Green building continues to evolve as a central theme in the future of construction, real estate, and environmental policy in the United States. In July 2025, the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) once again demonstrated its leadership in this space through critical advocacy efforts aimed at protecting, improving, and promoting sustainability standards in buildings at the federal, state, and local levels. These efforts come at a pivotal time, with the green building sector navigating a rapidly shifting policy landscape, intensified political debates, and economic pressures that influence how sustainability goals are implemented in real estate development, construction, and housing.
One of the most significant developments this month involves the ENERGY STAR program, which has long served as one of the most trusted and recognized energy efficiency labels in the U.S. Developed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), ENERGY STAR provides benchmarks and certification for buildings, appliances, and systems that achieve superior energy performance. The Trump administration’s renewed effort to eliminate federal funding for ENERGY STAR in its fiscal year 2026 budget proposal reignited concerns across the sustainability community. However, in a rare display of bipartisanship, the House Appropriations Committee added report language through amendment to their appropriations bill, urging EPA to allocate at least $32 million to maintain and operate the ENERGY STAR program. Even more significantly, the Senate Appropriations Committee passed its own version of the bill with a more forceful provision, inserting $36 million directly into the bill text, which, if passed, would require the administration to fund the program at that level.
This kind of bicameral support is critical in an increasingly polarized Congress. The fate of FY26 appropriations remains uncertain—Congress could still opt for a continuing resolution that delays or sidelines funding decisions—but the initial support for ENERGY STAR highlights how energy efficiency transcends traditional political divides. It also reflects a growing understanding that energy-efficient buildings are not just about environmental performance; they’re about saving money for families, reducing operational costs for businesses, and contributing to broader climate mitigation efforts without sacrificing economic growth.
While Congress debates the funding, USGBC continues to mobilize constituents to make their voices heard. Through simple online tools, citizens can send messages to their representatives encouraging continued support for ENERGY STAR and other sustainability initiatives. This grassroots engagement has become a vital strategy for ensuring environmental programs remain on the federal agenda, especially under administrations that may deprioritize climate and energy efficiency issues.
Another high-stakes issue that USGBC is tackling this month concerns minimum energy codes for federally assisted housing projects. Under the Biden administration, HUD and USDA had modernized their energy requirements by adopting the 2021 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) and ASHRAE 90.1-2019 standards, replacing the outdated 2009 and 2007 editions, respectively. These newer standards reflect advances in energy efficiency, design strategies, and construction technologies, helping to lower energy bills, improve housing quality, and reduce carbon emissions.
However, the Trump administration has now reopened this determination for public comment, prompting concern that the administration might roll back the updated energy codes. The agencies are soliciting feedback through August 6, asking stakeholders whether to retain or revert these standards. USGBC plans to submit formal comments advocating for the preservation of the 2021 codes, and it is encouraging developers, builders, architects, and residents familiar with these standards to do the same. Maintaining these higher energy codes is essential for reducing long-term utility costs, especially for low-income residents who are more vulnerable to fluctuations in energy prices.
The implications are significant not only for energy performance but also for affordability. Energy-efficient homes cost less to operate, meaning residents can dedicate more of their income to food, healthcare, and other necessities. In the broader context of the housing crisis, reducing energy expenses is a proven method of improving housing affordability. What makes this moment particularly delicate is the fact that green building policies often get caught in broader ideological battles about federal regulation, local autonomy, and market freedom. Advocates must walk a careful line—demonstrating the tangible economic and health benefits of these codes while pushing back against narratives that frame them as burdensome or overly prescriptive.
In addition to energy codes, HUD has proposed another policy shift that could undermine progress in green housing. Specifically, the agency is considering eliminating the discounted mortgage insurance premium (MIP) rate category for energy-efficient and green-certified multifamily housing projects. This policy has long provided financial incentives for developers who integrate sustainability features—such as LEED certification—into their projects. By offering a lower insurance premium, the program made it more economically attractive to build efficient, healthy, and resilient housing.
Removing this preferential category threatens to reverse years of progress. USGBC responded by submitting comments urging HUD to maintain this financial tool, arguing that energy-efficient buildings not only enhance affordability through reduced utility costs but also present lower financial risk in terms of loan default. After all, lower monthly utility expenses often correlate with increased housing stability for residents. Furthermore, energy-efficient buildings often perform better over time, facing less wear and tear from mechanical failures or environmental exposure. These characteristics align perfectly with the core mission of the Federal Housing Administration: promoting accessible, affordable, and sustainable housing while managing long-term financial risk.
Another sweeping development affecting green building policy came on July 4th, when President Trump signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act into law. Marketed as a broad fiscal realignment measure, the law effectively terminated several key tax incentives tied to building decarbonization and clean energy. This includes credits and deductions for new energy-efficient home construction, electric vehicle charging infrastructure, and on-site renewable energy systems like solar and wind power. The law also rescinds remaining unspent funds from Inflation Reduction Act grant and financing programs, many of which were designed to spur investment in high-performance building retrofits, environmental justice communities, and emerging clean energy markets.
The passage of this bill represents a major setback for the green building sector. These incentives have played a vital role in encouraging innovation, scaling emerging technologies, and creating more equitable access to sustainable housing and infrastructure. While the full implications are still being unpacked, the loss of these tools will likely slow progress toward climate goals, at least in the short term. For developers, architects, and construction professionals, this means tighter margins and potentially lower demand for green-certified projects unless new state or local incentives fill the gap.
Speaking of state and local action, the USGBC has also been busy tracking legislation at the subnational level. Since the beginning of the year, the policy team has reviewed more than 2,000 bills across various states, prioritizing nearly 340 for closer attention and identifying 26 for active engagement. One of the more notable developments this month occurred in Oklahoma, where the Housing Finance Agency released the first draft of its 2026 Qualified Allocation Plan. QAPs govern how states allocate Low-Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTCs), and they play a powerful role in shaping affordable housing development. USGBC submitted comments urging the state to include competitive points for projects that achieve green building certifications like LEED.
Such incentives within QAPs can significantly increase the number of sustainable affordable housing projects, especially in regions where market demand alone might not drive green features. USGBC's involvement in the Oklahoma QAP process signals a broader effort to ensure that affordable housing policies integrate environmental performance and resilience, not just basic affordability criteria. Developers, architects, and planners working in Oklahoma—or any state with an open QAP process—are encouraged to participate in comment periods, as these plans often undergo multiple revisions before final adoption.
At the local level, USGBC launched its summer 2025 cohort of the Local Green Building Policy Accelerator. This program brings together 20 local governments to work collaboratively on developing and implementing sustainability policies tailored to their jurisdictions. These accelerators offer technical assistance, peer learning, and expert guidance to municipalities eager to advance their green building agendas. Even if a city missed the current cohort, they can still join the waitlist or request assistance from the USGBC policy team. As federal support for climate action becomes more uncertain, local governments have an increasingly vital role to play in driving progress.
The rise of local innovation in green building policy mirrors a broader trend in the climate and sustainability movement: decentralized leadership. Cities and counties, from progressive coastal hubs to conservative heartland towns, are proving that smart, green building policy can thrive at every level of government. Whether through zoning reforms, energy benchmarking ordinances, building code updates, or financial incentives for retrofits, local governments are uniquely positioned to enact meaningful change—and they often do so faster and with greater community input than their federal counterparts.
Looking ahead, the green building movement in the United States stands at a crossroads. On one hand, strong market demand, better technologies, and greater public awareness are driving momentum. On the other hand, political headwinds, regulatory uncertainty, and fiscal policy reversals threaten to slow or even reverse some of the gains made over the past decade. Organizations like USGBC play a critical role in holding the line, advancing policy, and ensuring that the long-term vision of a sustainable built environment remains within reach.
For construction professionals, developers, architects, and engineers, this is not a time for passivity. Engagement is key—whether through public comment, direct advocacy, participation in working groups, or simply educating clients and communities about the value of sustainable design. The buildings we construct today will shape the environmental, economic, and social landscape of tomorrow. Investing in green building is not just a matter of ethics or brand value; it’s a strategic imperative in a world increasingly defined by resource constraints, climate volatility, and rising expectations for health and equity.
In conclusion, July 2025 was a month of both challenges and opportunities for green building policy in the United States. From Congress to city councils, from federal housing regulations to local pilot programs, the future of sustainable construction is being written in real time. Stakeholders at every level must stay informed, stay engaged, and stay committed to building a better, greener future.