EuropeanIssuers contributed to the European Commission’s call for feedback on the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) Proposal.
EuropeanIssuers welcomed the
Commission’s initiative on sustainability reporting and its primary goal
of having a clearer and more coherent reporting framework within the
EU. Nevertheless, in its feedback
it stressed that the defined framework is too prescriptive and does not
consider adequately the competitive issues that EU companies could face
on international level, neither the costs generated to implement the
new requirements.
EuropeanIssuers highlighted the concerns regarding the extension of the scope of the Directive.
- The extension of the provisions to all SMEs listed on regulated
market is not justified as there is no correlation between the “listing
status” and the companies’ impact on ESG or ESG’s impact on companies
and is disproportionate as the SME definition covers very small
companies whether SMEs listed on regulated market or not. SMEs should be
exempted from the mandatory discipline of the CSRD or at least
implement an opt-in mechanism allowing them to use simplified reporting
regimes.
- The extension of the provisions to all large companies, including
the ones who will be reporting on non-financial issues for the first
time: for those companies who will be reporting for the first time,
EuropeanIssuers proposed a regime of progressive application.
- The lack of extension to non-listed and non-EU companies exceeding a
certain threshold of a global turnover: regarding the non-EU companies
operating in the EU, EuropeanIssuers advised that they should be
subjected to the CSRD discipline as well, in order to avoid unfair
competition and social or environmental dumping.
Building up on its previous positions
related to the Non-Financial Reporting Directive, EuropeanIssuers
reiterated its views on the principle of both financial and
non-financial materiality and the location of sustainability information
reporting. On this matter EuropeanIssuers Secretary General Florence
Bindelle commented: “We believe that companies should be the ones
defining what constitutes material information based on their specific
sectors. Instead of what the CSRD proposal envisages, we should maintain
flexibility regarding the location of non-financial information.”
EuropeanIssuers also commented on the
general terms of the proposal concerning reporting standards. It called
for more flexibility in its application and warned about the need of a
consistent timetable. The convergence between EU and international
standards is crucial in avoiding cumulative effects of diverging
reporting obligations. Therefore, while awaiting for this convergence,
the companies should be able report under approved international
standards, by justifying their choice.
With regard to the digitalisation of
sustainability reporting, EuropeanIssuers recommended clarifying the
requirements to avoid undue burden for preparers.
The current proposal allows Member
States to authorise independent assurance service providers other than
statutory auditors or audit firms to carry out the assurance of
sustainability reporting. On this matter, EuropeanIssuers suggested the
authorisation to be compulsory in order to avoid restricting the market
for this kind of service and to ensure alignment to EU freedom to
provide services.
EuropeanIssuers will continue to monitor
the developments of this legislative proposal, and engage with
representatives from the European Parliament and Council to reiterate
its position and make the voice of issuers across Europe heard.
EuropeanIssuers
© EuropeanIssuers
Key
Hover over the blue highlighted
text to view the acronym meaning
Hover
over these icons for more information
Comments:
No Comments for this Article