{"id":191890,"date":"2025-06-17T14:33:25","date_gmt":"2025-06-17T14:33:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/191890\/"},"modified":"2025-06-17T14:33:25","modified_gmt":"2025-06-17T14:33:25","slug":"council-of-eu-mulls-limiting-csddd-scope-to-firms-with-5000-employees","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/191890\/","title":{"rendered":"Council of EU mulls limiting CSDDD scope to firms with 5,000+ employees"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"EU<\/p>\n

The Council of the European Union is discussing the possibility of raising the threshold for companies in scope of the bloc\u2019s corporate due diligence rules to those with more than 5,000 employees and \u20ac1.5 billion net turnover, according to leaked documents.<\/p>\n

A draft of the Council\u2019s fourth compromise text says that, while the European Commission did not suggest revising the scope of the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD)<\/a> in its February Omnibus<\/a> proposal, the Polish presidency \u201csees a merit in exploring the possibility\u201d of limiting it to larger companies.<\/p>\n

\u201cIn the presidency\u2019s view, such largest companies are able to have the biggest influence on their value chain and, at the same time, are best equipped to absorb the costs and burdens of due diligence process,\u201d the document says.<\/p>\n

The leaked draft proposal would see the scope of the directive drastically reduced. As it stands, it covers firms with more than 1,000 employees and \u20ac450 million in net turnover.<\/p>\n

While the scope of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD)<\/a> has been heavily debated by the Council<\/a>, this is the first time changes to the CSDDD threshold have been discussed.<\/p>\n

On the European Parliament side, the lead Omnibus negotiator, Swedish MEP J\u00f6rgen Warborn, has proposed watering down the scope of the regulation<\/a> to companies with 3,000 employees and \u20ac450 million in net turnover.<\/p>\n

The presidency has also proposed postponing the transposition deadline of the regulation by one year to July 2028.<\/p>\n

\u201cAs discussed in the context of the \u2018stop the clock\u2019 proposal, in the presidency\u2019s view, companies should be given sufficient time to set up relevant due diligence processes,\u201d it wrote.<\/p>\n

The text will form part of the discussions on the revision to the CSRD and CSDDD at a member state representative meeting on Wednesday 18 June.<\/p>\n

An EU source said the discussion had been confirmed for Wednesday, and the presidency\u2019s intention is to reach an agreement at this level so that the file can be adopted at next week\u2019s general affairs council meeting.<\/p>\n

Further changes<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Council also proposed a series of other amendments to CSDDD.<\/p>\n

These include simplifying the provisions for climate change mitigation transition plans by aligning them with CSRD \u2013 as previously discussed \u2013 and delaying the requirement to adopt transition plans by two years to 2030.<\/p>\n

It would also be clarified that companies through their transition plans \u201ccontribute to\u201d limiting global warming in line with the Paris Agreement, rather than saying the plans \u201care compatible\u201d with doing so.<\/p>\n

The Council said the European Commission should issue guidelines on transition plans, including practical guidance on sectoral pathways to adequately assist companies in designing their plans, as well as for supervisory authorities.<\/p>\n

It also suggested limiting the due diligence obligations to a company\u2019s own operations, subsidiaries and direct business partners.<\/p>\n

Warborn has proposed scrapping transition plan requirements altogether.<\/p>\n

The presidency also expanded on its proposal for identifying and assessing actual and potential impacts, which it said is based on the \u201crisk-based approach\u201d, where the focus is placed on areas where these impacts are most likely to occur.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"The Council of the European Union is discussing the possibility of raising the threshold for companies in scope…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":191891,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5174],"tags":[15679,14920,2000,299,5187,1699,14921,2443],"class_list":{"0":"post-191890","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-eu","8":"tag-csddd","9":"tag-csrd","10":"tag-eu","11":"tag-europe","12":"tag-european","13":"tag-european-union","14":"tag-omnibus","15":"tag-regulation"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@uk\/114699200442397894","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/191890","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=191890"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/191890\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/191891"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=191890"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=191890"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=191890"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}