ING's new head office in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Photo: ING Group via Flickr (CC BY 2.0)ING (an abbreviation of Internationale Nederlanden Groep) is a Netherlands based international financial services company and one of the world's largest savings banks. It was founded through a merger in 1991 of NMB Postbank Groep and the insurance business of Nationale-Nederlanden, which history dates back to 1845. ING's primary businesses are retail banking, direct banking, commercial banking, investment banking, asset management, and insurance services. ING is active in over 40 countries.
| Website | http://www.ing.com/group/index.jsp?&lang=en |
| Headquarters |
Cedar Blijmerdreef 106
1102 CT Amsterdam
Netherlands
|
| CEO/chair |
Steven van Rijswijk CEO |
| Supervisor | |
| Annual report | Annual report 2019 |
| Ownership |
listed on Euronext Amsterdam & Euronext Brussels
ING's shareholder structure can be seen here. |
A bank can obtain a total of 200 policy points for its overall fossil fuel policies; 120 possible points for oil and gas policies and 80 possible points for coal policies. Based on this score banks are then classified as laggards (0-50 points), followers (50.5-100 points), front runners (100.5-150 points) or leaders (150.5-200 points).
The scores for a bank's policies restricting expansion of fossil fuels - in each area, prohibitions against financing projects and/or companies expanding that area - are aggregated into a fossil fuel expansion policy score.
The point-based policy ranking for fossil fuel expansion consists of the following distribution:
A bank can obtain a total of 89 policy points for its fossil fuel expansion policy. Based on this score, banks are then classified as laggards (0-22.25 points), followers (22.25-44.5 points), front runners (44.5-66.75 points) or leaders (66.75-89 points).
For each of the six subsectors, 20 possible policy points can be obtained, so a bank can obtain a total of 120 policy points for its oil and gas policies. Based on this score banks are then classified as laggards (0-30 points), followers (30.5-60 points), front runners (60.5-90 points) or leaders (90.5-120 points).
The point-based policy ranking above assesses bank policies in four ways:
1) Restriction on direct financing for tar sands projects.
None (0), weak exclusion (1.5), moderate exclusion (3), strong exclusion (4)
2) Restriction on financing for companies that expand tar sands.
None (0), weak exclusion (3), strong exclusion (5)
3) The bank’s commitment to phase-out financing for tar sands.
None (0), reduction (1.5), weak phase-out (3), strong phase-out (5)
4) The bank’s commitment to exclude companies active in tar sands above a certain threshold.
None (0), enhanced due diligence (0.5), weak exclusion threshold (2), strong exclusion threshold (5), full exclusion (6)
A bank can obtain a total of 20 policy points for its tar sands policy. Based on this score banks are then classified as laggards (0-5 points), followers (5.5-10 points), front runners (10.5-15 points) or leaders (15.5-20 points).
The point-based policy ranking assesses bank policies in four ways:
1) Restriction on direct financing for Arctic oil and gas projects.
2) Restriction on financing for companies that expand Arctic oil and gas.
3) The bank’s commitment to phase-out financing for Arctic oil and gas.
4) The bank’s commitment to exclude companies active in Arctic oil and gas above a certain threshold.
A bank can obtain a total of 20 policy points for its Arctic oil and gas policy. Based on this score banks are then classified as laggards (0-5 points), followers (5.5-10 points), front runners (10.5-15 points) or leaders (15.5-20 points).
The point-based policy ranking assesses bank policies in four ways:
1) Restriction on direct financing for offshore oil and gas projects.
2) Restriction on financing for companies that expand offshore oil and gas.
3) The bank’s commitment to phase-out financing for offshore oil and gas.
4) The bank’s commitment to exclude companies active in offshore oil and gas above a certain threshold.
A bank can obtain a total of 20 policy points for its offshore oil and gas policy. Based on this score banks are then classified as laggards (0-5 points), followers (5.5-10 points), front runners (10.5-15 points) or leaders (15.5-20 points).
The point-based policy ranking assesses bank policies in four ways:
1) Restriction on direct financing for fracked oil and gas projects.
2) Restriction on financing for companies that expand oil and gas fracking.
3) The bank’s commitment to phase-out financing for oil and gas fracking.
4) The bank’s commitment to exclude companies active in oil and gas fracking above a certain threshold.
A bank can obtain a total of 20 policy points for its fracking policy. Based on this score banks are then classified as laggards (0-5 points), followers (5.5-10 points), front runners (10.5-15 points) or leaders (15.5-20 points).
The point-based policy ranking assesses bank policies in four ways:
1) Restriction on direct financing for LNG projects.
2) Restriction on financing for companies that expand LNG.
3) The bank’s commitment to phase-out financing for LNG.
4) The bank’s commitment to exclude companies active in LNG above a certain threshold.
A bank can obtain a total of 20 policy points for its LNG policy. Based on this score banks are then classified as laggards (0-5 points), followers (5.5-10 points), front runners (10.5-15 points) or leaders (15.5-20 points).
The point-based policy ranking assesses bank policies in four ways:
1) Restriction on direct financing for other/conventional oil and gas projects.
None (0), weak exclusion (1.5), strong exclusion (4)
2) Restriction on financing for companies that expand other/conventional oil and gas.
None (0), weak exclusion (3), strong exclusion (5)
3) The bank’s commitment to phase-out financing for other/conventional oil and gas.
None (0), reduction (1.5), weak phase-out (3), strong phase-out (5)
4) The bank’s commitment to exclude companies active in other/conventional oil and gas above a certain threshold.
None (0), enhanced due diligence/Equator Principles commitment (0.5), weak exclusion threshold (2), strong exclusion threshold (5), full exclusion (6)
A bank can obtain a total of 20 policy points for its other/conventional oil and gas policy. Based on this score banks are then classified as laggards (0-5 points), followers (5.5-10 points), front runners (10.5-15 points) or leaders (15.5-20 points).
For both coal mining and coal power, 32 possible policy points can be obtained, while for other coal,16 possible policy points can be obtained. So a bank can obtain a total of 80 policy points for its coal policies. Based on this score banks are then classified as laggards (0-20 points), followers (20.5-40 points), front runners (40.5-60 points) or leaders (60.5-80 points).
The point-based policy ranking assesses bank policies in four ways:
1) Restriction on direct financing for coal mining projects.
2) Restriction on financing for companies that expand coal mining.
3) The bank’s commitment to phase-out financing for coal mining.
4) The bank’s commitment to exclude companies active in coal mining above a certain threshold.
A bank can obtain a total of 32 policy points for its coal mining policy. Based on this score banks are then classified as laggards (0-8 points), followers (8.5-16 points), front runners (16.5-24 points) or leaders (24.5-32 points).
The point-based policy ranking assesses bank policies in four ways:
1) Restriction on direct financing for coal power projects.
2) Restriction on financing for companies that expand coal power.
3) The bank’s commitment to phase-out financing for coal power.
4) The bank’s commitment to exclude companies active in coal power above a certain threshold.
A bank can obtain a total of 32 policy points for its coal power policy. Based on this score banks are then classified as laggards (0-8 points), followers (8.5-16 points), front runners (16.5-24 points) or leaders (24.5-32 points).
The point-based policy ranking assesses bank policies in four ways:
1) Restriction on direct financing for coal infrastructure projects.
None (0), weak exclusion (1), strong exclusion (3)
2) Restriction on financing for companies that expand coal infrastructure.
None (0), weak exclusion (2), strong exclusion (4)
3) The bank’s commitment to phase-out financing for coal infrastructure.
None (0), exposure reduction (1), weak phase-out (2), strong phase-out (4)
4) The bank’s commitment to exclude companies active in coal infrastructure above a certain threshold.
None (0), enhanced due diligence (0.5), weak exclusion threshold (2), strong exclusion threshold (4), full exclusion (5)
A bank can obtain a total of 16 policy points for its coal infrastructure policy. Based on this score banks are then classified as laggards (0-4 points), followers (4.5-8 points), front runners (8.5-12 points) or leaders (12.5-16 points)
ING is reporting on the implementation here.
You may also want to directly contact the department of ING that is responsible for the Equator Principles (keep us informed):
