On 3 July 2026, the European Commission adopted revised European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS). This is not a new “version of CSRD”, but a revision of the reporting standards used to implement the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD).
Compared with the original ESRS set, the revised standards are intended to simplify reporting. The European Commission states that they reduce mandatory datapoints by more than 60% and the total number of datapoints by more than 70%. They also introduce additional flexibilities and streamline key reporting processes.
The core principle remains unchanged: companies must report material impacts on people and the environment, as well as material sustainability-related risks and opportunities. This is the principle of double materiality.
It is important to distinguish between two related developments. The Omnibus I Directive, adopted at EU level in February 2026, amends the CSRD framework, including its scope and assurance requirements. The revised ESRS adopted in July 2026 are still subject to scrutiny by the European Parliament and the Council before they apply.
| Parameter | Original CSRD framework | Framework following Omnibus I and revised ESRS |
|---|---|---|
| Scope | Large undertakings exceeding 250 employees and either €50 million in net turnover or €25 million in total assets; listed SMEs were also included in the scope. | CSRD scope is limited to companies with more than 1,000 employees that also exceed either €50 million in net turnover or €25 million in total assets. Listed SMEs are excluded. |
| ESRS datapoints | The original ESRS set contained a large number of datapoints and envisaged the development of sector-specific ESRS. | The Commission states that the revised ESRS reduce mandatory datapoints by more than 60% and total datapoints by more than 70%. The requirement to develop sector-specific ESRS has been removed. |
| Value chain | Reporting companies may need sustainability information from their value chain, which can create a significant “trickle-down” burden for suppliers. | A value-chain cap applies to companies with 1,000 employees or fewer. CSRD companies cannot require more information than specified by the voluntary reporting standard. They may request additional information, but must make clear that the supplier has the right to decline. |
| Assurance | The framework envisaged a possible future transition from limited assurance to reasonable assurance. | The transition to reasonable assurance has been removed. The assurance requirement remains limited assurance. |
| Timing | Companies in later reporting waves were expected to begin reporting under the original timetable. | The “Stop-the-Clock” measure postpones reporting requirements by two years for the affected later-wave companies. |
What this means in practice
- Market expectations remain important. Companies outside the direct CSRD scope may still receive ESG data requests from banks, investors and larger customers. However, the voluntary reporting standard provides a common and proportionate reference point for such requests.
- Double materiality remains central. Simplification does not remove the need for a robust double materiality assessment. It remains the basis for determining the sustainability information a company must report.
- Value-chain requests need to be proportionate. Procurement and sustainability teams should request only the information genuinely needed for CSRD reporting purposes and should align supplier questionnaires with the value-chain cap.
- Assurance planning becomes clearer. Limited assurance remains the applicable assurance level. Companies should still build reliable governance, processes and data controls, but a future mandatory move to reasonable assurance is no longer part of the CSRD framework.
