Brussels spent the spring finalizing the Omnibus package — the overhaul that scales back who has to report under the CSRD, and how much. For most organizations, the headline is relief: fewer companies in scope, simpler disclosure, more time. For the sustainability and compliance teams who spent two years building reporting infrastructure, it can feel like the ground moved under a project they were finally getting right.
I understand the relief. I'd also gently push back on stopping there.
A lighter compliance burden is not a smaller strategic question
The Omnibus changes what you have to report, not what your stakeholders, employees and customers expect you to stand for. Organizations that treat this purely as “we can now do less” are solving the wrong problem. The real question was never “what does the regulation require” — it was always “what do we actually want to be known for, and is our current story true.” That question didn't get lighter.
What the smart organizations are doing instead
The clients navigating this well are using the reduced reporting burden to redirect effort — from box-ticking disclosure toward a smaller number of claims they can actually substantiate and are proud to lead with. Less reporting, used well, means more precision. That is a positioning opportunity, not a compliance footnote.
Regulation tells you the floor. It has never told you where your ceiling is.
The risk of getting this wrong
The organizations most at risk right now are the ones quietly dismantling their sustainability narrative along with the paperwork — assuming that if it's no longer mandatory, it's no longer relevant. That assumption is a mistake. Investors, partners and increasingly employees formed expectations during the CSRD build-up that don't disappear because Brussels loosened the reporting threshold.
Regulatory simplification is a rare gift: permission to stop performing compliance and start being deliberate about what you actually say. Organizations that use 2026 to sharpen their sustainability story — rather than quietly shelve it — will be the ones still telling it credibly in 2028, when the pendulum inevitably swings back.
Valuable background information
What did the CSRD Omnibus actually change?
It scaled back who has to report under the CSRD, and how much they have to disclose. For most organizations, that means fewer companies fall in scope and simpler reporting requirements — but it changes what you have to report, not what stakeholders expect you to stand for.
If sustainability reporting is no longer mandatory for us, is it still worth investing in?
Yes — treating a lighter reporting burden as permission to drop the sustainability story entirely is a common and costly mistake. Investors, partners and employees formed expectations during the CSRD build-up that don't disappear because Brussels loosened the threshold.
How should organizations respond to the reduced reporting requirements?
Use the freed-up effort to sharpen your story instead of abandoning it — redirect from box-ticking disclosure toward a smaller number of claims you can actually substantiate and are proud to lead with. Less reporting, used well, means more precision, not less credibility.
Is regulatory simplification a risk or an opportunity for sustainability positioning?
It's an opportunity, if you treat it as one. Regulation only ever tells you the floor — the minimum you must disclose. It has never told you where your ceiling is. Organizations that use this moment to get deliberate about what they actually say will still be telling a credible story when the pendulum swings back.
Rethinking your sustainability positioning after the Omnibus changes? Let's talk about what's worth keeping.