EU Ombudsman Teresa Anjinho has requested the European Commission to clarify its failure to adhere to procedural steps in launching the “Omnibus” initiative, aimed at simplifying and reducing corporate sustainability reporting and due diligence requirements. This request was made in a letter to EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, marking the next phase of an inquiry into the Omnibus proposal. The inquiry, initiated by the Ombudsman in May, follows complaints that the Commission did not comply with its “Better Regulation Guidelines,” which outline the principles the Commission must follow when preparing new initiatives.
The Ombudsman specifically seeks detailed information on the Commission’s decision to forego an impact assessment, public consultation, and climate consistency assessment. The latter is mandated by the European Climate Law to ensure that EU and national policies align with the EU’s 2050 climate neutrality goal.
The Commission released its Omnibus I package in late February 2025, targeting a significant reduction in the sustainability reporting and regulatory burden on companies. It includes proposals for substantial changes to regulations such as the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), the Taxonomy Regulation, and the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM).
Key changes in the package include proposals to exclude most companies from the CSRD’s scope and reduce the required reporting information. The CSDDD would mandate full human rights and environmental due diligence only at the level of direct business partners, with less frequent monitoring. Limits on sustainability information requests for smaller companies are also proposed.
In her letter, the Ombudsman notes that the Omnibus proposal would typically require a comprehensive impact assessment, yet the Commission only prepared an analytical document. Despite the Commission citing the proposal’s “critical urgency,” the Ombudsman stated that the Commission has not adequately justified deviating from its rules, noting the absence of any sudden or unexpected event justifying urgency.
The Ombudsman also asks why a public consultation was deemed unnecessary, highlighting that only two meetings with industry and business stakeholders occurred before the Omnibus release. The letter states: “It is not clear how the stakeholder exchanges referred to in the explanatory memorandum meant that a public consultation would not have added new information, particularly considering that many stakeholders who could have contributed were not invited to participate in the February 2025 meetings.”
On the lack of a climate consistency assessment, the letter mentions that the Commission considered it unnecessary as the amendments did not conflict with the European Green Deal’s objectives. However, the Ombudsman notes that no analysis supporting this conclusion was included in the explanatory memorandum or staff working document.
The Ombudsman further observes that internal consultations between Commission departments, typically conducted over ten days and expedited to 48 hours in some cases, were only allowed 24 hours for the Omnibus proposal. This consultation was launched on a Friday evening and concluded on a Saturday evening, prompting a request for clarification.
The Ombudsman has requested a response from the Commission by 15 September, stating, “considering the importance of this inquiry, and taking into account that the Commission is planning additional ‘Omnibus’ proposals, I do not intend to grant any extension of this deadline.”
[Click here](https://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/doc/correspondence/en/208117) to access the Ombudsman’s letter to the Commission.
