Oklahoma, and forest and paper products like Domtar in South Carolina.
• Six of the low-engaged companies—such as Freddie Mac in Virginia—are financial institutions and, as such, are scored under InfluenceMap's Climate Finance project, which analyzes corporate engagement on climate-related financial policy as well as "real economy" climate change policy.²
• The low-engaged companies span a wide revenue range, from Knife River ($2,899 million in revenue) headquartered in North Dakota to CVS Health ($372,809 million) in Rhode Island.

By contrast, the 14 engaged companies come from sectors that are generally more engaged according to LobbyMap analysis, such as energy (ExxonMobil in Texas), transportation (FedEx in Tennessee and General Motors in Michigan), and information technology (Amazon in Washington state and Apple in California).

• DuPont, headquartered in Delaware, is the only chemical company across the full list. The company is somewhat actively engaged on climate, with an EI of 15%, and takes a mix of positive and negative positions.
• While most financial and banking companies fall into the low-engaged category, two exceptions are JPMorgan Chase in New York—with an InfluenceMap EI of 23%—and Bank of America in North Carolina, with a relatively lower but still active EI of 12%.
• Revenue in this group also spans a wide range, from Hawaiian Electric Industries, a utility, at $3,638 million, to Walmart, headquartered in Arkansas, at $680,985 million.

In addition to the largest companies by revenue, InfluenceMap’s US platform now also shows the largest private employer according to World Population Review’s Largest Employer by State 2026 list. Because LobbyMap analysis only includes publicly traded corporations, the US platform excludes public sector employers, government agencies, and university systems, which employ the largest number of residents in many states. Under these criteria, Walmart emerges as the largest employer across nearly half of the 50 states, peaking in Texas, where it employs over 177,000 people.

Despite its economic footprint, Walmart has a relatively low EI of 14%, indicating only slightly active advocacy on climate policy. While the company holds generally positive positions on climate—for example, advocating to pass the federal Inflation Reduction Act in 2022—InfluenceMap has found little recent evidence of positive advocacy for climate policy progress, and even less evidence of state-level engagement. See the map here for profiles of additional large employers in each state.

The State Climate Lobbying Landscape

InfluenceMap analysis consistently shows a range of vested interests—including industry associations, energy utilities, and oil and gas companies—dedicating massive lobbying efforts to subnational climate policy. The landscape for state-level action has been even more complicated following the rollback of the Inflation Reduction Act’s clean energy incentives, with some states claiming that their own climate targets have fallen out of reach. New York, for example, recently rolled back its climate law following years-long lobbying from the state’s business league and oil and gas interests, a trend that could continue in other states if not actively prevented.

State-level industry associations demonstrate highly active and negative engagement on climate and energy regulations, and every state has a cross-sector Chamber of Commerce speaking on behalf of local business. While InfluenceMap has only assessed seven of the state Chambers—including the California Chamber of Commerce (CalChamber), Business League of New York State (BCYNS), and Texas Association of Business—all seven actively engage in opposition to climate policy and the energy transition in their state.

Energy utilities also tend to actively lobby in the states they serve, with many continuing to advocate in favor of fossil fuels. In fact, none of the 27 US utilities currently assessed by InfluenceMap lobby on climate policy in full alignment with scientific recommendations. The largest utilities in each state are listed alongside other large companies and industry associations here.

Many of the companies identified in this analysis have climate goals and a clear stake in a renewables-led energy system, but despite this, remain unengaged on climate policy in their state. Scrutinizing state-level engagement, including by trade associations, must form a central component of any effort to hold companies accountable for their climate policy influence.