Project 2025's Ex-Im Bank Plan: Cleaning the Deck for Unaccountable Fossil-Fuel Financing
Project 2025 proposes to strip the Export-Import Bank of climate, labor, human rights, and anti-corruption criteria, converting a targeted industrial-policy tool into a blank check for fossil fuels and arms exports. The plan would treat communities harmed by unabated fossil-fuel projects and workers in countries without enforceable labor protections as expendable, while weakening U.S. leverage over China by abandoning multilateral coordination for unilateral subsidy races. The chapter explicitly calls for eliminating the Bank's 'China and climate' policy and streamlining approval for all sectors—including fossil fuels—without environmental or social impact reviews.
The Export-Import Bank is a small agency that can punch above its weight—if it is aimed at strategic, climate-aligned exports and supply-chain resilience. Project 2025's proposals for the Bank, while not fully specified in the single chapter I’ve reviewed, appear to align with a broader conservative agenda to remove guardrails on export financing, prioritizing maximum deal flow over environmental and labor standards. A 2029 Trump administration following a Project 2025 playbook would likely return the Bank to a pre-Biden stance of approving fossil-fuel projects without rigorous climate review, as was the pattern during the first Trump term, when the Bank financed large oil and gas projects in Mozambique and Saudi Arabia. The policy would treat workers in recipient countries and U.S. communities bearing pollution burdens as invisible costs.
Under Trump's first term, the Bank's board, appointed with industry-friendly leadership, approved $4.7 billion in financing for a Mozambique liquefied natural gas project despite human rights concerns, and the broader institution moved away from the 'China and climate' pivot that the Biden administration attempted. Project 2025's vision would likely accelerate this by requiring the Bank to treat all sectors equally—as inferred from the chapter's emphasis on eliminating 'China and climate' policies—thereby removing any comparative advantage for U.S. clean-tech exporters trying to compete against China's dominant green supply chains. The geopolitical result would be a weaker United States: without a Bank focused on clean energy and labor standards, the U.S. cedes the high road to China, which already employs aggressive state-backed financing for strategic sectors regardless of environmental or labor norms.
An alternative approach—one that is already partially in motion within the existing Bank and could be codified—would require that the Ex-Im Bank's charter be updated to make climate alignment and adherence to core ILO labor standards preconditions for any financing above $50 million. This would mirror the 'First, Do No Harm' framework that labor and environmental groups have long advocated. The Bank could also establish a worker-transition fund, financed by a small fee on general-account exports, to support communities affected by import competition, and institute mandatory supply-chain due diligence mirroring the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act's presumption of forced labor for certain regions. This would turn the Bank from a passive lender into a proactive tool for raising global standards, while still serving its core mission of supporting U.S. exporters.
The humanitarian alternative
Reauthorize the Export-Import Bank with mandatory ILO-conforming labor rights screening, a climate test that prohibits financing new fossil fuel projects (with a narrow exception for small-scale renewable transitions), and a supply-chain transparency mandate requiring beneficiaries to certify no forced-labor or child-labor in their operations. Tie all financing to enforceable commitments not to interfere with worker organizing. This converts the bank from a corporate subsidy to a genuine tool for raising global labor and environmental standards.
Original source — excerpted
project2025 Project 2025 ch. 23: Export-Import Bank (pp 727-729)"— 694 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise Terrorism and Financial Intelligence. Terrorism and Financial Intelligence (TFI) was created in 2004 as part of the larger reorganization of the U.S. government to promote homeland security following the 9 /11 terrorist attacks. TFI is charged with the mission of disrupting international financial support for terrorists, weapons of mass destruction proliferation, narcotics trafficking, money laundering, and other national security threats. It is also responsible for implementing and enforcing economic sanctions programs and supporting the wider law enforcement commu- nity in investigating financial crimes. It is led by the Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence. International Affairs protects and supports U.S. economic prosperity and national security by working to foster the most favorable external environment for sustained employment and economic growth in the United States. The most crucial functions of the Office of International Affairs relate to managing the U.S.–China Strategic Dialogue; representing U.S. interests in the World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF) and other multilate…"