On 5 April 2025 ESMA released a report with key messages on how to improve future non-financial reports, acknowledging a ”current learning phase of the sustainability reporting journey”.
It is based on findings from corporate reporting during 2024 (on FY 2023, prepared in accordance with the Accounting Directive, 2013/34/EU).
The report addresses listed companies in the EEA, auditors and other corporate reporting professionals, with the aim to promote transparency and accountability to the market.
ESMA examined 573 non-financial statements, whereof most (425) related to checking whether the information met the requirements of the Accounting Directive.
This led to enforcement actions related to content towards 121 issuers, causing an action rate of 28%, up from 23% in the previous year.
Most actions required the issuer to make a correction in a future non-financial statement.
22 enforcement actions were also taken, based on the examination of the 137 issuers in the sample, related to the recommendations derived from the 2023 European Common Enforcement Priorities (ECEP).
They were all in the form of requiring the issuer to correct the relevant matter in future non-financial statements.
Enforcement actions
Close to half of all actions related to Article 8 Taxonomy Regulation disclosures – or the lack thereof – followed by disclosures related to non-financial KPIs and description of policies and outcome of policies, due diligence and principal risks.
In particular, the level of specificity of disclosures related climate-related targets and emission reduction targets can be improved, especially in relation to the strategic dimension of the targets, the specific decarbonisation levers used and the financial resources necessary to fulfil the targets.
Overall, the review of the disclosures on targets confirms the importance of relying on sufficiently detailed disclosure rules focusing on minimum basic requirements to enable the comparability of disclosures and the assessment of the credibility of individual issuer’s commitments.
Other actions related to issues such as the reporting perimeter (lack of transparency on it or insufficient coverage of the reporting), reporting on environmental, social and governance (ESG), related governance issues and ESG ratings.
Key findings
Disclosures relating to Article 8 of the Taxonomy Regulation
ESMA refers to these disclosures as having a ”theoretical relevance as a tool to communicate the transition potential of a business”.
- Difficulties were flagged with the application of the activity-based reporting set out in the taxonomy regime for integrated business models or for economic activities whose management is typically outsourced
- Disclosures to explain the methodologies and the conclusions underlying the eligibility and alignment assessments as well as to explain the quantitative information in the reporting templates, most notably on the main taxonomy ratios, did not provide entirely satisfactory.
- The disclosure of CapEx plans remained very limited with sometimes insufficient accompanying contextual information.
Disclosures of climate-related targets, actions and progress
An increased transparency in reporting on climate-related matters is now required, gaining further relevance in light of the forthcoming application of the enhanced disclosure regime set out in the CSRD.
The Non-Financial Reporting Directive (NFRD) requirements are not specific as to the basic elements that disclosures on targets should contain.
- Many times disclosures lacked basic elements, such as the scope of the target, the baseline value and base year, the underlying methodologies and assumptions and whether the target is based on scientific evidence.
- Explanations of the relationship between the targets and their strategic dimension were often missing for a sizeable part of the sample.
- Many disclosures lacked specificity, e.g., in relation to decarbonisation levers, the science-based nature of the targets and the absence of intermediate milestones.
- The disclosure of financial resources necessary to support the achievement of the targets disclosed was often missing or lacking specificity, for example not providing specific breakdowns to assess the relationship between a specific target and the related investments.
Overall, the review of the disclosures on targets confirms the importance of relying on sufficiently detailed disclosure rules focusing on minimum basic requirements to enable the comparability of disclosures and the assessment of the credibility of individual issuer’s commitments.
Scope 3 emissions
Disclosures on Scope 3 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are part of the information that investors would consider as necessary input to sustainable investment decisions.
- Shortcomings remain in terms of transparency on the exclusions from the scope 3 calculation and transparency on the use of estimates to calculate the emissions.
- Only in a minority of cases were disclosures of the gross amounts of GHG emissions provided separately from the effect of carbon credits and other measures.
- Comparative information on scope 3 emissions was in many cases not sufficient to get an understanding of the factors driving the evolution of the reported information.
The lacking or insufficient information will be required under the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) which is expected to increase the comparability and overall quality of GHG emissions reporting.
Improve contextual information and explanations of relationships between targets, strategy and related investments
By using ESRS taxonomy-centric report templates and IRO-management models provided in Cleerit ESG, disclosures on contextual information, and explanations of the relationship between the targets, their strategic dimension and the related investments, will be improved – for the benefit of the market and management.
You are welcome to contact us if you want to know more about how leading market actors are enhancing their strategic sustainability governance and reporting > Book a presentation