In Brussels, sustainability ambition met economic gravity.
After four years of negotiation, European Union member states gave final approval to the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive as amended by the Omnibus I package, narrowing the scope of one of the bloc’s most consequential corporate accountability frameworks. The directive survives, but its perimeter has been redrawn under mounting competitiveness pressure.
The architecture holds. The reach contracts.
Scope reduced, liability concentrated
The revised CSDDD now applies only to the largest corporations, those with more than 5,000 employees and €1.5 billion in annual turnover, alongside foreign companies exceeding that turnover within the EU. Earlier thresholds had captured a much broader corporate base.
The change is not cosmetic.
By limiting coverage to a smaller group of multinationals, the EU has effectively narrowed the universe of firms exposed to mandatory human rights and environmental due diligence obligations across global supply chains. Fines of up to 3 percent of net global turnover remain available for breaches, but enforcement risk is now concentrated among fewer entities.
Exposure consolidates at the top.
Climate obligation removed
Among the most consequential amendments is the removal of a requirement for companies to adopt climate transition plans. Compliance deadlines have also been extended to mid-2029, delaying earlier implementation timelines by two years for larger firms.
Time expands. Obligation recedes.
The changes extend to the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive, raising reporting thresholds to companies with more than 1,000 employees and €450 million in annual turnover, compared with the previous 250-employee benchmark.
Comparability narrows.
For investors and market analysts, this shift alters the data perimeter that underpins ESG screening, supply chain exposure modelling and capital allocation decisions across mid-cap Europe. A smaller reporting base reduces visibility into segments of the market that were previously within regulatory scope.
Information asymmetry widens.
Competitiveness as override
EU ministers framed the revisions as a move toward more targeted and proportionate regulation. External pressure from governments including the United States and Qatar, who warned that strict due diligence rules could disrupt gas supply relationships, underscored the geopolitical dimension of the recalibration.
Regulation bends under supply realities.
The amendments follow industry criticism that regulatory burden was undermining European competitiveness relative to foreign rivals. The Omnibus package therefore represents more than technical adjustment; it signals that sustainability expansion now operates within explicit economic constraints.
Leadership now carries conditions.
Accountability preserved, but thinner
Despite dilution, the directive retains provisions granting victims of corporate abuse access to EU courts and administrative enforcement. Large multinationals remain legally required to identify and address certain risks within their value chains.
The accountability core remains intact.
Yet the removal of mandatory climate transition plans and the raising of reporting thresholds mark a shift from expansion to containment. The EU’s original ambition was to embed due diligence deeply across corporate Europe. The revised framework embeds it selectively.
Ambition absorbs friction.
The structural signal
The CSDDD began as a structural attempt to anchor global corporate conduct to European regulatory standards. Its amended form reflects a recalibration in which competitiveness, energy security and geopolitical pressure reshape the boundaries of sustainability law.
For global capital, the signal is sharper than the headline suggests.
Regulatory ambition in the EU remains intact, but its perimeter is now responsive to economic stress and political leverage. That responsiveness introduces conditionality into what had been presented as structural transformation.
The perimeter has narrowed. The precedent has widened.
Whether this marks a pragmatic consolidation or the first step in a broader retrenchment will depend on how firmly the EU enforces the slimmer framework it has chosen to preserve.
RELATED STORIES:
Follow SDG News on LinkedIn
