Search every question across sub-FAQs

Even where liability conditions are national, contemporaneous due diligence evidence matters to the factual questions likely to arise: what the company knew, which duty applied, how impacts were assessed and prioritised, which measures were reasonably available, what stakeholders reported, what monitoring showed, and how alleged damage is connected to company conduct.

The original Directive (EU) 2024/1760 required certain in-scope companies to adopt and put into effect a climate transition plan for climate-change mitigation. The plan was to pursue, through best efforts, compatibility with a sustainable economy, the Paris Agreement 1.5 C limit, and EU climate neutrality, including intermediate and 2050 targets.

Historical Article 22 required time-bound 2030 targets and five-year steps to 2050, appropriate Scope 1, Scope 2, and Scope 3 absolute emissions-reduction targets, decarbonisation levers and key actions, quantified investment and funding, and the role of administrative, management, and supervisory bodies. It also required an update every 12 months with progress against targets. Directive (EU) 2026/470 entered into force on 18 March 2026 and states that Article 22 is deleted.

Member States must transpose the CSDDD-related 2026 amendments by 26 July 2028 and apply them from 26 July 2029. The amended CSDDD does not require Member States to impose the former standalone Article 22 duty. A national law may still contain a climate-plan obligation on another basis, including an earlier or separate national measure, so the company must check the law that applies to it.

Yes. Deleting CSDDD Article 22 answers only the CSDDD question. A company may still need a plan, plan disclosure, targets, or progress reporting under the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive and applicable European Sustainability Reporting Standards, national climate or corporate law, sector regulation, lending or investment terms, procurement conditions, or a public commitment.

Keep the legal tests separate. ESRS E1-1 is a disclosure requirement concerning a transition plan for climate-change mitigation; it does not recreate the former CSDDD duty for every company. Whether ESRS E1-1 applies depends on the reporting entity's current CSRD scope, the applicable reporting period and standards, and its materiality assessment. A contractual or voluntary plan may also use different boundaries, targets, governance, and assurance.

Do not delete the plan or its evidence merely because Article 22 was removed. First identify every remaining basis for the control. Then relabel the owner, evidence, update cycle, and assurance statement so each one points to the rule, contract, or commitment that still requires it.

If no other basis remains, record the legal change and retire the CSDDD-specific obligation in a controlled way. Preserve historical decisions and public statements that still need an audit trail, and correct any current statement that says the amended CSDDD itself requires the plan.

Do not apply the Commission's February 2025 proposal as if every proposed change became law. Build the change register from Directive (EU) 2026/470 and the current consolidated CSDDD. Preserve national-law dependencies because a directive requires transposition and Member States retain room in areas the CSDDD does not fully harmonise.

Separate removed rules from amended rules. Article 22 was deleted. Article 29's uniform liability test was deleted, but compensation and procedural safeguards remain. Mandatory termination was removed, while restrictions on new or extended relationships, possible suspension, enhanced action plans, notice, impact comparison, monitoring, and review remain in amended Articles 10 and 11.

Also separate entry into force from company application. The 2026 amendment is binding on Member States, which must complete CSDDD transposition by 26 July 2028 and apply the national measures from 26 July 2029. Until then, a company's current duties may arise from existing national due diligence law, sector rules, contracts, or voluntary commitments rather than from the future application date alone.

The amendment changed how several controls operate, but it retained the core Articles 5 to 16 lifecycle. Covered companies still need a risk-based due diligence policy, impact identification and assessment, prioritisation where necessary, prevention and corrective measures, remediation, stakeholder engagement, complaint and notification routes, monitoring, and public communication under the applicable national measures.

Retain supporting evidence for at least five years from production or receipt, extending retention through any ongoing proceeding. Review and, where necessary, update the due diligence policy at least every 24 months and without undue delay after a significant change. These policy and evidence cycles are separate from the amended Article 15 effectiveness assessment, which runs after significant change, at least every five years, and on reasonable grounds to doubt adequacy or identify new risks.

For each old control, record the former source, the adopted amendment, the current consolidated article, the national-law dependency, the affected entity or process, and the implementation decision. Mark proposal text and legislative history as historical so a reviewer can tell which source has legal force.

The register should lead to an owner and a dated action, not a general statement that Omnibus was reviewed. Reassess it when a Member State publishes transposition measures, the Commission issues Article 18 or 19 guidance, a group crosses or falls below a scope threshold for a relevant year, or a business process changes the chain of activities.

A third-country company passes the general Article 2(2) amount test when it generated more than EUR 1.5 billion in net turnover in the Union in the financial year preceding the last financial year. The threshold is strict: EUR 1.5 billion exactly does not pass. The same route applies to an ultimate parent company when its group reaches that amount on a consolidated basis even if the parent does not reach it alone.

Use net turnover under the financial reporting framework used for the company's financial statements, then isolate the amount generated in the Union on a consistent and supportable basis. The Directive does not replace the accounting framework with a special CSDDD revenue measure. A legal entity list, customer or transaction geography, accounting policy, ledger-to-statement reconciliation, consolidation eliminations, and currency conversion should let a reviewer reproduce the result.

Example: if the relevant Union net turnover is EUR 1.6 billion in each of two consecutive test years, the amount and duration conditions are met. If it then falls to EUR 1.4 billion for one year, scope does not end at once; Article 2(5) requires the conditions to cease to be met for each of the last two relevant financial years.

A scope result does not itself appoint the regulator or complete implementation. For a third-country company, the competent Member State is normally where it has a branch. If it has no Union branch or branches in several Member States, competence follows the Member State where it generated the highest Union net turnover in the Directive's reference year.

The company must also designate an authorised representative in a Member State where it operates. Keep the signed and accepted mandate, notified contact details, evidence of the representative's powers and resources, authority correspondence, and any reasoned request to change competent authority after a change in turnover geography.