Search
Contact
Symbolbild für die erste Omnibus-Verordnung: Containerschiff
26.02.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

First Omnibus Package to relax the obligations of the CSDDD, CSRD and EU taxonomy

The EU Commission has today published the draft of the first announced Omnibus Package. With the first directive as part of the omnibus initiative, the Commission wants to amend the CSRD, the CSDDD and the EU taxonomy in particular.

At the end of January, the Commission presented the EU Competitiveness Compass, which is based on the recommendations of the Draghi report. One of the focal points of the EU Compass is a roadmap for competitiveness. In particular, the reporting and due diligence obligations under the Green Deal are to be simplified, thereby reducing the administrative burden. More companies than before are to be completely exempted from the obligations. In addition to the draft of the first Omnibus Directive, further directives are planned, which will affect the CBAM, the InvestEU Regulation and the EFSI Regulation, for example.

Planned changes to the CSRD

The EU Commission would like to harmonise the application thresholds of the CSRD and CSDDD. In future, only companies with more than 1,000 employees and either more than 50 million euros in turnover or a balance sheet total of more than 25 million euros will have to submit a sustainability report in accordance with the CSRD. This is intended to reduce the number of companies subject to the CSRD by around 80 percent. Previously, two of the three criteria had to be exceeded: more than 50 million euros in turnover, a balance sheet total of more than 25 million euros or more than 250 employees. In addition, the ESRS and the obligations under the EU Taxonomy Regulation are also to be adjusted and the reporting obligations for companies in the second wave are to be postponed by two years. Listed SMEs are to be completely excluded from the from the scope of application of the CSRD. SMEs are to be relieved by the fact that the companies obliged by the CSRD are no longer allowed to collect all information from SMEs for the purposes of their own sustainability reporting.

The European Supply Chain Directive CSDDD is to be mitigated

The Commission now wants to further simplify the European Supply Chain Directive CSDDD, which had already been weakened before its adoption on 13 June 2024 at the insistence of individual member states.

Identification and assessment of negative impacts only in relation to direct business partners

The CSDDD stipulates that companies must assess and identify actual and potential negative impacts in relation to the entire chain of activities. This includes their own business activities, those of their subsidiaries and all direct and indirect business partners. The EU Commission would now like to limit these due diligence obligations to its own activities, those of subsidiaries and those of direct business partners, i.e. exclude indirect business partners in principle, except where there are indications of risks or violations. The due diligence obligations would then be similar to those of the German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG).

According to the proposal, information for the general mapping of risk areas should also no longer be able to be requested from direct business partners with fewer than 500 employees if it goes beyond the information required by the VSME standart under the CSRD.

The obligation to terminate contracts is to be dropped

The current CSDDD obliges companies to terminate the contractual relationship under certain conditions if a milder remedy – such as a suspension of the contractual relationship and corrective action plans – does not promise success in the event of serious potential or actual negative effects. The obligation to terminate business relationships is to be removed in order to avoid disrupting production-critical supply chains, for example, and to give suppliers the opportunity to improve the situation. Instead, the focus should be on a temporary suspension of the contractual relationship.

Fewer stakeholders need to be involved

To date, the involvement of stakeholders has been required for numerous steps of due diligence. In addition to those directly affected, stakeholders include consumers and human rights and environmental organizations. The circle of stakeholders to be included is to be reduced to those directly affected and their representatives. The sub-areas of the due diligence obligations in which stakeholders are to be involved are also to be reduced.

Monitoring effort to be reduced

According to the current CSDDD, the appropriateness and effectiveness of measures to identify, prevent, mitigate, remedy and minimize the extent of negative impacts must be reviewed at least every twelve months. The EU Commission wants to reduce the workload by only requiring companies to take monitoring measures every five years and when there is a specific reason to do so.

Climate plans should no longer have to be implemented

In addition to the due diligence obligations, the current CSDDD also obliges companies to draw up a climate plan with measures that must also be implemented. The Commission wants to weaken this obligation. Climate plans must contain implementation measures. However, the actual implementation should no longer be explicitly mandatory.

Sanctions and liability: Member states to be given more freedom of decision

Instead of a minimum upper limit for sanctions of 5 percent of global net turnover, the Commission now only wants to provide guidelines. The EU Commission also wants to give member states a free hand with regard to civil liability. Currently, member states are required to ensure that companies can also be held liable under civil law in the event of culpable infringements. This obligation is now to be dropped.

Commission strives for greater harmonization

The EU Commission also wants to reduce the member states’ room for manoeuvre. The aim is for the transposition laws of the individual EU member states to diverge less. Accordingly, the areas in which the member states cannot adopt divergent regulations are to be extended to include

– the requirements for due diligence at group level,
– all requirements for the identification of adverse impacts, with the exception of    requirements on the termination of contractual relationships, preventive measures and the remediation of actual adverse impacts and
– the requirements for the complaints procedure.

Start of CSDDD to be postponed by one year

The EU Commission wants to give companies more time for implementation. Instead of July 26, 2027, the first companies should not apply the CSDDD until July 26, 2028. To enable companies to plan better, the countries should transpose the directive into national laws more quickly. The implementation period should only be twelve months from the entry into force of the proposed amendments. In addition, the Commission’s specific guidelines on the fulfillment of due diligence obligations should also be presented six months earlier than previously planned, namely on July 26, 2026.

Parliament and Council still have to approve the Omnibus Package

The next step is for the EU Parliament and the Council to discuss the proposal. It is likely that the Omnibus Directive will then be amended.

What the planned changes mean for companies

The changes would ease the burden on business to a greater or lesser extent. Companies with a maximum of 1,000 employees would be exempt from the obligations of the CSRD and some affected companies would only have to report for the first time later than before.
Under the CSDDD, numerous detailed obligations would be removed. The effort required for investigations and assessments of negative impacts would be reduced and simplified, as only direct business partners and no longer the entire chain of activities would have to be reviewed. The risk of specific civil liability would also be eliminated. Smaller companies with fewer than 500 employees would only have to provide limited information. Companies would only have to carry out unprovoked monitoring measures every 5 years instead of annually. Companies would only have to involve stakeholders to a reduced extent. Overall, the planned measures could help to reduce the burden on companies, although in practice the specific scope will depend heavily on the respective risk situation and supplier structure of a company.
Companies can and should use the longer preparation time, should it be adopted, to integrate the obligations arising from the CSDDD into their governance.

 

Explore #more

24.03.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

Product piracy in online retail: these are the latest tricks

Product piracy is also flourishing with the growth in online trade. A major problem for brand owners, but also a challenge for online marketplaces and…

24.03.2025 | Deal Notifications

KPMG Law advises Munich Airport on the sale of aerogate München Gesellschaft für Luftverkehrsabfertigungen mbH

KPMG Law Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH (KPMG Law) provided legal advice to Flughafen München GmbH (FMG) on the sale of its subsidiary aerogate München Gesellschaft für Luftverkehrsabfertigungen…

21.03.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

Special infrastructure assets: how the administration manages to implement projects quickly

The special infrastructure fund creates the opportunity to catch up on years of investment backlog. There is a need for urgency. Defence capability, economic growth…

20.03.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

AI Act: This applies to AI in universities and research

Artificial intelligence (AI) offers numerous opportunities for research, teaching and administration, but also raises complex legal issues. The European Union’s AI Regulation(AI Act)…

19.03.2025 | In the media

BUJ/KPMG Law Summit Transformation

The Bundesverband der Unternehmensjuristinnen und Unternehmensjuristen e.V. (BUJ) and KPMG Law cordially invite you to the BUJ Summit Transformation on May 28, 2025 in Frankfurt…

18.03.2025 | In the media

KPMG Law Statement in the German transport magazine DVZ: Planning at a crawl; DIHK sees great potential for faster traffic route construction

The Chamber of Commerce in Arnsberg regularly awards prizes to the worst state roads in the Hellweg-Sauerland region of Westphalia. A funny idea, if it…

13.03.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

ECJ tightens antitrust liability for information exchange

The ECJ (C-298/22) has recently set strict standards for the permissible exchange of information between companies. As a result, companies are now even more faced…

11.03.2025 | In the media

KPMG Law Interview with HAUFE: LkSG after the elections – everything new?

Many companies have made considerable efforts to implement the Supply Chain Due Diligence Act. The political discussion about its abolition is now causing uncertainty. KPMG…

07.03.2025 | In the media

Guest article in unternehmensjurist: Implementing the requirements of the BFSG correctly

The Barrier-Free Accessibility Reinforcement Act requires companies to offer certain products and services without barriers. The obligations vary depending on the role in business transactions.…

05.03.2025 | In the media

KPMG Law Statement in TextilWirtschaft: What the changes from Brussels mean for the fashion industry

It’s now official: the EU Commission will massively simplify the planned sustainability reporting. The Supply Chain Law Initiative examines the announced changes to the CSDDD…

Contact

Dr. Thomas Uhlig

Partner
Co-Head of General Business and Commercial Law

Galeriestraße 2
01067 Dresden

Tel.: +49 351 21294460
tuhlig@kpmg-law.com

© 2024 KPMG Law Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH, associated with KPMG AG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft, a public limited company under German law and a member of the global KPMG organisation of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Limited, a Private English Company Limited by Guarantee. All rights reserved. For more details on the structure of KPMG’s global organisation, please visit https://home.kpmg/governance.

 KPMG International does not provide services to clients. No member firm is authorised to bind or contract KPMG International or any other member firm to any third party, just as KPMG International is not authorised to bind or contract any other member firm.

Scroll