Author(s)

SARA TODESCHINI

Abstract

This paper critically analyses the transposition implications of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) in three Member States: Germany, Italy and Spain. This directive primarily tries to widen the basis of subjects for whom it will be mandatory to report on non-financial information; it also unsuccessfully tries to simplify the reporting scheme and procedure. This study aims to raise awareness on the potentially dangerous heterogeneity that might arise within the European Union if the CSRD is transposed in forms differing greatly from each other. Moreover, the paper intends to open a discussion in order to identify, in a comparative perspective, pros and cons of the methods used for each national transposition, as a process which of course is expected to take several years. Based on the findings, conclusions on the purpose of the papers will be drawn. The CSRD needs to be transposed ex art. 288 TFUE by every Member State before 6 July 2024. The paper will use content analysis to scrutinise, from a comparative perspective, the national transpositions of the CSRD on different levels. First, the analysis will focus on the difference between the ‘limited assurance’ and ‘reasonable assurance’. Second, some remarks will regard the subjects involved in the reporting, that will differ greatly in the three legal orders. Third, the use of tools to ensure public consultation and involvement of at least primary stakeholders shall be examined. This paper aims to address a gap existing in literature on the various possible forms of the implementation of this Directive and on the consequent inconsistencies that may arise, especially with regard to the assurance. The CSRD prescribes a ‘limited assurance’ done by a statutory advisor or audit firm but pushes for a gradual shift towards the ‘reasonable assurance’ already foreseen for financial reporting.

Keywords

non-financial reporting, CSRD, stakeholders, assurance, national transposition