ON Semiconductor Corp

Lobbying Governance & Transparency

Sign up to access all our data and the evidence and analysis underlying our overall scores. Once you've created an account, we'll get in touch with further details:

Lobbying Governance
Overall Assessment Analysis Score
None ON Semiconductor Corp. articulates its support for a range of public policies and industry memberships but does not disclose any internal processes to ensure that its lobbying activities align with its climate commitments. For instance, the company states “We support public policies that encourage the innovation, investment and open markets necessary to advance our vision of driving energy-efficient innovations that empower customers to reduce global energy use” and notes it “is a founding member of the Semiconductor Climate Consortium (SCC) focused on the challenges of climate change and working to speed industry value chain efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in member company operations and in other sectors of the semiconductor value chain.” However, it provides no description of who within the organization oversees or signs off on lobbying positions, how those engagements are monitored or managed against its climate strategy, or any alignment review processes. When asked about committing to conduct its engagement in line with the Paris Agreement, ON Semiconductor responds “No, and we do not plan to have one in the next two years,” and we found no evidence of board or executive oversight, regular audits, or specific policies governing the alignment of its direct or indirect lobbying with its climate goals.

View Sources

E
Lobbying Transparency
Overall Assessment Analysis Score
Limited ON Semiconductor offers only limited insight into its climate-related lobbying. It indicates that policy engagement happens “through industry associations like the SIA and WSC” and that it “engag[es] with government agencies globally,” but it does not identify the particular agencies contacted or describe concrete actions such as meetings, letters, or consultation responses. On the substance of its advocacy, the company points to broad support for the CHIPS for America Act and for unspecified “energy-efficiency policies” promoted via its membership in the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, yet it does not name any specific climate or energy-related legislation, nor does it clarify whether these are its only areas of engagement. Likewise, the objectives it seeks remain high-level—promoting innovation, growth, energy efficiency, and open markets—without measurable targets or detailed policy positions. As a result, disclosures touch on each of the key elements of policy, mechanism, and desired outcome, but they remain general and lack the specificity needed for a clearer picture of the company’s climate lobbying activities.

D