Opinion / Position Paper
25
February
2026
Opinion on Draft Simplified European Sustainability Reporting Standards
This FRA Opinion on the draft simplified European Sustainability Reporting Standards informs the European Commission ahead of the standards’ adoption. This Opinion applies a risk-based human rights approach to assess whether the proposed simplifications preserve essential safeguards for people adversely affected by corporate activities. The Opinion provides practical, proportionate suggestions to strengthen the simplified framework and ensure that efficiency gains do not come at the expense of fundamental rights.
TABLE OF CONTENT
Search inside this publication
- Pursuant to Article 49(3b) of the Accounting Directive [1] Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC Text with EEA relevance, OJ L 182, 29.6.2013.
as amended by the CSRD, the European Commission has requested that the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) provide an opinion on the draft simplified European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) prior to their adoption via a delegated act. - FRA’s opinion applies a risk-based approach [2] see FRA, ‘A Human Rights Approach to Due Diligence: Reflections on key principles’, October 2025.
, grounded in international human rights standards and frameworks, to sustainability reporting and to its analysis of the revised ESRS. It recalls the foundational principles of responsibility of businesses to respect human rights, which requires companies to take adequate measures to identify, prevent, mitigate and, where appropriate, remedy actual and potential adverse human rights impacts that they may cause or contribute to through their own activities or as a result of their business relationships with other parties. [3] United Nations, ‘Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” framework’, 2012, in particular principles 11 and 13 and the commentaries thereon. The UNGPs are a soft law instrument, and do not create legally binding obligations.
- This opinion analyses the changes proposed by EFRAG to the ESRS from a fundamental rights perspective: it identifies where deletions of data points or rephrasing of standards increase risks to the protection of fundamental rights, including for vulnerable groups, and it offers recommendations on where to restore or strengthen safeguards. As a result of this, the analysis focuses on social standards [4] See EFRAG, Draft Simplified ESRS at Draft Simplified ESRS | EFRAG
. - This opinion does not purport to provide an exhaustive analysis of the potential adverse impacts that the simplification of the ESRS may have on fundamental rights but rather aims to alert policymakers and companies to the most salient points.
- Its analysis and conclusions draw on desk research and take account of relevant European and international instruments, Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (hereafter the Charter), the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (hereafter UNGPs), and relevant international reporting standards, for example International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRSs) and Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Standards.
- EU sustainability reporting rules require large and listed companies to regularly disclose comparable and reliable information on the social and environmental risks and opportunities they face, and how their activities affect people and the environment. By mandating these disclosures from companies above specified size thresholds, the EU sustainability reporting framework promotes transparency on corporate sustainability performance. This information enables investors, civil-society organisations, consumers and other stakeholders to assess companies’ sustainability impacts and risks, while advancing the European Green Deal’s goals to promote more sustainable economic activities [5] European Commission, ‘Corporate sustainability reporting’, European Commission website, 9 December 2025.
. - The Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) [6] Directive (EU) 2022/2464 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2022 amending Regulation (EU) No 537/2014, Directive 2004/109/EC, Directive 2006/43/EC and Directive 2013/34/EU, as regards corporate sustainability reporting (OJ L 322, 16.12.2022, p. 15, ELI: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2022/2464/oj/eng).
was adopted on 14 December 2022 and amended the Accounting Directive [7] Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC (OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, p. 19, ELI: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2013/34/oj/eng).
– among other measures. It introduced an obligation for listed small, medium-sized and large undertakings (excluding micro-undertakings) listed on EU-regulated markets, and large undertakings and parent undertakings of large groups, to report on the impact of their activities on sustainability (Article 19a). The reporting obligation also applies to insurance undertakings and credit institutions (Article 1(3)). - The CSRD aims to ensure a harmonised level of sustainability reporting across the EU. It specifies the nature and scope of information that sustainability reporting must include, notably in the undertaking’s own operations and its entire value chain. Article 19a(4) provides that undertakings must report the required information in accordance with the ESRS, the content of which is set out in Article 29b. The first set of sector-agnostic ESRS was published by the European Commission in July 2023, as mandated by the CSRD: these 12 ESRS cover the full range of sustainability issues, including social and environmental issues.
- Over time, however, practitioners (particularly business and employer associations) began to raise concerns that certain disclosure requirements (DRs) were imposing excessive burdens on undertakings. This prompted a regulatory push to refine the CSRD’s personal and material scope through the Omnibus I simplification package and the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG). In July 2025, EFRAG launched a public consultation on draft simplified ESRS to gather stakeholder input on reducing complexity [8] See https://www.efrag.org/en/news-and-calendar/news/press-release-efrag-shares-revised-esrs-exposure-drafts-and-launches-60day-public-consultation. EFRAG website.
. A significantly streamlined set of ESRS was finalised by EFRAG [9] See European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG), ‘Draft simplified ESRS’, EFRAG website, November 2025.
on 3 December 2025 (‘draft simplified ESRS’). According to EFRAG, the revised ESRS introduce greater flexibility, phased implementation and an approximately 61 % [10]
See EFRAG,Simplified ESRS Factsheets, EFRAG website, November 2025 .
cut in mandatory data points to ease undertakings’ reporting load. - The Omnibus I package, including the Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directives 2006/43/EC, 2013/34/EU, (EU) 2022/2464 and (EU) 2024/1760 as regards certain corporate sustainability reporting and due diligence requirements, was formally approved by the co-legislators on 16 December 2025 [11] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-10-2025-0324_EN.html.
. - The final agreement on Omnibus I significantly reduces the CSRD’s personal scope i.e. limits it to undertakings with more than 1000 employees and net turnover above EUR 450 000 000. This translates to an 85–90 % reduction [12] This is an estimate based on secondary analyses, not an official Commission number. See Danish Institute for Human Rights, ‘Danish Institute for Human Rights calls for strong implementation of EU sustainability rules after Omnibus I’, Danish Institute for Human Rights website, 17 December 2025; European Sustainable Investment Forum (Eurosif), ‘Omnibus: Setback for sustainable finance rules, but damage control on transition plans’, Eurosif website, 14 October 2025; ESG Today, ‘EU Parliament approves Omnibus agreement to cut sustainability reporting and due diligence requirements’, ESG Today website, 16 December 2025.
in the number of undertakings subject to sustainability reporting obligations. - In addition, the limitations on the scope of information requests within value chains and the expanded list of derogations concerning the information that must be disclosed are expected to significantly decrease the overall level of data reported.
- Omnibus I also narrows the personal scope of the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), with estimates suggesting a reduction of around 70 %. The directive would therefore apply to fewer than 1 000 undertakings across the EU [13] Eurosif, ‘Omnibus: Setback for sustainable finance rules, but damage control on transition plans’, Eurosif website, 14 October 2025.
. Although the ESRS do not impose substantive obligations related to conduct, the reporting requirements rely on existing due diligence processes. As highlighted in the draft simplified ESRS, ‘the outcome of the undertaking’s sustainability due diligence process … informs the undertaking’s assessment of its material impacts, risks and opportunities’ [14] ESRS, Draft simplified ESRS 1 – General Requirements, par. 58.
. - The amendments to the CSRD – notably the significant narrowing of the reporting scope – are central to interpreting the draft simplified ESRS. The initiatives share a common objective: simplification and the reduction of administrative burdens. Accordingly, the proposed reduction in data points within the ESRS must be assessed against the now substantially reduced scope of reporting undertakings.
- To promote international policy coherence and ensure effective human rights protection, sustainability reporting laws and policy measures should be consistent with international law and standards. Article 29b of the CSRD promotes such coherence in mandating that sustainability reporting standards address social and human rights aspects, including equal treatment, working conditions, and adherence to human rights, fundamental freedoms, democratic principles and standards outlined in key instruments. These encompass the International Bill of Human Rights and other core UN human rights conventions (including the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities), the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the International Labour Organization’s Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, and the fundamental conventions of the International Labour Organization, the ECHR, the European Social Charter and the Charter. [15] see Article 29b CSRD
- The ESRS safeguard fundamental rights across social, governance, and environmental areas by embedding elements of human rights due diligence into corporate reporting. In particular, the social standards protect rights such as non-discrimination, safe work, and freedom from forced labour. Cross-cutting standards set general requirements for double materiality and require disclosures on governance, strategy, and impacts, risks, and opportunities across all topics, including the identification and management of human rights impacts. Governance standards promote ethical culture, anti-corruption and whistleblower protection. Finally, environmental standards advance rights by addressing climate change, pollution, water, biodiversity and resources, as these issues can threaten rights to health, life, food, water, or indigenous land. Negative impacts like ecosystem harm can cause severe human rights violations.
