On February 26, 2026, in the Official Journal of the EU[4] was published Directive (EU) 2026/470 (“Omnibus I”)[14], which drastically narrows the scope of non-financial reporting under CSRD and due diligence obligations under CSDDD (CS3D). After the changes, CSRD will cover only companies exceeding simultaneously 1,000 employees[5] and 450 million euros in annual net turnover, which according to estimates excludes about 90% of firms originally covered by this regime. CSDDD will apply only to entities with revenues over 1.5 billion euros, excluding around 70% of the original population.
The Directive takes effect on March 18, 2026[17], and Member States – including Poland – have until March 19, 2027[30] to implement CSRD changes and until July 26, 2028, for the CSDDD part; CS3D obligations will effectively start on July 26, 2029[31]. The Brussels political compromise among the European Parliament, the EU Council, and the European Commission reduces the number of reporting companies but maintains strict requirements for the largest capital groups and their supply chains, meaning further “trickling down” of ESG data demands to smaller subcontractors and the necessity to update due diligence duties and strategies.
Omnibus I Narrows Scope of CSRD and CSDDD
Simultaneously, in the United States, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) approved implementing regulations[3] for the climate laws SB 253 and SB 261, creating the first comprehensive mandatory emissions disclosure system in the US. According to the adopted schedule, large companies operating in California with revenues above approximately 1 billion dollars (SB 253) and 500 million dollars (SB 261) must report[23] Scope 1 and 2 emissions for 2025[29] starting August 10, 2026, and Scope 3 emissions from 2027. The laws will cover both American and European corporations – including potentially Polish groups with significant sales in California – forcing harmonization of emissions measurement and reporting systems under CSRD, upcoming SEC regulations, and state requirements. A constitutional dispute over SB 261 temporarily delays enforcement of mandatory climate risk reports, but CARB already collects voluntary data, and the risk of disputes over the quality of Scope 3 estimates[24] and greenwashing allegations is rising.
California, Greenwashing, and Anti-ESG
A new front opens in anti-ESG disputes. Asset manager Vanguard agreed to a $29.5 million settlement[11] in a multi-state antitrust lawsuit initiated by, among others, the Alabama Attorney General with Texas playing a key role. Vanguard, Black. Rock, and State Street were accused of coordinated, pro-climate actions against the coal sector. In exchange for resolving part of the case, Vanguard accepted commitments limiting how it votes its shares on ESG matters. This is the first such major success for the “anti-ESG” camp[13] in US antitrust law, which may encourage the largest asset managers to be more cautious in participating in net-zero alliances and weaken climate pressure from broad index capital on listed companies also in Europe.
In the United Kingdom, the risk linked to greenwashing sharply increases following the enactment of the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 (DMCCA) and the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023. Starting with the 2025/26 financial year, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) can independently impose administrative penalties on companies for misleading environmental claims up to 10% of a group’s global turnover[28], and serious, deliberate climate frauds may be classified as “failure to prevent fraud” offenses with potential criminal liability. This particularly impacts the retail, fashion, FMCG, finance, and aviation sectors, but also affects EU entities serving UK customers, including Polish online stores. Companies using terms such as “climate neutrality,” “zero-emission,” or “sustainable” must have solid data, life cycle analyses, and auditable documentation, as evidentiary standards in marketing start to resemble non-financial reporting requirements.
Record Emissions and Surge in Green Energy Financing
Against this regulatory tension, the Climate TRACE consortium published the new database 5.4.0[2], showing that global greenhouse gas emissions in 2025 reached another record – the year-to-date level was about 0.5% higher than the previous year. Some regions show emission decreases linked to renewable energy development, yet the oil and gas sector reached new historical highs. Data based on satellite observations and sectoral emission breakdowns are becoming a tool for regulators – including EU institutions responsible for CBAM, taxonomy, and CSRD report supervision – and investors who can verify corporate inventories’ credibility. For companies in high-emission sectors like energy, cement, or steel, this means growing pressure to confront their own data with external databases and scenarios.
A contrast to the emissions record is the situation in the US energy sector. According to the latest Short-Term Energy Outlook published by the U. S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) on March 1, 2026, CO₂ emissions from energy in the United States are expected to fall by 1.4% in 2026 compared to 2025 and by another 0.5% in 2027, mainly due to accelerated coal phase-out. Simultaneously, in 2026, the US is projected to add about 86 GW of new generation capacity[9], including 43.4 GW of photovoltaics, 24.3 GW of energy storage, and 11.8 GW of wind, which accounts for about 93% of the increase coming from low-emission technologies. The scale of these investments confirms that the US market for renewables and storage, driven by incentives under the Inflation Reduction Act, remains one of the key expansion areas for technology providers, developers, and financial institutions from Europe, while intensifying global competition for module production capacity, batteries, and execution resources.
Sources
Related posts:
- EU Taxonomy Consultations, First CBAM Price, and Energy Price Pressure — A Week in ESG
- Week Marked by Tightened ESG Standards and New Corporate Strategies
- ESG and Climate: Narrowed CSRD, CBAM Price Start, and New Wave of Green Financing
- ESG at a Crossroads: CBAM, Simplified Reporting, and Real Costs of the Climate Crisis