Corporate Responsibility Claims Under Political Backlash: Disclosure Durability Across Technology, Manufacturing, and Finance

ABSTRACT This study develops the concept of corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure durability to explain why some public responsibility claims remain visible and checkable when their political or legal costs increase, whereas others are renamed, relocated, or reduced. We conduct a longitudinal comparative multiple‐case analysis of annual filings and sustainability‐related disclosures issued by nine large US‐listed technology, manufacturing, and financial firms from 2014 through 2025. Durability is evaluated through three dimensions: visibility, specificity, and public checkability. The 2025 stress test shows that climate and governance disclosures generally persisted where they were connected to recurring metrics, board oversight, assurance, and investor‐facing reporting. Diversity‐related disclosures displayed more substitution and selective retreat, although firms frequently retained inclusion, opportunity, or workforce commitments under revised language. The study distinguishes disclosure durability from reporting quality and CSR performance and provides a preliminary assessment tool for evaluating continuity in corporate accountability claims.