Sustainability leads, compliance officers, legal teams, finance teams, and investor relations staff at mid-to-large companies who need to know which ESG reporting and due diligence rules apply — without spending weeks mapping every regulation themselves.

If you're on an ESG-adjacent team and the phrase "is CSRD still in scope for us after Omnibus?" sounds familiar, this tool is for you.

Highly Probable means your profile clearly clears the adopted thresholds and scope triggers for that framework. May Apply means one or more criteria depend on interpretation, listing status, supply-chain relationships, or pending enforcement guidance. Monitor Changes means the rule doesn't apply today but could on a foreseeable timeline.

Treat this as a shortlisting tool, not a legal opinion. Every "Highly Probable" result should still be confirmed with counsel before you build reporting processes around it.

This is the single most valuable use case for the tool. Multi-jurisdiction companies typically trigger 3-6 overlapping frameworks (e.g. CSRD + California SB 253 + UK SECR + ISSB) that all demand similar climate data, supplier due diligence, and governance documentation.

The smartest move is to design one data architecture, one control set, and one governance cadence that feeds every framework — not four parallel projects. Use the jurisdiction sections in your results to identify the biggest overlaps first.

Yes. All EU framework thresholds (CSRD, CSDDD, Taxonomy) reflect the formally adopted Omnibus Directive from February 2026. That means CSRD scope is now 1,000+ employees AND €450M+ turnover, the limited-to-reasonable assurance transition has been removed, and CSDDD due diligence is now limited to direct business partners.

We update regulatory data monthly. Any threshold changes, new enforcement guidance, or scope narrowing gets incorporated within 30 days of confirmation.

Pick your top 2-3 "Highly Probable" frameworks and run a formal threshold-validation exercise with counsel. That single step removes more uncertainty than anything else — and often reveals that at least one framework doesn't actually apply despite looking like it should.

Only after threshold validation should you spend on data systems, software, or reporting exercises. Building first and verifying later is the most common mistake we see teams make.

No. This is a scoping and prioritization tool, not a legal opinion. Its purpose is to get your team past the blank-page problem and into productive conversations with counsel and internal stakeholders faster.

For any framework that looks material to your business, have qualified legal, compliance, or ESG specialists validate the applicability before you act on it.