As Earth Day encourages support for environmental causes, Greenpeace is confronting a legal judgment that could represent more than a financial setback. It may pose an existential threat. A North Dakota court has finalized a $345 million judgment against Greenpeace entities tied to protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline. This followed a jury finding of liability for claims including defamation, trespass, and conspiracy.
The size of the judgment is significant relative to Greenpeace’s resources, and the organization has indicated it cannot readily absorb such a financial blow. Both Greenpeace and the plaintiff, Energy Transfer, are pursuing further legal action, with Greenpeace seeking a new trial and appeal.
The judgment does not apply to a single organization, but to several Greenpeace-related entities, including Greenpeace, Inc. (Greenpeace USA), Greenpeace International, and Greenpeace Fund, Inc. According to The North Dakota Monitor:
“The company sued three Greenpeace entities — Greenpeace USA, Greenpeace International and Greenpeace Fund.“
“The jury found Greenpeace USA liable for almost all claims. The jury did not find Greenpeace International and Greenpeace Fund responsible for the alleged on-the-ground harms committed by protesters, but did find those entities liable for defamation and interfering with Energy Transfer’s business. The jury found Greenpeace USA and Greenpeace International liable for conspiracy.”
This distinction matters because liability was allocated across entities that operate under the same brand but are legally separate.
Greenpeace disputes the allegations and has characterized the lawsuit as an attempt to silence advocacy, but the court’s ruling, at least for now, establishes substantial legal exposure across Greenpeace’s organizational network.
To understand the implications of the case from a donor’s perspective, it is essential to know that “Greenpeace” is not a single entity.
In the United States, the two primary organizations are:
Greenpeace, Inc. engages in advocacy and lobbying and receives non-tax-deductible contributions. Greenpeace Fund, Inc., by contrast, is a public charity and receives tax-deductible donations, but is more limited in the types of activities it can fund.
Beyond the U.S., Greenpeace operates through a global network that includes Greenpeace International, based in the Netherlands, and numerous national and regional affiliates. These entities are legally independent but operate under a shared global strategy.
The result is a structure in which:
Previously, CharityWatch rated Greenpeace, Inc. a C-minus on our “A+ to F” rating scaled based on our analysis of fiscal 2021 financial data.
CharityWatch is unable to provide a letter grade rating for Greenpeace at this time due to substantial doubt about the Organization’s ability to continue as a going concern. For this reason we have assigned it a “?” rating for its 2024 fiscal year.
According to the Independent Auditors’ Report within the audited financial statements for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2024 (Substantial Doubt about the Organization’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern):
“The accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming that Greenpeace, Inc. will continue as a going concern. As discussed in Note 11 [cited below] of the financial statements, because of accruing a loss related to a legal matter, Greenpeace, Inc.’s liabilities are significantly greater than its assets, and management has stated that substantial doubt exists about Greenpeace, Inc.’s ability to continue as a going concern. Management’s evaluation of the events and conditions and management’s plans regarding those matters also are described in Note 11 [cited below]. The financial statements include an adjustment that reflects the expected outcome of this uncertainty. Our opinion is not modified with respect to that matter.”
According to the Greenpeace audit of December 31, 2024 (Note 11, Going Concern Uncertainty):
“Greenpeace, Inc. is currently subject to a $404 million jury verdict rendered in March, 2025 in North Dakota in connection with litigation brought by Energy Transfer, LP and related entities. The litigation between Energy Transfer and Greenpeace centers on the environmental protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) that took place in 2016 and 2017. The plaintiff’s alleged that Greenpeace, Inc. engaged in defamation, trespass, and civil conspiracy, which led to significant financial losses and project delays.
The Organization has filed motions challenging the verdict and intends to appeal the verdict should it become a judgement. However, as of the date of issuance of these financial statements, the outcome and timing of those motions and the appeal process remain uncertain.
The verdict represents a liability far in excess of Greenpeace’s current financial resources. As of December 31, 2024, Greenpeace, Inc. had cash and cash equivalents of $1.4 million and total assets of $23 million. Absent a versal or substantial reduction of the verdict, the Company does not have sufficient liquidity to satisfy the judgment or to continue its operations beyond the next twelve months.
As a result of these factors, management has concluded that there is substantial doubt about Greenpeace Inc.’s ability to continue as a going concern for a period of one year after the date that these financial statements are issued. The accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming Greenpeace, Inc. will continue as a going concern and do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.”
Greenpeace’s audited Statement of Financial Position for its fiscal year ended December 31, 2024, reflects a net asset deficit of $395,219,752].
CharityWatch is unable to provide a rating for Greenpeace Fund (the Fund) based on its fiscal year ended 12/31/2024 at this time due to substantial doubt about the Organization’s ability to continue as a going concern, along with an inability to obtain its audited financial statements for that financial year. For this reason we have issued the charity a “?” rating, signifying nondisclosure of financial information and/or other specific concerns.
CharityWatch has historically been unable to provide a complete rating of the Fund due to how the organization is structured, as it has essentially functioned as a fundraising arm for its affiliated organizations, reporting no financially significant programs of its own. CharityWatch’s methodology is not designed to measure how efficiently one entity of a charity grants funds to its related organizations.
Per Schedule O of the Fund’s 2024 tax filing, the Fund reports re: Supplemental Information to the Form 990:
“Greenpeace Fund, Inc. was found liable in a $131 million jury verdict rendered in March 2025 in North Dakota in connection with litigation brought by Energy Transfer, LP and related entities. The litigation between Energy Transfer and Greenpeace centers on the environmental and Indigenous rights protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) that took place in 2016 and 2017. The jury found Greenpeace Fund, Inc. liable for defamation and tortious interference, which the plaintiffs argued led to significant project delays and financial losses. The organization has filed motions challenging the verdict, and as of the date of issuance of these financial statements, no judgment has been entered by the court. If the court does enter judgment against Greenpeace Fund, Inc. and denies a new trial, the organization will appeal. The outcome and timing of these legal processes remain uncertain. The verdict represents a liability in excess of the organization’s current financial resources. As of December 31, 2024, Greenpeace Fund, Inc. had cash and cash equivalents of $24 million and total assets of $42 million. If judgment is issued in the amount of the verdict and is not subsequently vacated or reversed, the organization does not have sufficient liquidity to satisfy the judgment or to continue normal operations if the judgment is enforced. As a result of these factors, management has concluded that there is substantial doubt about Greenpeace Fund, Inc.’s ability to continue as a going concern for a period of one year after the date these financial statements are issued. The accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming Greenpeace Fund, Inc. will continue as a going concern and include an adjustment that reflects the expected outcome of this uncertainty.”
[Per IRS Form 990, Part X, Balance Sheet, line 32, the Fund reports a net asset deficit of $101,147,462].
CharityWatch was previously unable to provide a complete rating of Greenpeace Fund for its fiscal year ended 12/31/2021 due to how the organization was (and continues to be) structured.
According to the Greenpeace Fund audit of December 31, 2021 (Note 8, Related Party Transactions, Stichting Greenpeace Council):
“Greenpeace is a global environmental organization, consisting of Greenpeace International (Stichting Greenpeace Council –the ‘Council’) in Amsterdam and 28 independent national and regional offices across the world covering operations in more than 55 countries. These national/regional offices are independent in carrying out global campaign strategies within the local context they operate within, and in seeking the necessary financial support from donors to fund this work. Greenpeace International’s main legal entity is ‘Stichting Greenpeace Council’ (SGC). It is a Dutch Stichting -a foundation-type nonprofit entity- based in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Although the Organization [Greenpeace Fund] is a nonvoting member of the Council, all Greenpeace entities are influenced by decisions of the Council. However, the Organization has ultimate responsibility for and control over its own activities and decisions.”
The U.S.-based Greenpeace Fund (tax ID #95-3313195) is one of the 28 independent offices referenced above that contributes financially to Greenpeace International (Stichting Greenpeace Council). According to the Greenpeace Fund audit of December 31, 2021 (Note 8, Related Party Transactions), Greenpeace Fund granted $8,028,130 to Stichting Greenpeace Council and $5,100,000 to Greenpeace, Inc. (Greenpeace, Inc. is a related U.S.-based 501(c)(4) tax-exempt, social welfare organization.) The grants from Greenpeace Fund to Stichting Greenpeace Council and Greenpeace, Inc. totaled $13,128,130, which is 100% of Greenpeace Fund’s program spending in 2021.
As described above, Greenpeace Fund essentially functions as a fundraising arm for its affiliated organizations, reporting no financially significant programs of its own. CharityWatch’s methodology is not designed to measure how efficiently one entity of a charity grants funds to its related organizations. For this reason, CharityWatch does not believe it is fair to publish a Program % for Greenpeace Fund alongside those of other charities that conduct their own programs and/or primarily make grants to unaffiliated charities. Therefore, CharityWatch is unable to provide a Program % for Greenpeace Fund, but we are able to provide its Cost to Raise $100 fundraising ratio:
In fiscal year 2021, Greenpeace Fund spent a very reasonable $6 to raise each $100 in public support.
In order for CharityWatch to be able to provide a complete rating for Greenpeace Fund in the future, we would require consolidated / combined financial statements, expressed in U.S. dollars and based on U.S. GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles) reporting standards, that include all of Greenpeace International’s related entities. Such statements would eliminate inter-organizational related party transactions, as well as provide a comprehensive view of how the organization both raises and spends public dollars on the whole. This information may not currently be practicable for Greenpeace International to provide given that it is headquartered in Europe, and because its national and regional offices may not be subject to comparable financial reporting requirements in their home countries.
[NOTE: CharityWatch provides a separate, complete letter grade rating for Greenpeace Fund’s related 501(c)(4) tax-exempt, social welfare organization, Greenpeace, Inc. (tax ID #52-1541501). For information about things to consider when donating to organizations that have related public charity and social welfare entities, read CharityWatch’s article, “Sorting Out Nonprofit Pairs.”]
The Greenpeace case illustrates how advocacy, financial structure, and legal risk intersect. Advocacy organizations often engage in activities that carry legal risk. In this case, that risk has materialized in the form of a judgment large enough to raise questions about the collective organization’s financial sustainability.
Greenpeace has a long track record of high-profile environmental advocacy that many donors view as highly impactful. Loyal supporters may see the current litigation as tied to that advocacy work rather than as an administrative departure from it. Continued giving could help sustain ongoing campaigns and signal support during a financially treacherous period for the organization.
At the same time, the disclosed judgment and “going concern” audit language indicate material financial uncertainty, including the possibility that a large portion of resources could be diverted to legal costs, settlements, or restructuring rather than to program activities. In practical terms, supporting Greenpeace now carries a higher-than-usual possibility that contributions will be affected by factors unrelated to program efficiency or impact.
Will you help CharityWatch continue our important work?
As the only independent charity watchdog organization in the United States, CharityWatch relies on your support to fund our in-depth research and analysis in order to bring you the unbiased charity ratings and other information you rely on to help you make more informed giving decisions. We are not directly or indirectly funded by nonprofit industry interests.
We hope you will consider making a donation today so that we can continue to speak openly and critically and call out wrongdoing when we see it without concern for special interests cutting our funding. CharityWatch is a small organization and your donations are noticed, needed, and greatly appreciated. Thank you for giving wisely!
| Charity | |
|---|---|
| Greenpeace | |
| Greenpeace Fund |
