An investigation published today in the Wall Street Journal reveals that more than 140 corporations were allowed to claim carbon offsets credits from one of the world’s largest projects hosted by Verra in Brazil, despite the fact that the project was under investigation for claims regarding its legitimacy. Corporations such as BlackRock, Mastercard, and Phillip Morris International were allowed to retire and count these credits towards their emissions-reducing activities while the project was suspended. Evidence suggests that the project may have been illegitimate from its establishment, due to claims that it was located on public lands where it did not have a legal right to operate. The Wall Street Journal investigation was based in part on research conducted by Corporate Accountability.
Additional research by Corporate Accountability released today reveals that over 70% of all carbon credits recently retired in Brazil are “problematic” and cannot be counted on to deliver their promised emissions reductions. The researchers examined the top 50 carbon offset projects in Brazil between January 2024 and June 2025 — which are also among the largest projects globally — and found that millions of these problematic offsets were retired by multinational corporations and counted towards their emissions reductions despite not being likely to deliver.
The research shows that 32 of the top 50 carbon offsets projects in Brazil are unlikely to reduce emissions. These projects retired 15.7 million carbon offsets credits between January 2024 and June 2025. In theory, offsets are meant to help reduce emissions by allowing corporations to purchase these offsets to claim they are reducing pollution through emissions-reducing activities taking place by other actors elsewhere. But this new research underscores a growing body of evidence that lays bare the failings of carbon offsets, and the voluntary carbon market (VCM) where they are regulated and traded.
This means that a substantial portion of the offsets from these projects that corporations were counting towards their emissions reductions were likely doing little to nothing to reduce emissions. All of this while communities around the world face worsening floods, droughts, and extreme weather — as well as systemic violence fueled and enabled by some of the world’s largest corporate polluters in places like Palestine, Sudan, Venezuela, Iran and elsewhere.
Verra, the world’s largest carbon credit certifier, hosts 23 of the 32 problematic projects in Brazil. This accounts for 12.8 million carbon offsets credits retired between January 2024 and June 2025. Despite promises of reform amidst repeated integrity concerns, Verra appears to continue to host projects that are not proven to deliver real and lasting emissions reductions. The Clean Development Mechanism hosts the remaining nine problematic projects, accounting for 2.9 million offsets retired during this period. The Clean Development Mechanism has a history of hosting projects that lack real emissions reductions and has been estimated to actually increase global emissions by 6.1 billion tons of carbon dioxide through approval of empty offsets.
“Carbon offsets have failed to lead to a decrease in global greenhouse gas emissions,” said Rachel Rose Jackson, Director of Climate Research and Policy at Corporate Accountability. “Meanwhile, the claims of harm to communities and ecosystems caused by these projects continue to pile up. Yet again, the evidence suggests that those promoting and profiting off these projects cannot be counted on to help protect the planet. With life at stake, who is liable for the continued failures of these projects and the carbon market more broadly? And how many more times do we need to see evidence of their failure before we reorient towards more meaningful and proven solutions that reduce emissions and keep fossil fuels in the ground?”
Corporate Accountability’s research also revealed that many major international corporations across sectors have retired offsets from these problematic Brazil-based projects. Petrobras retired nearly 200,000 credits from these problematic projects during the research period. Shell retired approximately 66,500 credits, and Equinor nearly 21,000. BlackRock retired 137,000 problematic credits from these projects.
Consulting firms also made significant use of these questionable offsets. EY retired nearly 179,000 credits from problematic Brazil projects. BCG retired around 90,000 credits. KPMG and Deloitte each retired around 5,500 credits. Other corporations using these problematic offsets include Barilla, Philip Morris, Uber, SWIFT, Mastercard, S&P Global, Engie, Yamaha Motor, and Dell.
The Wall Street Journal investigation and Corporate Accountability’s research raises questions about the continued popularity of carbon offsets projects that even industry actors like BeZero assess as unlikely to deliver emissions reductions. It warrants discussion as to why buyers and policymakers continue to participate in a system with such significant problems, and who is responsible for the repeated failure of checks and balances within the voluntary carbon market.
The voluntary carbon market is predicted to grow significantly in coming years. Climate advocates, academics, communities, and experts are calling for immediate action to reverse the harms and failures of the carbon market, and to course-correct to real solutions that will put us on a proven pathway to Real Zero emissions.
Carlos Augusto Pantoja Ramos, a Forestry Engineer and PhD student at the Amazonian Institute of Family Agriculture, Federal University of Pará in Brazil, has worked extensively with communities impacted by carbon offsets projects. He explained that it is not the communities near projects like Pacajaí that have benefitted from these projects. “The attempt to capture public and common goods, such as land, by projects…such as Pacajaí, can intensify the concentration of income in the hands of a few corporations and institutional investors, deepening the severe social inequality in regions like the Amazon. This reveals disproportionate gain relationships between the parties involved, many of whom lack the structure and/or technical knowledge to assert their rights.”
The briefing expands upon the findings of “Built to Fail?: World’s Largest Carbon Offset Projects Unlikely to Deliver Promised Emissions Reductions Despite Reforms” and looks specifically at the largest carbon offsets projects located in Brazil. Despite their failures, carbon markets continue to be promoted as a central pillar of climate action. “Built to Fail?“ found that 47.7 million problematic offset credits were retired through 43 of the world’s largest offset projects in 2024. That volume represents nearly one-quarter of the entire voluntary carbon market in 2024.
Many of the largest offsets projects in Brazil are also some of the largest offsets projects in the voluntary carbon market globally.
The briefing is available here in English, and will be available in Spanish and Portuguese in the coming days. The full research report “Built to Fail?: World’s Largest Carbon Offset Projects Unlikely to Deliver Promised Emissions Reductions Despite Reforms” offers more in-depth analysis of many other industries, corporations and geographies. Rachel Rose Jackson and Carlos Augusto Pantoja Ramos are available for interviews.
