| Scope and covered activity | Eligibility starts with the economic activity description in the delegated acts adopted under the Taxonomy Regulation. Match the activity itself, not just a company label or NACE sector. | Alignment starts from the eligible activity and then tests whether that activity qualifies as environmentally sustainable under Article 3 and the applicable technical screening criteria. | Do not describe a company, product line, or investment as aligned just because one of its activities is eligible; document the exact activity boundary first. |
|---|
| Who must act | Article 8 reporting applies to undertakings required to publish non-financial information under Articles 19a or 29a of Directive 2013/34/EU. Finance, sustainability, and business data owners usually need to map activities and KPIs. | The same reporting population may need alignment evidence, but the work expands to owners who can prove screening criteria, DNSH controls, safeguards processes, and activity-level data. | Assign eligibility mapping to reporting and business owners, then assign alignment testing to the teams that control technical, environmental, human-rights, and KPI evidence. |
|---|
| Trigger or threshold | The trigger is whether the activity is described in the delegated acts. Commission guidance states that eligibility does not depend on meeting technical screening criteria and gives no indication of sustainability. | The trigger is the Article 3 sustainability test: substantial contribution to one or more Article 9 objectives, no significant harm to the other objectives, minimum safeguards, and compliance with technical screening criteria. | Treat eligibility as the entry gate for reporting and alignment as the claim gate for environmentally sustainable activity. |
|---|
| Core reporting obligation | For non-financial undertakings, eligibility reporting covers the proportion of Taxonomy-eligible and non-eligible activities in turnover, CapEx, and OpEx. Financial undertaking disclosures use their Article 8 asset or activity KPIs. | Alignment reporting shows the share of activities or financing associated with environmentally sustainable economic activities, using the Disclosures Delegated Act methodology and templates where applicable. | Build KPI tables so eligible, non-eligible, eligible-but-not-aligned, and aligned amounts cannot be collapsed into one sustainability number. |
|---|
| Evidence and records | Eligibility evidence should show the activity description used, the delegated act source, the reporting boundary, the KPI denominator, and any voluntary estimate clearly separated from mandatory disclosure. | Alignment evidence should add proof for substantial contribution, DNSH, minimum safeguards, and each applicable technical screening criterion, with activity-level traceability. | Keep an audit trail from source provision to activity mapping, KPI calculation, alignment test, reviewer sign-off, and final wording. |
|---|
| Timing and cadence | Eligibility reporting began first under Article 10 of the Disclosures Delegated Act: large undertakings reported eligibility from January 2022 for the previous annual reporting period. | Alignment reporting phased in later: large non-financial undertakings reported aligned climate activities from 2023, large financial undertakings from 2024, and certain credit institution trading book plus fees and commissions KPIs from 2026. | Do not infer that an old eligibility-only report failed alignment; check which reporting year, undertaking type, objective, and KPI were in scope. |
|---|
| Assurance and claim risk | Eligibility risk is mainly overstatement: presenting an activity as sustainable, or using voluntary estimates, when the mandatory disclosure only supports eligible or non-eligible status. | Alignment risk is evidence failure: a public aligned claim is weak if any Article 3 condition, screening criterion, DNSH requirement, or minimum safeguard cannot be supported. | Review public copy, investor materials, and report notes so eligible is not used as a synonym for green, sustainable, or aligned. |
|---|
| Overlap and reuse | Eligibility mapping can feed alignment because it defines the universe of activities that may have potential to align with technical screening criteria. | Alignment can reuse the activity map and KPI base, but it must add the environmental and safeguards evidence required for an environmentally sustainable activity. | Reuse the same activity inventory and KPI owner where possible, but keep the alignment checklist separate until every Article 3 condition is evidenced. |
|---|
| Practical decision rule | Use eligibility when answering: is this activity described in the Taxonomy delegated acts and therefore part of eligible or non-eligible Article 8 reporting? | Use alignment when answering: can this eligible activity be counted or described as environmentally sustainable under the Taxonomy Regulation? | Publish the narrowest accurate statement: eligible means covered by the Taxonomy activity descriptions; aligned means the full Article 3 and delegated-act tests are met. |
|---|