Suggested Omnibus-adjustments to CS3D, CSRD, CBAM and Taxonomy

In-depth analysis

The European Commission introduced the "Omnibus" package on February 26, 2025, aiming to streamline and simplify existing EU sustainability regulations to enhance global competitiveness and reduce administrative burdens on businesses. The package proposes significant changes to the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) and the EU Taxonomy Regulation.

The CSRD would see a reduction in scope, affecting only large companies with over 1,000 employees and more than EUR 50m turnover or EUR 25m balance sheet, and a delay in reporting requirements for most companies by two years. The CSDDD's implementation would be postponed by one year to July -2028, with simplified due diligence obligations and a primary focus on direct suppliers. Companies with over 1,000 employees and up to EUR 450m turnover would no longer be obliged to report on the EU Taxonomy Regulation. At the heart of the planned simplification of the CBAM Regulation is a de minimis rule that would exclude numerous companies from the personal scope of application in future. The Omnibus package requires approval from the European Parliament and a majority of EU member states before it can be enacted.

CSDDD

Minor change
Significant change
Far-reaching change

	CS3D so far	CS3D omnibus	LkSG	Comment
Risk analysis (Art. 8)	Analyzing areas where adverse impacts are likely and severe and in-depth assessment in this regard – this can be in the entire supply chain.	In-depth assessment can typically only be in own business area and at direct business partners; indirect business partners only in cases of “plausible information that suggests that adverse impacts at the level of the operations of an indirect business partner have arisen or may arise”. Q: Mapping of areas where adverse impacts are likely and severe appears to still cover entire supply chain (see para. 2 lit. (a)). Q: What does “having plausible information” mean? Q: No gathering of information from direct business partners with fewer than 500 employees - but why only with respect to mapping (para. 2 lit. (a)) and not regarding in-depth-ass.?	Risk analysis in own business area and at direct suppliers; at indirect suppliers only in case of “substantiated knowledge”.	Far-reaching change since it remains unclear when “plausible information on indirect business partner” is assumed – only in exceptional cases (e.g. specific information on a particular supplier) or also in cases of information about potential adverse impacts in an entire supply chain. Still uncertainties due to suggested wording.
Civil liability (Art. 29)	Civil liability possible only in case of: intentional or negligent. non-compliance with preventive or remedial measures. causality between the damage and the company's misconduct.	Civil liability possible only under national laws obligation of MS to ensure litigation on another’s behalf deleted. international mandatory application deleted.	“A violation of the obligations under the LkSG does not give rise to any liability under civil law”; liability only possible according to general principles of civil law.	Far-reaching change, since civil liability according to national laws will be less likely and without international mandatory application most likely rules of the country where the harm occurs apply. However thresholds for liability under CS3D were high already. And explicit exclusion that a violation of the obligations under the CS3D does not give rise to liability (see LkSG) is missing. Courts could e.g. consider joint causation as an indication for liability.
Application (Art. 37)	Application as of July 2027 = 3 phases: 2027: 5000+ emp. and 1500+ m. turnover. 2028: 3000+ emp. and 900+ m. turnover. 2029: 1000+ emp. and 450+ turnover.	Application as of July 2028 = 2 phases: 2028: 3000+ emp. and 900+ m. turnover. 2029: 1000+ emp. and 450+ turnover.	Applies since January 2023.	Significant, but doesn’t change the applicability itself.
Penalties (Art. 27)	Max. fine at least 5 % of turnover.	No figures anymore; penalties up to member states.	Max. fine of 2 % of turnover.	Significant but not far-reaching since unclear how member states will decide on penalties and provision that Commission issues guidance and that penalties in MS shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive.
Monitoring (Art. 15)	Monitoring, i.e. assessment of adequacy and effectiveness required at least every 12 months.	Monitoring required at least every 5 years.	Monitoring, i.e. assessment of adequacy and effectiveness required every year.	Minor change since apparently due diligence would still need to be carried out without undue delay for every new supplier; relief mainly with respect to existing suppliers that do not need to be monitored every year but only every five years.
Financial institutions (Art. 36)	Only covered with respect to upstream sourcing; deposits, loans, investments not included.	Only covered with respect to upstream sourcing; deposits, loans, investments not included. Only change is that there should be no review as to whether it will become necessary to extent due diligence obligations of financial undertakings to their financial services and investment activities.	Only covered with respect to upstream sourcing; deposits, loans, investments not included.	Minor, since future review wouldn’t have necessarily lead to extension of due diligence obligations for financial institutions.
Level of harmonization (Art. 4)	Full harmonization with respect to risk assessment, preventive and remedial measures.	Full harmonization with respect to risk assessment, preventive and remedial measures and due diligence support at group level (Art. 6) and notification mechanism and complaints procedure (Art. 14).	-	Minor change since more interesting parts (risk assessment, preventive and remedial measures) were already harmonized.
Preventive and remedial measures (Art. 10, 11)	As a last resort termination of business relationship required if action plan is not successful.	No termination of business relationship required; only suspension, no entering into new relations and no extending existing relation with a business partner required if action plan is not successful.	Termination of business relationship only required if 1. violation is assessed as very serious, 2. implementation of the measures developed in the concept does not remedy the situation, 3. the enterprise has no other less severe means at its disposal and increasing the ability to exert influence has no prospect of success.	Minor change since in practice business relationships are not only terminated as a last resort according to legal requirements; often termination already before to avoid extensive measures.
Stakeholder engagement (Art. 3 para. 1 lit. (n))	Engagement required with company’s employees, employees of its subsidiaries, employees of its business partners, trade unions, workers representatives, consumers, other individuals, groupings, communities or entities whose rights or interests are or could be affected, national human rights and environmental institutions, civil society organizations.	See left column, however engagement not required with consumers, national human rights and environmental institutions, civil society organizations.	Stakeholder engagement less prominent and not further specified.	Minor change since most important stakeholders remain.
Transition plan (Art. 22)	Transition plan for climate change mitigation to be adopted and put into effect.	Transition plan for climate change mitigation to be adopted.	No transition plan required.	Minor change since transition plan for climate change mitigation was fulfilled through CSRD-compliance before as well and according to existing Art. 25 para. 1 authorities were already only empowered to supervise adoption and design of transition plan.

CSRD

Minor change
Significant change
Far-reaching change

	CSRD so far	CSRD omnibus	Comment
Scope reduction (Art. 19a para 1, 29a para 1. 40a)	From 2025 for 2024: Large EU companies of public interest (capital market-oriented companies, credit institutions and insurance companies) with more than 500 employees and a balance sheet total > EUR 25 million or turnover > EUR 50 million (the same thresholds apply to EU parent companies on a consolidated basis) (Wave 1). From 2026 for 2025: Large EU companies that exceed two of the following three limits: Balance sheet total > EUR 25 million, turnover > EUR 50 million, employees > 250 (the same thresholds apply to EU parent companies on a consolidated basis) (Wave 2). From 2027 for 2026: EU SMEs that exceed two of the following three thresholds: Balance sheet total > EUR 450,000, turnover > EUR 900,000, employees > 10 (the same thresholds apply to EU parent companies on a consolidated basis) (Wave 3). From 2029 for 2028: Non-EU parent companies with a turnover in the EU of more than EUR 150 million and either an EU subsidiary that itself exceeds the CSRD thresholds or an EU branch with a turnover of more than EUR 40 million (Wave 4).	Combination of Wave 1 to Wave 3: Reporting requirement for all large companies with more than 1.000 employees and a balance sheet total > EUR 25 million or turnover > EUR 50 million (the same thresholds apply to EU parent companies on a consolidated basis). Public interest (capital market-oriented companies, credit institutions and insurance companies) does not play a role. Wave 4: Increase of thresholds for overall turnover from EUR 150 million to more than EUR 450 million. for turnover of EU branch from EUR 40 million to more than EUR 50 million.	This is a far-reaching change as it significantly reduces the scope of the applicability of the CSRD, removing the reporting obligation of 80% of the companies that were initially part of the scope of the CSRD. No more distinction between capital market-oriented and non-capital market-oriented companies. Furthermore, no longer two out of three criteria but threshold of employees plus turnover or balance sheet.
Implementation Schedule	Wave 1: Reports required for the financial year starting on or after January 1, 2024 > Report to be prepared in 2025. Wave 2: Reports required for the financial year starting on or after January 1, 2025 > Report to be prepared in 2026. Wave 3: Reports required for the financial year starting on or after January 1, 2026 > Report to be prepared in 2027. Wave 4: Reports required for the financial year starting on or after January 1, 2028 > Report to be prepared in 2029.	Wave 1: No change foreseen (if the CSRD is already implemented in a EU-country) or those reporting pursuant to NFRD (if the CSRD has not already been implemented in a EU-country) > Reporting requirement remains. Wave 2: Reporting (with new thresholds) starts in 2028 (instead of 2026). Wave 3: New thresholds don’t apply to SMEs anymore. Wave 4: No change foreseen.	This is a far-reaching change, as the companies have more time for preparation. No change foreseen for companies in Wave 1 (if the CSRD is already implemented in a EU-country) or those reporting pursuant to NFRD (if the CSRD has not already been implemented in a EU-country) > Reporting requirement remains. The regulations are set out in a separate directive, which is independent of the guideline with the regulations on the scope and extent of the reporting obligation. The background to this is probably that the Commission believes that this directive will be adopted more quickly than the other directive. Therefore, it would already apply to the CSRD in its current version.
Value Chain (Art. 19a para 3, 29a para 3)	Companies were required to collect and report sustainability data across their entire value chain, including direct and indirect business relationships.	Reporting companies are not allowed to request more sustainability data from companies in their value chain with fewer than 1,000 employees than what is outlined in a new voluntary standard for out-of-scope companies. The reporting company should, however, be allowed to collect from such out-of-scope companies in its value chain any additional sustainability information that is commonly shared between companies in the sector concerned.	This is a far-reaching change, as it removes the opportunity for large enterprises affected by the CSRD to exhort power over smaller partners, requiring them to adhere to EU regulatory standards. This will greatly reduce the burden on SMEs and other out-of-scope companies.
Sustainability reporting standards for voluntary use by out-of-scope undertakings (Art. 29 ca new)	-	These standards must be proportionate and relevant to the capacities and the characteristics of these undertakings and to the scale and complexity of their activities.
Upcoming sector-specific standards (Art. 29b)	The European Commission was mandated to adopt delegated acts specifying sector-specific sustainability reporting standards.	The requirement for sector-specific European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) has been removed.	Sector-specific standards had not yet been released, leading to a lack of clarity how much the added value or burden of these would have been in practice.
EU Taxonomy (Art. 19 b, Art. 29aa)	All companies under the CSRD scope were required to report on criteria pursuant to Article 8 of the EU Taxonomy.	Companies with > 1000 employees and up to EUR 450 m. turnover, in principle, are no longer obliged to report on criteria pursuant to Article 8 of the EU Taxonomy. Companies with > 1000 employees and > EUR 450 m. turnover still obliged to report under EU Taxonomy.	This is a further simplification for companies that no longer have to provide the information in accordance with the EU-Taxonomy.
Datapoints to be reported	More than 1000 data points in the first set of ESRS, ranging from qualitative to quantitative.	The Commission intends to adopt a delegated act to revise the first set of ESRS. To deliver swiftly on the simplification and streamlining of the ESRS, and to provide clarity and legal certainty to undertakings The reporting framework will be revised to reduce the number of mandatory data points and focusing more on quantitative data.	This change, although unclear how strong, will bring significant change to the reporting scope.
Assurance Requirements (Art. 34)	Companies were required to obtain limited assurance on sustainability information, with a planned transition to reasonable assurance under certain conditions.	The possibility of moving from limited to reasonable assurance has been removed. Only limited assurance required. Commission will issue targeted assurance guidelines by 2026.	This represents a minor change in assurance, since only limited assurance had been discussed in practice yet.

CBAM

Minor change
Significant change
Far-reaching change

	CBAM so far	CBAM Omnibus	Comment
Scope reduction (Art. 2)	Exclusion from the scope of CBAM only for goods whose individual value per consignment did not exceed EUR 150 (“de minimis threshold”).	The de minimis threshold of only EUR 150 has been removed; importers are now exempt from CBAM if the net mass of the imported CBAM goods (except for hydrogen and electricity) does not exceed a cumulative annual threshold of 50 net tons.	Far-reaching change, as the adjustment and increase of the de minimis threshold means that small and medium-sized enterprises in particular are excluded from the scope of CBAM (probably 90% less companies).
Delegation to a CBAM representative (Art. 5)	No option to appoint a regular representative (= acting in the name and on behalf of the importer) to submit CBAM declarations.	Possible to have the CBAM declarations submitted by a regular representative. The CBAM declarant remains legally responsible for fulfilling CBAM obligations even in the case of delegation.	Significant change as it does make a significant contribution to simplifying the reporting obligations for importers.
Calculation of emissions (Art. 7)	Using standard values instead of calculating emissions only under certain strict circumstances.	Easier to use standard values when calculating emissions.	Significant change, as determination of emissions will be easier for importers to implement in the future.
Carbon price paid in a third country (Art. 9)	The number of CBAM certificates to be purchased has been reduced if the importer has already paid a carbon price in the country of origin.	The number of CBAM certificates to be purchased can now also be reduced if the importer in a third country other than the country of origin has already paid a carbon price.	Significant change as companies can more easily account for greenhouse gas emissions in third countries.
Purchase and surrender of CBAM certificates (Art. 20, 22)	The purchase of CBAM certificates would currently be required after the transitional period on January 1, 2026. The CBAM certificates had to be surrendered by 31 May of each year via the CBAM registry.	The commission now plans to postpone the purchase of CBAM certificates to February 1, 2027. The deadline for surrendering CBAM certificates via the CBAM registry has been changed to August 31.	Significant change as the start of the sale of CBAM certificates is postponed by one year.
CBAM declaration (as of 2026) (Art. 6)	Starting in 2026, the annual CBAM declaration was due by May 31 of each year.	The annual deadline for submitting the CBAM declaration has been changed to 31 August of each year.	Minor change, as the deadline is only postponed by three months.

EU Taxonomy Regulation

Minor change
Significant change
Far-reaching change

	Taxonomy so far	Taxonomy Omnibus	Comment
Scope reduction	All companies under the CSRD scope were required to report on criteria pursuant to Article 8 of the EU Taxonomy.	Companies with > 1000 employees and up to EUR 450 m. turnover, in principle, are no longer obliged to report on criteria pursuant to Article 8 of the EU Taxonomy. Companies with > 1000 employees and > EUR 450 m. turnover still obliged to report under EU Taxonomy.	This is a further simplification for companies that no longer have to provide the information in accordance with the EU-Taxonomy.
New materiality threshold	No materiality threshold.	Economic activities exempted from assessing Taxonomy eligibility/Alignment if not financially material (i.e. those not exceeding 10% of total turnover, capital expenditure, or total assets).	Significant, since simplification for companies.
Reduction of data points	Reporting templates to be filled out.	Less reporting templates, leading to a reduction of data points by almost 70%.	Significant, since simplification for companies.