Sittings · Document

Draft report (COM(2025)0081 – C100037/2025 – 2025/0045(COD)) 2025-07-09

Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directives 2006/43/EC, 2013/34/EU, (EU) 2022/2464 and (EU) 2024/1760 as regards certain corporate sustainability reporting and due diligence requirements

Committee on Legal Affairs

Official HTML ↗ PDF DOCX

AM_Com_LegReport

Amendment 694

Pascale Piera, Julie Rechagneux, Ton Diepeveen, Ernő Schaller-Baross, Raffaele Stancanelli

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 10

Text proposed by the Commission

Proposal for a rejection

(4 a) Article 10 is deleted.

Or. en

Amendment 695

Axel Voss, Radan Kanev

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 10 – paragraph 1

Present text

Amendment

(4a) In Article 10, paragraph 1 shall be replaced by the following:

1. Member States shall ensure that companies take appropriate measures to prevent, or where prevention is not possible or not immediately possible, adequately mitigate, potential adverse impacts that have been, or should have been, identified pursuant to Article 8, in accordance with Article 9 and with this Article

To determine the appropriate measures referred to in the first subparagraph, due account shall be taken of:

(a) whether the potential adverse impact may be caused only by the company; whether it may be caused jointly by the company and a subsidiary or business partner, through acts or omissions; or whether it may be caused only by a company’s business partner in the chain of activities;

(b) whether the potential adverse impact may occur in the operations of a subsidiary, direct business partner or indirect business partner; and

(c) the ability of the company to influence the business partner that may cause or jointly cause the potential adverse impact.

Or. en

Justification

Companies shall only be responsible for impacts that they caused, not for everything happening in their supply chain that they have no control over. A definition of causation and joint causation should be added accordingly.

Amendment 696

Tobiasz Bocheński, Kosma Złotowski

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5 a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(5a) Article 10, paragraph 2 is deleted;

Or. en

Amendment 697

Angelika Niebler, Christian Doleschal, Stefan Köhler, Markus Ferber, Andrea Wechsler, Andreas Schwab, Christine Schneider, Ralf Seekatz, David McAllister, Oliver Schenk, Daniel Caspary, Norbert Lins, Sabine Verheyen, Christian Ehler, Isabelle Le Callennec, Laurent Castillo, François-Xavier Bellamy, Christophe Gomart, Lukas Mandl, Céline Imart, Verena Mertens, Marion Walsmann

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(4a) in Article 10, paragraph 2, point b is deleted"

Or. en

Amendment 698

Pascale Piera, Julie Rechagneux, Ton Diepeveen, Ernő Schaller-Baross, Raffaele Stancanelli

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 10 – paragraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(5) [...]

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 699

Arash Saeidi, Mario Furore

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 10 – paragraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(5) [...]

deleted

Or. fr

Justification

The proposed amendment reintroduced the possibility for companies to terminate a business relationship. That way, Article 10(6) would not mandate termination but would make it a possibility for companies.

Amendment 700

Mario Mantovani

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 10 – paragraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(5) in Article 10, paragraph 6 is replaced by the following:

(5) in Article 10, paragraph 6 is deleted.

Or. it

Justification

The regime proposed for the suspension of contracts raises concerns and could lead to very intrusive measures, for example, when it is not possible to ensure that the enhanced prevention plan has a reasonable chance of success because of the unwillingness of a third state to cooperate or because the law in a third state prohibits cooperation of that kind. This would undermine the competitiveness of companies and the European ability to access raw materials crucial to its dual transition goal, especially in circumstances where there is no viable alternative.

Amendment 701

Tobiasz Bocheński, Kosma Złotowski

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 10 – paragraph 6 – first subparagraph – introductory wording

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

As regards potential adverse impacts as referred to in paragraph 1 that could not be prevented or adequately mitigated by the measures set out in paragraphs 2, 4 and 5, the company shall, as a last resort:

As regards potential adverse impacts as referred to in paragraph 1 that could not be prevented or adequately mitigated by the measures set out in paragraphs 2, 4 and 5, the company can, as a last resort:

Or. en

Amendment 702

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 10 – paragraph 6 – first subparagraph – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

As regards potential adverse impacts as referred to in paragraph 1 that could not be prevented or adequately mitigated by the measures set out in paragraphs 2, 4 and 5, the company shall:

Or. en

Amendment 703

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 10 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1– point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) where the law governing its relation with the business partner concerned so entitles it, adopt and implement an enhanced prevention action plan for the specific adverse impact without undue delay, provided that there is a reasonable expectation that those efforts will succeed, and

(b) adopt and implement an enhanced prevention action plan for the specific adverse impact without undue delay, provided that there is a reasonable expectation that those efforts will succeed,

Or. en

Amendment 704

Lara Wolters, René Repasi, Chloé Ridel, Ana Catarina Mendes, Tiemo Wölken, Krzysztof Śmiszek, Kathleen Van Brempt, Eric Sargiacomo, Leire Pajín, José Cepeda, Estelle Ceulemans, Francisco Assis, Brando Benifei, Mohammed Chahim, Victor Negrescu, Raphaël Glucksmann, Evelyn Regner

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 10 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) adopt and implement an enhanced prevention action plan for the specific adverse impact without undue delay, provided that there is a reasonable expectation that those efforts will succeed,

Or. en

Amendment 705

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 10 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(c) use or increase its leverage through the suspension of the business relationship with respect to the activities concerned.

(c) use or increase its leverage through the suspension of the business relationship with respect to the activities concerned, where the law governing its relation with the business partner so entitles it, and

Or. en

Amendment 706

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 10 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point ca (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(ca) as a last resort, if there is no reasonable expectation that the efforts under point (a), (b) or (c) would succeed or if the implementation of the enhanced prevention action plan has failed to prevent or mitigate the adverse impact, terminate the business relationship with respect to the activities concerned if the potential adverse impact is severe.

Or. en

Amendment 707

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 10 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – point ca (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(ca) where these efforts fail or cannot be reasonably expected to bring about any improvement, terminate the business relationship with respect to the activities concerned, provided that the law governing its relation with the business partner concerned so entitles it.

Or. en

Amendment 708

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 10 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

As long as there is a reasonable expectation that the enhanced prevention action plan will succeed, the mere fact of continuing to engage with the business partner shall not trigger the company’s liability.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 709

Mario Mantovani

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 10 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Prior to suspending a business relationship, the company shall assess whether the adverse impacts from doing so can be reasonably expected to be manifestly more severe than the adverse impact that could not be prevented or adequately mitigated. Should that be the case, the company shall not be required to suspend the business relationship and shall be in a position to report to the competent supervisory authority about the duly justified reasons for such decision.

By way of derogation from the above, the company shall not be required to suspend the business relationship in cases where:

(a) there is a reasonable expectation that the suspension would lead to an adverse impact that is more severe than the potential adverse impact that could not be prevented or adequately mitigated; or

(b) there is no available alternative to that business relationship, which provides a raw material, product or service essential to the company’s production of goods or provision of services, and/or the suspension would cause substantial prejudice to the company.

Or. it

Justification

The obligation to suspend the business relationship could lead to an abrupt interruption in the supply of products or components that are critical and strategic for the European economy or undermine the normal functioning of the company. It is therefore necessary to introduce a derogation to enable business relationships to continue in those circumstances, hence the proposal that the amendment envisaged in the Council’s general approach of November 2022 be reintroduced.

Amendment 710

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 10 – paragraph 6 –subparagraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Prior to temporarily suspending or terminating a business relationship, the company shall assess, in consultation with relevant stakeholders, whether the adverse impacts from doing so can be reasonably expected to be manifestly more severe than the adverse impact that could not be prevented or adequately mitigated. Should that be the case, the company shall not be required to temporarily suspend or terminate the business relationship. Within a month after deciding not to suspend or terminate the relationship, the company shall report the case to the competent supervisory authority and inform them about the duly justified reasons for such decision. The supervisory authority shall provide guidance on the course of action to take within one month after receiving the report.

Or. en

Amendment 711

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 10 – paragraph 6 –subparagraph 3a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Prior to and when suspending or terminating a contract, companies that experience dependencies on certain suppliers or resources/raw materials, shall look into alternative suppliers, materials, technologies and production processes. In this regard, Member States and the Commission shall support multistakeholder and industry initiatives as well as independent research, as a tool to foster mutual support in finding such alternatives.

Or. en

Amendment 712

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 10 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Prior to suspending or terminating a business relationship, the company shall assess whether the adverse impacts from doing so can be reasonably expected to be manifestly more severe than the adverse impact that could not be prevented or adequately mitigated. Should that be the case, the company shall not be required to suspend or terminate the business relationship and shall be in a position to report to the competent supervisory authority about the duly justified reasons for such decision.

Or. en

Amendment 713

Tobiasz Bocheński, Kosma Złotowski

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 10 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Prior to suspending a business relationship, the company can assess whether the adverse impacts from doing so can be reasonably expected to be manifestly more severe than the adverse impact that could not be prevented or adequately mitigated. Should that be the case, the company shall not be required to suspend the business relationship and shall be in a position to report to the competent supervisory authority about the duly justified reasons for such decision.

Or. en

Amendment 714

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 10 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall provide for an option to suspend the business relationship in contracts governed by their laws in accordance with the first subparagraph, except for contracts where the parties are obliged by law to enter into them.

Member States shall provide for an option to temporarily suspend or terminate the business relationship in contracts governed by their laws in accordance with the first subparagraph, except for contracts where the parties are obliged by law to enter into them.

Or. en

Amendment 715

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 10 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall provide for an option to suspend or terminate the business relationship in contracts governed by their laws in accordance with the first subparagraph, except for contracts where the parties are obliged by law to enter into them.

Or. en

Amendment 716

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 10 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where the company decides to suspend the business relationship, it shall take steps to prevent, mitigate or bring to an end the impacts of the suspension, shall provide reasonable notice to the business partner concerned and shall keep that decision under review.

Where the company decides to temporarily suspend or, as a last resort, terminate the business relationship, it shall take steps to prevent, mitigate or bring to an end the impacts of the suspension or termination. It shall provide reasonable notice to the business partner concerned and shall keep that decision under review.

Or. en

Amendment 717

Angelika Winzig, Lukas Mandl

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 10 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where the company decides to suspend the business relationship, it shall take steps to prevent, mitigate or bring to an end the impacts of the suspension and shall provide reasonable notice to the business partner concerned and shall review that decision at the latest prior to resumption of the business relationship.

Or. de

Justification

The amendment replaces what is a vague obligation to carry out rolling checks with a clearly defined requirement to conduct a review where there are grounds for doing so. This enhances legal certainty and makes it possible to act on requirements in a proportionate manner. Companies should properly review a decision to suspend a business relationship before any resumption thereof without being obliged to engage in permanent and highly bureaucratic monitoring.

Amendment 718

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 10 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where the company decides to suspend or terminate the business relationship, it shall take steps to prevent, mitigate or bring to an end the impacts of the suspension or termination, shall provide reasonable notice to the business partner concerned and shall keep that decision under review.

Or. en

Amendment 719

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 10 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where the company decides not to suspend the business relationship pursuant to this Article, it shall monitor the potential adverse impact and periodically assess its decision and whether further appropriate measures are available.;

Where the company decides not to suspend or terminate the business relationship pursuant to this Article, it shall monitor the potential adverse impact and periodically assess its decision and whether further appropriate measures are available.;

Or. en

Amendment 720

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 10 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 721

Tobiasz Bocheński, Kosma Złotowski

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 10 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where the company decides not to suspend the business relationship pursuant to this Article, is recommended to monitor the potential adverse impact and periodically assess its decision and whether further appropriate measures are available.;

Or. en

Amendment 722

Angelika Winzig, Lukas Mandl

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 10 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where the company decides not to suspend the business relationship pursuant to this Article, it shall monitor the adverse impact and assess its decision and whether further appropriate measures are available.

Or. de

Justification

See justification above.

Amendment 723

Tobiasz Bocheński, Kosma Złotowski

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5 b (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(5b) Article 11 is deleted;

Or. en

Amendment 724

Axel Voss, Radan Kanev

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5 a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 1

Present text

Amendment

(5a) In Article 11, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:

Member States shall ensure that companies take appropriate measures to bring actual adverse impacts that have been, or should have been, identified pursuant to Article 8 to an end, in accordance with Article 9 and with this Article.

To determine the appropriate measures referred to in the first subparagraph, due account shall be taken of:

(a) whether the actual adverse impact is caused only by the company; whether it is caused jointly by the company and a subsidiary or business partner, through acts or omissions; or whether it is caused only by a company’s business partner in the chain of activities;

(b) whether the actual adverse impact occurred in the operations of a subsidiary, direct business partner or indirect business partner; and

(c) the ability of the company to influence the business partner that caused or jointly caused the actual adverse impact.

Or. en

Amendment 725

Pascale Piera, Julie Rechagneux, Ton Diepeveen, Ernő Schaller-Baross, Raffaele Stancanelli

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5 a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point b

Present text

Amendment

(5a) In article 11, paragraph 1, point b is amended as follows:

whether the actual adverse impact occurred in the operations of a subsidiary, direct business partner or indirect business partner; and

"whether the actual adverse impact occurred in the operations of a subsidiary or direct business partner; and"

Or. en

Amendment 726

Pascale Piera, Julie Rechagneux, Ton Diepeveen, Ernő Schaller-Baross, Raffaele Stancanelli

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5 b (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 3

Present text

Amendment

(5b) In article 11, paragraph 3 is replaced by the following:

Companies shall be required to take the following appropriate measures, where relevant:

"Companies shall be required to neutralise the adverse impact or minimise its extent; such measures shall be proportionate to the severity of the adverse impact and to the company’s implication in the adverse impact. If the adverse impact cannot be immediately brought to an end, the company shall develop and implement a corrective action plan. Companies shall not be held responsible for failing to obtain data from business partners that are not subject to reporting obligations."

(a) neutralise the adverse impact or minimise its extent; such measures shall be proportionate to the severity of the adverse impact and to the company’s implication in the adverse impact;

(b) where necessary due to the fact that the adverse impact cannot be immediately brought to an end, without undue delay develop and implement a corrective action plan with reasonable and clearly defined timelines for the implementation of appropriate measures and qualitative and quantitative indicators for measuring improvement; companies may develop their action plans in cooperation with industry or multi-stakeholder initiatives; the corrective action plan shall be adapted to companies’ operations and chains of activities;

(c) seek contractual assurances from a direct business partner that it will ensure compliance with the company’s code of conduct and, as necessary, a corrective action plan, including by establishing corresponding contractual assurances from its partners, to the extent that their activities are part of the company’s chain of activities; when such contractual assurances are obtained, paragraph 6 shall apply;

(d) make necessary financial or non-financial investments in, adjustments or upgrades of, for example, facilities, production or other operational processes and infrastructures;

(e) make necessary modifications of, or improvements to, the company’s own business plan, overall strategies and operations, including purchasing practices, design and distribution practices;

(f) provide targeted and proportionate support to an SME which is a business partner of the company, where necessary in light of the resources, knowledge and constraints of the SME, including by providing or enabling access to capacity-building, training or upgrading management systems, and, where compliance with the code of conduct or the corrective action plan would jeopardise the viability of the SME, by providing targeted and proportionate financial support, such as direct financing, low-interest loans, guarantees of continued sourcing, or assistance in securing financing;

(g) in compliance with Union law, including competition law, collaborate with other entities, including, where relevant, in order to increase the company’s ability to bring the adverse impact to an end or minimise the extent of such impact, in particular where no other measure is suitable or effective;

(h) provide remediation in accordance with Article 12.

Or. en

Amendment 727

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6 a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 3 – point c

Present text

Amendment

(6a) in paragraph 3 of Article 11, point (c) is deleted;

Or. en

Amendment 728

Pascale Piera, Julie Rechagneux, Ton Diepeveen, Ernő Schaller-Baross, Raffaele Stancanelli

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5 c (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraphe 4 – 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(5c) In article 11, paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 are deleted.

Or. en

Amendment 729

Arash Saeidi, Mario Furore

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6) [...]

deleted

Or. fr

Justification

When it comes to an enhanced prevention plan, the delegation to national law makes no sense. The original CSDDD wording recognised that applicable contract law needed to be respected. However, the nature of an enhanced corrective plan appears to be entirely consistent with contract freedom.

Amendment 730

Mario Mantovani

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – introductory part

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6) in Article 11, paragraph 7 is replaced by the following:

(6) in Article 11, paragraph 7 is deleted.

Or. it

Justification

The suspension of contracts raises important concerns, for example, when it is not possible to ensure that the enhanced prevention plan has a reasonable chance of success because of the unwillingness of a third state to cooperate, companies would be in an impossible position. The same applies when a company has no supply alternatives. This could undermine European competitiveness, especially when there is no viable alternative, and lead to negative effects in local communities in third countries.

Amendment 731

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

As regards actual adverse impacts as referred to in paragraph 1 that could not be prevented or adequately mitigated by the measures set out in paragraphs 3, 5 and 6, the company shall, as a last resort:

As regards actual adverse impacts as referred to in paragraph 1 that could not be brought to an end or the extent of which could not be minimised by the measures set out in paragraphs 3, 5 and 6, the company shall, as a last resort:

Or. en

Amendment 732

Tobiasz Bocheński, Kosma Złotowski

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

As regards actual adverse impacts as referred to in paragraph 1 that could not be prevented or adequately mitigated by the measures set out in paragraphs 3, 5 and 6, the company can, as a last resort:

Or. en

Amendment 733

Pascale Piera, Julie Rechagneux, Ton Diepeveen, Ernő Schaller-Baross, Raffaele Stancanelli

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

As regards actual adverse impacts as referred to in paragraph 1 that could not be prevented or adequately mitigated by the measures set out in paragraph 3, the company shall, as a last resort:

Or. en

Amendment 734

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

As regards actual adverse impacts as referred to in paragraph 1 that could not be prevented or adequately mitigated by the measures set out in paragraphs 3, 5 and 6, the company shall:

Or. en

Amendment 735

Pascale Piera, Julie Rechagneux, Ton Diepeveen, Ernő Schaller-Baross, Raffaele Stancanelli

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1 – point a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) refrain from entering into new, or extending existing, relations with a business partner in connection with which, or in the chain of activities of which, the impact has arisen,

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 736

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) adopt and implement an enhanced corrective action plan for the specific adverse impact without undue delay, provided that there is a reasonable expectation that those efforts will succeed,

Or. en

Amendment 737

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) adopt and implement an enhanced corrective action plan for the specific adverse impact without undue delay, provided that there is a reasonable expectation that those efforts will succeed,

Or. en

Amendment 738

Pascale Piera, Julie Rechagneux, Ton Diepeveen, Ernő Schaller-Baross, Raffaele Stancanelli

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 - paragraph 7 - subparagraph 1 – point b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) where the law governing its relation with the business partner concerned so entitles it, adopt and implement an enhanced prevention action plan for the specific adverse impact, provided that there is a reasonable expectation that those efforts will succeed.

Or. en

Amendment 739

Pascale Piera, Julie Rechagneux, Ton Diepeveen, Ernő Schaller-Baross, Raffaele Stancanelli

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(c) use or increase its leverage through the suspension of the business relationship with respect to the activities concerned.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 740

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(c) use or increase its leverage through the suspension of the business relationship with respect to the activities concerned.

Or. en

Amendment 741

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1 – point ca (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(ca) as a last resort, if there is no reasonable expectation that the efforts under point (a), (b) or (c) would succeed or if the implementation of the enhanced corrective action plan has failed to prevent or mitigate the adverse impact, terminate the business relationship with respect to the activities concerned if the potential adverse impact is severe.

Or. en

Amendment 742

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7 - subparagraph 1 – point ca (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 743

Pascale Piera, Julie Rechagneux, Ton Diepeveen, Ernő Schaller-Baross, Raffaele Stancanelli

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 744

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 745

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

As long as there is a reasonable expectation that the enhanced corrective action plan will succeed, the mere fact of continuing to engage with the business partner shall not trigger the company’s liability.

Or. en

Amendment 746

Mario Mantovani

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

By way of derogation from the above, the company shall not be required to suspend the business relationship in cases where:

(a) there is a reasonable expectation that the suspension would lead to an adverse impact that is more severe than the potential adverse impact that could not be prevented or adequately mitigated; or

(b) there is no available alternative to that business relationship, which provides a raw material, product or service essential to the company’s production of goods or provision of services, or the suspension would cause substantial prejudice to the company.

Or. it

Justification

The obligation to suspend the business relationship could lead to an abrupt interruption in the supply of products or components that are critical and strategic for the European economy or undermine the normal functioning of the company, hence the proposal that the amendment envisaged in the Council’s general approach of November 2022 be reintroduced.

Amendment 747

Pascale Piera, Julie Rechagneux, Ton Diepeveen, Ernő Schaller-Baross, Raffaele Stancanelli

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 748

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 3a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 749

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Prior to temporarily suspending or terminating a business relationship, the company shall assess, in consultation with relevant stakeholders, whether the adverse impacts from doing so can be reasonably expected to be manifestly more severe than the adverse impact that could not be brought to an end or the extent of which could not be adequately minimised. Should that be the case, the company shall not be required to temporarily suspend or terminate the business relationship Within a month after deciding not to suspend or terminate the relationship, the company shall report the case to the competent supervisory authority and inform them about the duly justified reasons for such decision. The supervisory authority shall provide guidance on the course of action to take within one month after receiving the report.

Or. en

Amendment 750

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Prior to suspending or terminating a business relationship, the company shall assess whether the adverse impacts from doing so can be reasonably expected to be manifestly more severe than the adverse impact that could not be brought to an end or adequately mitigated. Should that be the case, the company shall not be required to suspend or terminate the business relationship and shall be in a position to report to the competent supervisory authority about the duly justified reasons for such decision.

Or. en

Amendment 751

Pascale Piera, Julie Rechagneux, Ton Diepeveen, Ernő Schaller-Baross, Raffaele Stancanelli

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 752

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 753

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 754

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where the company decides to temporarily suspend or terminate the business relationship, it shall take steps to prevent, mitigate or bring to an end the impacts of the suspension or termination, shall provide reasonable notice to the business partner concerned and shall keep that decision under review. In case of suspension, the company shall provide a clear end date, which is reasonable and does not jeopardise the viability of the business partner.

Or. en

Amendment 755

Pascale Piera, Julie Rechagneux, Ton Diepeveen, Ernő Schaller-Baross, Raffaele Stancanelli

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where the company decides voluntarily to suspend the business relationship, it shall take steps to prevent, mitigate or bring to an end the impacts of the suspension.

Or. en

Amendment 756

Angelika Winzig, Lukas Mandl

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. de

Justification

Amendment 757

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 758

Pascale Piera, Julie Rechagneux, Ton Diepeveen, Ernő Schaller-Baross, Raffaele Stancanelli

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 759

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where the company decides not to temporarily suspend or terminate the business relationship pursuant to this Article, it shall monitor the actual adverse impact and periodically assess its decision and whether further appropriate measures are available.’;

Or. en

Amendment 760

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Where the company decides not to suspend or terminate the business relationship pursuant to this Article, it shall monitor the actual adverse impact and periodically assess its decision and whether further appropriate measures are available.;

Or. en

Amendment 761

Angelika Winzig, Lukas Mandl

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 11 – paragraph 7 – subparagraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. de

Amendment 762

Pascale Piera, Julie Rechagneux, Ton Diepeveen, Raffaele Stancanelli

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6 a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 12 – paragraph 1

Present text

Amendment

(6a) In article 12, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:

Member States shall ensure that, where a company has caused or jointly caused an actual adverse impact, the company provides remediation.

"Member States shall ensure that, where a company has caused or jointly caused an actual adverse impact, the company provides remediation. Companies shall not be held responsible for failing to obtain data from business partners that are not subject to reporting obligations."

Or. en

Amendment 763

Angelika Winzig, Lukas Mandl

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6 a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 12 – paragraph 2a – 2b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

6a. in Article 12, the following paragraphs are added:

‘Member States may provide that companies may also fulfil their obligations under this Article by participating in a collective remediation instrument (fund). Such a fund may be organised on a regional, sectoral or risk-based basis and shall jointly finance, implement and document measures to remedy actual adverse human rights and environmental impacts in global supply chains. Participation in a fund shall replace the obligation to carry out and provide evidence of measures referred to in paragraph 1, provided that the fund is used in an effective, dedicated and transparent manner in accordance with objective criteria.

To support risk-based due diligence, the Commission shall draw up an EU risk map structured on a sector-specific and geo-regional basis. This interactive overview shall set out indicative hotspots with significant human rights or environmental risks on the basis of valid external data sources, monitoring reports and international assessments. Companies may base their risk analysis under Article 6 and their prioritisation of remedial actions under this Article on the basis of the risk areas identified as significant on the map. The Commission shall provide a digital filter and analysis tool for that purpose that is differentiated by region, sector and risk category.’

Or. de

Justification

The possibility to participate in collective redress instruments relieves companies of the obligation to provide individual proof. At the same time, bundled measures increase effectiveness, provided that the fund is used transparently, for specific purposes and effectively. A centralised, data-supported EU risk map increases orientation security for companies and ensures uniform standards for risk analysis. It supports the risk-based implementation of due diligence obligations and reduces the scope for discretion and red tape.

Amendment 764

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 13

Text prosposed by the Commission

Amendment

(7) in Article 13, pragraph 3 is amended as follows:

(7) Article 13 is replaced by the following:

Article 13 Stakeholder engagement

1. Member States shall ensure that undertakings effectively and meaningfully engage stakeholders, in fulfilling their obligations pursuant to this Directive. Undertakings shall be required to ensure:

(a) stakeholder engagement covers information, consultation and participation and takes places on a structural and regular basis throughout the entire due diligence process;

(b) comprehensive and meaningful information is provided to stakeholders;

(c) effective and appropriate frameworks, measures and tools of engagement are put in place, including but not limited to:

(i) setting reasonable and appropriate timelines ;

(ii) identifying and addressing potential barriers to participation;

(iii) providing adequate protection of stakeholders from the risk of retaliation;

(iv) implementing an action plan to proactively seek the engagement of stakeholders in a marginalised or vulnerable situation.

(d) ad-hoc and pro-active engagement with stakeholders is initiated in case of significant changes in operations, activities or operating context; and

(e) a gender- and culturally responsive approach is ensured at all times.

2. Member States shall ensure that, when stakeholders request to be included in the engagement outlined in paragraph 1, undertakings assess and respond to these requests and that they provide a detailed justification in case the request is denied.

3. The engagement of workers and workers’ representatives shall be without prejudice to Directives 2002/14/EC and 2009/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council Directive 2001/86/EC.

1. Member States shall ensure that undertakings effectively and meaningfully engage stakeholders, in fulfilling their obligations pursuant to this Directive. Undertakings shall be required to ensure:

Or. en

Amendment 765

Michał Wawrykiewicz

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 7

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 13 – paragraph 3

Present text

Amendment

(7) in Article 13, paragraph 3 is replaced by the following:

Consultation of stakeholders shall take place at the following stages of the due diligence process:

'Consultation of stakeholders shall take place when gathering the necessary information on actual or potential adverse impacts, in order to identify, assess and prioritise adverse impacts pursuant to Articles 8 and 9. '

(a) when gathering the necessary information on actual or potential adverse impacts, in order to identify, assess and prioritise adverse impacts pursuant to Articles 8 and 9;

(b) when developing prevention and corrective action plans pursuant to Article 10(2) and Article 11(3), and developing enhanced prevention and corrective action plans pursuant to Article 10(6) and Article 11(7);

(d) when adopting appropriate measures to remediate adverse impacts pursuant to Article 12;

(e) as appropriate, when developing qualitative and quantitative indicators for the monitoring required under Article 15.

Or. en

Amendment 766

Michał Wawrykiewicz

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point a

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 13 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) the introductory wording is replaced by the following:

deleted

‘Consultation of relevant stakeholders shall take place at the following stages of the due diligence process: ’;

Or. en

Amendment 767

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point a

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 13 – paragraph 3 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Consultation of relevant stakeholders shall take place at the following stages of the due diligence process:;

Consultation of potentially affected groups and other stakeholders shall take place at the following stages of the due diligence process:;

Or. en

Amendment 768

Arash Saeidi, Mario Furore

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point a

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 13 – paragraph 3 – introductory part

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Consultation of relevant stakeholders shall take place at the following stages of the due diligence process:;

Consultation of stakeholders shall take place at the following stages of the due diligence process:;

Or. fr

Justification

The definition of ‘stakeholders’ in Article 3(n) has already been narrowed, limiting the types of stakeholders that must be consulted. Adding another qualifier here would be too restrictive. It would also give the company the power to pick and choose which stakeholders to engage with instead of mandating companies to engage with stakeholders based on their actual role and position.

Amendment 769

Arash Saeidi, Mario Furore

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point b

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 13 – paragraph 3 – points c and e

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) points (c) and (e) are deleted;

deleted

Or. fr

Justification

Consultation of stakeholders should also take place during the development of indicators for monitoring adverse impacts, and during the termination of a business relationship.

Amendment 770

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point b

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 13 – paragraph 3 – points c and e

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) points (c) and (e) are deleted;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 771

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point b

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 13 – paragraph 3 – points c and e

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) points (c) and (e) are deleted;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 772

Michał Wawrykiewicz

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point b

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 13 – paragraph 3 – points c and e

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) points (c) and (e) are deleted;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 773

Angelika Winzig, Lukas Mandl

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point b

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 13 – paragraph 3 – points c, d and e

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) points (c) and (e) are deleted;

(b) points (c), (d) and (e) are deleted;

Or. de

Justification

If consultation with relevant stakeholders is provided for neither when deciding to suspend or terminate a business relationship (point (c)) nor when developing monitoring indicators (point (e)), such consultation does not appear necessary when adopting appropriate remediation measures (point (d)) either. A standard approach fosters legal certainty and cuts needless red tape.

Amendment 774

Angelika Winzig, Lukas Mandl

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 7 a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 13 – paragraph 7a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

7a. in Article 13, the following paragraph is inserted:

‘7a. Member States may provide for measures to promote the coordination and pooling of stakeholder involvement, in particular through the creation or recognition of representative associations of affected persons, employee representatives, non-governmental organisations or other relevant groups. The use of a single stakeholder forum shall be regarded as equivalent fulfilment of the duty to ensure appropriate engagement, provided that the forum operates in accordance with the principles of representativeness, transparency and participation.’

Or. de

Justification

The amendment allows for workable and coordinated action to ensure stakeholder involvement. Combined forums and recognised associations will make engagement more efficient, legally more certain and less resource-intensive. Representativeness, transparency and participation will be upheld.

Amendment 775

Pascale Piera, Julie Rechagneux, Ton Diepeveen, Raffaele Stancanelli

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 7 a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 14 – paragraph 2

Present text

Amendment

(7a) In article 14, paragraph 2 is replaced by the following:

Member States shall ensure that complaints may be submitted by:

"Member States shall ensure that complaints may be submitted by natural or legal persons who are affected by an adverse impact or trade unions and other workers’ representatives representing natural persons working in the chain of activities concerned."

(a) natural or legal persons who are affected or have reasonable grounds to believe that they might be affected by an adverse impact, and the legitimate representatives of such persons on behalf of them, such as civil society organisations and human rights defenders;

(b) trade unions and other workers’ representatives representing natural persons working in the chain of activities concerned; and

(c) civil society organisations that are active and experienced in related areas where an adverse environmental impact is the subject matter of the complaint.

Or. en

Amendment 776

Angelika Winzig, Lukas Mandl

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 7 b (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 14 – paragraphs 7a – 7e (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

7b. in Article 14, the following paragraphs are inserted:

Where a company has not received a substantive complaint over a period of at least two consecutive reporting years, it shall be presumed to have duly complied with its obligations under this Directive unless there are facts or findings to the contrary. Manifestly unfounded or factually inaccurate complaints shall be without prejudice to this rebuttable presumption.

Member States shall ensure that companies are authorised to outsource the establishment and operation of the complaints mechanism, in whole or in part, to independent third parties, provided that the requirements of transparency, impartiality and accessibility laid down in this Directive are thereby ensured.

Member States shall ensure that companies can prioritise complaints received, as part of a risk-based procedure, on the basis of their relevance and sphere of influence. Complaints that are unrelated to key human rights or environmental concerns may be deferred or dealt with in aggregated form.

Member States shall ensure that companies are allowed to use automated procedures, including AI-based systems, to categorise, prioritise and analyse complaints, provided that they are documented in a comprehensible manner, are non-discriminatory and the form they take complies with applicable Union law.

Member States shall ensure that access to the complaints mechanism is simple and barrier-free for persons affected and stakeholders. In particular, submission may also be made possible via digital interfaces such as web forms, mobile applications or QR codes.’

Or. de

Justification

The proposals will enhance the practicability and efficiency of complaints mechanisms without diminishing their safeguarding effect. A rebuttable presumption establishes legal certainty. Outsourcing, digitalisation and prioritisation make resource-efficient implementation possible. At the same time, access for those affected remains guaranteed and human rights and environmental concerns remain safeguarded.

Amendment 777

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 8

Directive (EU)2024/1760

Article 15 – second sentence

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(8) in Article 15, the second sentence is replaced by the following:

deleted

‘Such assessments shall be based, where appropriate, on qualitative and quantitative indicators and be carried out without undue delay after a significant change occurs, but at least every 5 years and whenever there are reasonable grounds to believe that the measures are no longer adequate or effective or that new risks of the occurrence of those adverse impacts may arise. ’;

Or. en

Amendment 778

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 8

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 15

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(8) in Article 15, the second sentence is replaced by the following:

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 779

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 8

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 15

Present text

Amendment

(8) Article 15 is replaced by the following

Article 15

Monitoring

Article 15

Monitoring

Member States shall ensure that companies carry out periodic assessments of their own operations and measures, those of their subsidiaries and, where related to the chain of activities of the company, those of their business partners, to assess the implementation and to monitor the adequacy and effectiveness of the identification, prevention, mitigation, bringing to an end and minimisation of the extent of adverse impacts. Such assessments shall be based, where appropriate, on qualitative and quantitative indicators and be carried out without undue delay after a significant change occurs, but at least every 5 years and whenever there are reasonable grounds to believe that the measures are no longer adequate or effective or that new risks of the occurrence of those adverse impacts may arise. Where appropriate, the due diligence policy, the adverse impacts identified and the appropriate measures that derived shall be updated in accordance with the outcome of such assessments and with due consideration of relevant information from stakeholders.

Member States shall ensure that companies monitor and assess the adverse impacts identified and the appropriate measures under this Directive, and where appropriate, update their due diligence policy, on an ongoing basis and without undue delay after a significant change occurs, in accordance with qualitative and quantitative indicators, and with due consideration of relevant information from stakeholders.

Or. en

Amendment 780

Pascal Canfin

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 8

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 15 – second sentence

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Such assessments shall be based, where appropriate, on qualitative and quantitative indicators and be carried out without undue delay after a significant change occurs, but at least every 2 years and whenever there are reasonable grounds to believe that the measures are no longer adequate or effective or that new risks of the occurrence of those adverse impacts may arise. When a company covered by this directive acquires a company that was not in the scope of this directive, the acquiring company has two years to integrate the processes of the purchased company into its own due diligence strategy.;

Or. en

Justification

If an in-scope company buys an out-of-scope company, it should have two years to integrate the processes of a company that never had to perform due diligence under its own due diligence policy.

Amendment 781

Arash Saeidi, Mario Furore

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 8

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 15 – second sentence

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

‘Such assessments shall be based, where appropriate, on qualitative and quantitative indicators and be carried out without undue delay after a significant change occurs, but at least every 12 months and whenever there are reasonable grounds to believe that new risks of the occurrence of those adverse impacts may arise.’;

Or. fr

Justification

According to international standards, the due diligence process is an ongoing, iterative effort. Limiting monitoring to five years would affect the iterative nature of the duty, whereas a review every year would be more in line with international standards and reporting cycles. Therefore, we are reestablishing the original text as adopted during the last mandate.

Amendment 782

Tobiasz Bocheński, Kosma Złotowski

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 8

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 15 – second sentence

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Such assessments are recommended to be based, where appropriate, on qualitative and quantitative indicators and be carried out without undue delay after a significant change occurs, but at least every 5 years and whenever there are reasonable grounds to believe that the measures are no longer adequate or effective or that new risks of the occurrence of those adverse impacts may arise.;

Or. en

Amendment 783

Pascale Piera, Julie Rechagneux, Ton Diepeveen, Ernő Schaller-Baross, Raffaele Stancanelli

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 8

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 15 – second sentence

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 784

Adrián Vázquez Lázara, Maravillas Abadía Jover

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 8

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 15 – second sentence

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Justification

Extending the minimum interval to 10 years reflects the need for a balanced and proportionate approach. It reduces unnecessary administrative burdens when risks remain stable over time while preserving the obligation to act promptly whenever significant changes occur or new risks arise. This ensures both legal certainty and the efficient allocation of resources.

Amendment 785

Angelika Winzig, Lukas Mandl, Angelika Niebler

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 8

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 15 – second sentence

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

‘Such assessments shall be based, where appropriate, on qualitative and quantitative indicators and be carried out without undue delay after a significant change occurs, but at least every 6 years and whenever there is evidence to believe that the measures are no longer adequate or effective or that new risks of the occurrence of those adverse impacts may arise.’;

Or. de

Justification

The amendment enhances legal certainty and cuts red tape for businesses. Extending the interval between checks from five to six years will more closely match internal company planning cycles and be more practicable. Replacing ‘reasonable grounds to believe’ by tangible ‘evidence’ makes it clear that no new mandatory assessment will be set in train simply on the basis of an assumption. That strengthens the risk-based approach and will prevent disproportionate red tape.

Amendment 786

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 8

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 15 – second sentence

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

‘Such assessments shall be based, where appropriate, on qualitative and quantitative indicators and be carried out without undue delay after a significant change occurs, but at least every 6 years and whenever there is evidence to believe that the measures are no longer adequate or effective or that new risks of the occurrence of those adverse impacts may arise.’;

Or. en

Amendment 787

Pascale Piera, Julie Rechagneux, Ton Diepeveen, Ernő Schaller-Baross, Raffaele Stancanelli

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 8 a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 16

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(8a) Article 16 is deleted.

Or. en

Justification

The purpose is to avoid overlapping reporting with CSRD obligations in order to reduce administrative burden for companies.

Amendment 788

Javier Zarzalejos, Miriam Lexmann

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 8 a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 19 – paragraph 1

Present text

Amendment

(8a) in Article 19, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:

In order to provide support to companies or to Member State authorities on how companies should fulfil their due diligence obligations in a practical manner, and to provide support to stakeholders, the Commission, in consultation with Member States and stakeholders, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, the European Environment Agency, the European Labour Authority, and where appropriate with international organisations and other bodies having expertise in due diligence, shall issue guidelines, including general guidelines and sector-specific guidelines or guidelines for specific adverse impacts.

‘In order to provide support to companies or to Member State authorities on how companies should fulfil their due diligence obligations in a practical manner, and to provide support to stakeholders, the Commission, in consultation with Member States and stakeholders, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, the European Environment Agency, the European Labour Authority, and where appropriate with international organisations and other bodies having expertise in due diligence, shall issue guidelines, including general guidelines and sector-specific guidelines or guidelines for specific adverse impacts or specific high-risk geographical areas.';

Or. en

Amendment 789

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 9

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 19 – paragaph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The guidelines referred to in paragraph 2, point (a), shall be made available by 26 July 2026, those referred to in paragraph 2, points (d) and (e), by 26 January 2027, and those referred to in paragraph 2, points (b), (f) and (g), by 26 July 2027.;

3. The guidelines referred to in paragraph 2, points (a) and (c) insofar as the guidance covers sectors listed in Sections A to H, K and L of Annex I of Regulation (EC) No 1893/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council, shall be made available by 26 July 2026, those referred to in paragraph 2, points (d) and (e), by 26 January 2027, and those referred to in paragraph 2, points (b), (c) for other relevant sectors, (f), (g) and (h) by 26 July 2027.’;

Or. en

Amendment 790

Michał Wawrykiewicz

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 9

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 19 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The guidelines referred to in paragraph 2, point (a), shall be made available by 26 July 2026.;

Or. en

Justification

Accelerating the availability of all guidelines is crucial for clarifying the provisions and their implementation.

Amendment 791

Axel Voss, Radan Kanev

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 9

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 19 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

3. The guidelines referred to in paragraph 2 shall be made available by 26 July 2027; In the event that the guidelines are not published by 26 July 2027, the Commission shall assess and extend appropriately the date of application;

Or. en

Justification

It is impossible to have guidelines before the omnibus is done. Moreover, companies need all guidelines at the same time.

Amendment 792

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 21 – paragraph 2a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(9a) in Article 21, the following paragraph 2a is inserted:

'2a. The Single Helpdesk shall establish a dedicated contact point for SMEs where concrete information and guidance can be sought on their rights and protections contained in this Directive, particularly as regards the identification of impacts outlined in Article 8, the contractual assurances referred to in Article 10, paragraph 5 and Article 11, paragraph 6 and the obligations of large companies to provide support referred to in Article 10, paragraph 2 (e) and Article 11, paragraph 3 (f).'

Or. en

Amendment 793

Pascale Piera, Julie Rechagneux, Ton Diepeveen, Ernő Schaller-Baross, Raffaele Stancanelli

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 22

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(9a) Article 22 is deleted.

Or. en

Amendment 794

Mario Mantovani

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 22

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(9a) all of Article 22 is deleted.

Or. it

Justification

It is a particularly oppressive provision for companies that penalises European competitiveness.

Amendment 795

Axel Voss, Angelika Niebler

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 22

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(9a) Article 22 is deleted.

Or. en

Amendment 796

Pascale Piera, Julie Rechagneux, Ton Diepeveen, Ernő Schaller-Baross, Raffaele Stancanelli

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 10

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 22 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10) in Article 22(1), the first subparagraph is replaced by the following:

(10) in Article 22(1), the first subparagraph is deleted;

‘Member States shall ensure that companies referred to in Article 2(1), points (a), (b) and (c), and Article 2(2), points (a), (b) and (c), adopt a transition plan for climate change mitigation, including implementing actions, which aim to ensure, through best efforts, that the business model and strategy of the company are compatible with the transition to a sustainable economy and with the limiting of global warming to 1.5°C in line with the Paris Agreement and the objective of achieving climate neutrality as established in Regulation (EU) 2021/1119, including its intermediate and 2050 climate neutrality targets, and where relevant, the exposure of the company to coal-, oil- and gas-related activities. ’;

Or. en

Amendment 797

Axel Voss, Angelika Niebler

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 10

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 22 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10) in Article 22(1), the first subparagraph is replaced by the following:

(10) in Article 22(1), the first subparagraph is deleted;

Or. en

Justification

Following the once only principle, the climate transition plans under the CSDDD are redundant.

Amendment 798

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 10

Directive 2024/1760/EU

Article 22 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10) in Article 22(1), the first subparagraph is replaced by the following:

(10) in Article 22(1), the first subparagraph is deleted;

Or. en

Amendment 799

Tobiasz Bocheński, Kosma Złotowski

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 10

Directive 2024/1760/EU

Article 22 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10) in Article 22(1), the first subparagraph is replaced by the following:

(10) in Article 22(1), the first subparagraph is deleted;

Or. en

Amendment 800

Pascal Canfin

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 10

Directive 2024/1760/EU

Article 22 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall ensure that companies referred to in Article 2(1), points (a), (b) and (c), and Article 2(2), points (a), (b) and (c), adopt a transition plan for climate change mitigation, including implementing actions, which aim to ensure, through best efforts, that the business model and strategy of the company are compatible with the transition to a sustainable economy and with the limiting of global warming to 1.5°C in line with the Paris Agreement and the objective of achieving climate neutrality as established in Regulation (EU) 2021/1119, including its intermediate and 2050 climate neutrality targets, and where relevant, the exposure of the company to coal-, oil- and gas-related activities.;

Member States shall ensure that companies referred to in Article 2(1), points (a), (b) and (c), and Article 2(2), points (a), (b) and (c), adopt and, through all reasonable efforts, put into effect a transition plan for climate change mitigation which aims to ensure that the business model and strategy of the company are compatible with the transition to a sustainable economy and with the limiting of global warming in line with the Paris Agreement and the objective of achieving climate neutrality as established in Regulation (EU) 2021/1119, including its intermediate and 2050 climate neutrality targets, and where relevant, the exposure of the company to coal-, oil- and gas-related activities. All reasonable efforts in the context of this article shall be understood as taking several proportional and reasonable actions to put the plan into effect, without having to exhaust all possible means at their disposal. Member States shall ensure that the obligation of companies to implement their transition plan for climate change mitigation is an obligation of means, not an obligation of results. ;

Or. en

Justification

We reinsert “put into effect” so the obligation is not merely to adopt but act on the transition plan. We clarify that the putting into effect part is an obligation of means, not result and that it should be proportional and reasonable. We define “all reasonable efforts” to express the differences with the concept of “best efforts”. We delete the 1.5 reference to stick to the Paris Agreement, which provides for holding the temperature increase well below 2 degrees and pursuing effort to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 thus making sure the transition plans are better aligned with the obligations stemming from the Agreement.

Amendment 801

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 10

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 22 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

'Member States shall ensure that companies referred to in Article 2(1), points (a), (b) and (c), and Article 2(2), points (a), (b) and (c), adopt and implement a transition plan for climate change mitigation which aims to ensure, through best efforts, that the business model and strategy of the company are compatible with the transition to a sustainable economy and with the limiting of global warming to 1.5°C in line with the Paris Agreement and the objective of achieving climate neutrality as established in Regulation (EU) 2021/1119, including its intermediate and 2050 climate neutrality targets, and where relevant, the exposure of the company to coal-, oil- and gas-related activities, including by pursuing alignment with science-based sectoral or cross-sectoral transition pathways, targets and plans in line with the Paris Agreement.’

Or. en

Amendment 802

Arash Saeidi, Mario Furore

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 10

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 22 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall ensure that companies referred to in Article 2(1), points (a), (b) and (c), and Article 2(2), points (a), (b) and (c), adopt and implement a transition plan for climate change mitigation, including implementing actions, which aim to ensure, through best efforts, that the business model and strategy of the company are compatible with the transition to a sustainable economy and with the limiting of global warming to 1.5°C in line with the Paris Agreement and the objective of achieving climate neutrality as established in Regulation (EU) 2021/1119, including its intermediate and 2050 climate neutrality targets, and where relevant, the exposure of the company to coal-, oil- and gas-related activities.;

Or. fr

Justification

The ECB opinion on the Omnibus ‘recommends that the drafting of the relevant provision should be clarified in the proposed amendments to the CSDDD to ensure that transition plans are put into effect’, and adds that ‘there is a risk that the revised drafting may be misinterpreted as meaning that undertakings are obliged to adopt transition plans but not to implement them’.

Amendment 803

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 10

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 22 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

‘Member States shall ensure that companies referred to in Article 2(1), points (a), (b) and (c), and Article 2(2), points (a), (b) and (c), adopt, develop and implement a comprehensive transition plan for climate change mitigation which aim to ensure that the business model and strategy of the company are compatible with the transition to a sustainable economy and with the limiting of global warming to 1.5°C in line with the Paris Agreement and the objective of achieving climate neutrality as established in Regulation (EU) 2021/1119, including its intermediate and 2050 climate neutrality targets, and where relevant, the exposure of the company to coal-, oil- and gas-related activities.’;

Or. en

Amendment 804

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 10a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 22 - paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10a) in Article 22 paragraph 2 is deleted;

Or. en

Amendment 805

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 10 a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 22 – paragraph 3a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10a) In Article 22, the following paragraph 3a is added:

3a. Member States shall ensure that companies align a significant part of director's variable remuneration with the achievement of their climate targets and plans, in particular absolute greenhouse gas emission reduction targets for scope 1, 2 and 3. Directors shall be liable for overseeing the obligations set out in paragraph 1.

Or. en

Amendment 806

Angelika Winzig, Lukas Mandl

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 10 a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 24 – paragraph 4a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

10a. in Article 24, the following paragraph 4a is inserted:

‘4a. Any report duly drawn up and published in accordance with this Directive by a parent undertaking established in a Member State shall automatically be recognised as equivalent for all that undertaking’s subsidiaries covered that are established in other Member States. No separate verification, authorisation or additional submission involving the competent authorities of the Member States in which those subsidiaries are established shall be required. The competent authorities of the Member States concerned may verify compliance with reporting obligations through official cooperation with the authority of the parent undertaking’s home state.’

Or. de

Justification

This addition will enhance cross-EU coherence and prevent requirements from being duplicated because of parallel reporting checks carried out in more than one Member State. Automatic recognition will foster administrative simplification, cut red tape and establish legal certainty for cross-border corporate groups. Cooperation between authorities will continue.

Amendment 807

Angelika Winzig, Lukas Mandl

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 10 b (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 24a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

10b. the following Article shall be inserted after Article 24:

‘Article 24a – Exception for innovation

(1) Companies that develop and/or use innovative models or technologies to fulfil the obligations under this Directive may submit an application to the European Commission to be granted test status (regulatory sandboxes).

(2) Test status shall be granted for a maximum period of two years, provided that the company demonstrates that the model in question is capable of meeting the objectives of this Directive in an equivalent manner, in particular in terms of the transparency, traceability and reliability of the information collected or reported.

(3) Where a company is granted test status in accordance with paragraph 2, Member States shall ensure that the national provisions transposing the obligations concerned do not apply to the company in question during the test period. The Commission shall inform the Member States without delay of the granting or revocation of a test status.

(4) The Commission may revoke the test status at any time if the conditions referred to in paragraph 2 are no longer met or if the equivalent achievement of the objective no longer appears to be guaranteed.

(5) The Commission shall issue guidelines on the organisation and application of the test status, including requirements for evidence, test procedures and conditions for renewal and revocation.

(6) The Commission shall inform the European Parliament and the Council annually of the number, duration and results of test statuses that have been granted.’

Or. de

Justification

The introduction of regulatory sandboxes enables companies to test innovative approaches under real-life conditions. This promotes technological developments without jeopardising the achievement of the directive's objectives. The implementation obligation of the Member States ensures legal clarity throughout the EU.

Amendment 808

Mario Mantovani

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 22

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(9a) all of Article 22 is deleted.

Or. it

Justification

It is a particularly oppressive provision for companies that penalises European competitiveness.

Amendment 809

Mario Mantovani

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 10 a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 25 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10a) in Article 25, paragraph 1 is deleted.

Or. it

Justification

Although the CSRD does not itself lay down an obligation to adopt a climate transition plan, it requires companies to declare, where necessary, when they do not have one in place. Considering that this entails significant reputational risks for companies that legitimately declare that they do not have one in place, I believe that this provision of the CSDDD should be removed.

Amendment 810

Michał Wawrykiewicz

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 10 a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 26 – paragraph 1

Present text

Amendment

(10a) In article 26 paragraph 1 is amended as follows:

Member States shall ensure that natural and legal persons are entitled to submit substantiated concerns, through easily accessible channels, to any supervisory authority when they have reasons to believe, on the basis of objective circumstances, that a company is failing to comply with the provisions of national law adopted pursuant to this Directive.

'Member States shall ensure that only natural and legal persons, or their duly authorised representatives, whose legally protected interests have been directly affected or harmed by a company’s failure to comply with the provisions of national law adopted pursuant to this Directive are entitled to submit substantiated concerns, through easily accessible channels, to any supervisory authority. Substantiated concerns shall be based on objective circumstances and accompanied by sufficient information to demonstrate such harm.'

Or. en

Amendment 811

Mario Mantovani

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 10 c (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 26 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10c) in Article 26, paragraph 1 is amended as follows:

Member States shall ensure that natural and legal persons are entitled to submit substantiated concerns, through easily accessible channels, to any supervisory authority when they have reasons to believe, on the basis of objective circumstances, that their legally protected legitimate interests have been infringed as a result of a company’s breach of the provisions of national law adopted within the meaning of this Directive.

Or. it

Justification

Anyone can lodge a complaint and complainants do not have to prove that they have any connection with the alleged omission or have suffered damage caused by it in order to submit a concern. This exposes the system to abuse in which a significant number of reports can be submitted at no cost to the complainant. The text should provide for a reasonable mechanism to filter out unfounded complaints or concerns in a timely manner.

Amendment 812

Tobiasz Bocheński, Kosma Złotowski

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 10 a (new)

Directive (EU)2024/1760

Article 27

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10a) Article 27 is deleted;

Or. en

Amendment 813

Pascale Piera, Julie Rechagneux, Ton Diepeveen, Ernő Schaller-Baross, Raffaele Stancanelli

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 10 a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 27

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10a) Article 27 is replaced by the following:

1. Member States shall lay down the rules on penalties, including pecuniary penalties, applicable to infringements of the provisions of national law adopted pursuant to this Directive, and shall take all measures necessary to ensure that they are implemented. The penalties provided for shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive.

Member States shall lay down rules on applicable sanctions, which shall be necessary, dissuasive and proportionate.

2. In deciding whether to impose penalties and, if such penalties are imposed, in determining their nature and appropriate level, due account shall be taken of:

(a) the nature, gravity and duration of the infringement, and the severity of the impacts resulting from that infringement;

(b) any investments made and any targeted support provided pursuant to Articles 10 and 11;

(d) where relevant, the extent to which prioritisation decisions were made in accordance with Article 9;

(e) any relevant previous infringements by the company of the provisions of national law adopted pursuant to this Directive found by a final decision;

(f) the extent to which the company carried out any remedial action with regard to the subject matter concerned;

(g) the financial benefits gained or losses avoided by the company due to the infringement;

(h) any other aggravating or mitigating factors applicable to the circumstances of the case concerned.

3. Member States shall provide for at least the following penalties:

(a) pecuniary penalties;

(b) if a company fails to comply with a decision imposing a pecuniary penalty within the applicable time limit, a public statement indicating the company

Or. en

Amendment 814

Mario Mantovani

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 10 d (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 27 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(10d) in Article 27(1), the following subparagraph is added:

When deciding whether to impose sanctions, the supervisory authority will send a written warning to the company, which will include a description of the infringement and the specific instructions to be followed by the company to remedy the infringement. The authorities will issue sanctions only for failure to comply with the instructions provided.

Or. it

Justification

Given its nature, which requires flexibility in the implementation of due diligence processes and the likelihood that most situations are not clear because different interpretations fit different specific contexts, the CSDDD provides only a general overview of what companies expect and lacks specific guidelines. This divergence from legislation such as antitrust legislation and GDPR should be considered in the sanctioning regime.

Amendment 815

Arash Saeidi, Mario Furore

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 11

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 27 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(11) in Article 27, paragraph 4 is replaced by the following:

deleted

‘4. The Commission, in collaboration with Member States, shall issue guidance to assist supervisory authorities in determining the level of penalties in accordance with this Article. Member States shall not set a maximum limit of pecuniary penalties in their national law transposing this Directive that would prevent supervisory authorities from imposing penalties in accordance with the principles and factors set out in paragraphs 1 and 2.’;

Or. fr

Justification

Penalties should not be less than 5 % of a company’s net worldwide turnover so that the enforcement of the CSDDD can be effective and actually discourage companies from shirking their due diligence obligations. Also, this level of penalties is already lower than in competition law (where it is up to 10 %) and we should not consider human rights as less important than free competition.

Amendment 816

Pascale Piera, Julie Rechagneux, Ton Diepeveen, Ernő Schaller-Baross, Raffaele Stancanelli

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 11

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 27 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(11) in Article 27, paragraph 4 is replaced by the following:

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 817

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 11 – introductory part

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 27 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(11) in Article 27, paragraph 4 is replaced by the following:

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 818

Mario Mantovani

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 11

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 27 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(11) in Article 27, paragraph 4 is replaced by the following:

deleted

4. The Commission, in collaboration with Member States, shall issue guidance to assist supervisory authorities in determining the level of penalties in accordance with this Article. Member States shall not set a maximum limit of pecuniary penalties in their national law transposing this Directive that would prevent supervisory authorities from imposing penalties in accordance with the principles and factors set out in paragraphs 1 and 2.’;

Or. it

Amendment 819

Adrián Vázquez Lázara, Maravillas Abadía Jover

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 11

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 27 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. The Commission, in collaboration with Member States, shall issue guidance to assist supervisory authorities in determining the level of penalties in accordance with this Article. Member States shall set a maximum limit of pecuniary penalties in their national law transposing this Directive that would prevent supervisory authorities from imposing penalties in accordance with the principles and factors set out in paragraphs 1 and 2.;.

Or. en

Justification

To ensure legal certainty for companies, it is essential to establish a clear maximum threshold for pecuniary penalties. This would guarantee a consistent and uniform application of the Directive, preventing potential disputes or conflicts stemming from the application of other unclear legal frameworks. Moreover, linking the penalty cap to net profit guarantees fairness and proportionality for all companies. Using a different parameter, such as global turnover, would create disproportionate impacts on companies operating with lower profit margins.

Amendment 820

Lukas Mandl

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 11 – introductory part

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 27 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(11) in Article 27, paragraph 4 is replaced by the following:

(11) Article 27 is replaced by the following:

4. Member States shall lay down the rules on penalties applicable to the refusal to comply with this Directive. The penalties provided for shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive.

Or. en

Justification

Article 27 should be limited to this one sentence to respect Member States’ competence in determining penalties. Member States are best placed to set effective, proportionate, and dissuasive penalties tailored to their legal systems.

Amendment 821

Maravillas Abadía Jover, Adrián Vázquez Lázara

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 11a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 27 – paragraphs 4a and 4b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(11a) in Article 27(4), the following paragraphs are inserted:

Where financial penalties are applied, they shall be determined in relation to the company´s net profits. Member States shall guarantee that the upper threshold for such penalties does not exceed 5% of the net profits earned by the company during the financial year prior to the year in which the penalty is imposed.

For entities falling under Article 2(1)(b) and Article 2(2)(b), Member States shall ensure that the calculation of financial penalties takes into account the consolidated revenue of the ultimate parent undertaking.

Or. en

Amendment 822

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 11 a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 27 – paragraph 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(11a) in Article 27, a new paragraph 4a is added:

The Commission, in collaboration with Member States, shall issue guidance to assist supervisory authorities in determining the level of penalties in accordance with this Article. Member States shall not set a maximum limit of pecuniary penalties in their national law transposing this Directive that would prevent supervisory authorities from imposing penalties in accordance with the principles and factors set out in paragraphs 1 and 2.;

Or. en

Amendment 823

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 11a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 27 – paragraph 4a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(11) in Article 27, the following paragraph 4a is inserted:

4a. The Commission, in collaboration with Member States, shall issue guidance to assist supervisory authorities in determining the level of penalties in accordance with this Article.

Or. en

Amendment 824

Pascal Canfin

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(12) Article 29 is amended as follows:

deleted

(a) paragraph 1 is deleted;

(b) paragraph 2 is replaced by the following:

‘2. Where a company is held liable pursuant to national law for damage caused to a natural or legal person by a failure to comply with the due diligence requirements under this Directive, Member States shall ensure that those persons have a right to full compensation. Full compensation shall not lead to overcompensation, whether by means of punitive, multiple or other types of damages. ’;

(d) paragraph 4 is replaced by the following:

‘4. Companies that have participated in industry or multi-stakeholder initiatives, or used independent third-party verification or contractual clauses to support the implementation of due diligence obligations may nevertheless be held liable in accordance with national law. ’;

(e) in paragraph 5, the first subparagraph is replaced by the following:

‘The civil liability of a company for damages as referred to in this Article shall be without prejudice to the civil liability of its subsidiaries or of any direct and indirect business partners in the chain of activities of the company. ’;

(f) paragraph 7 is deleted;

Or. en

Justification

Removing the Union-wide liability regime would lead to fragmenting the single market, which runs counter the very idea of EU-wide due diligence replacing national laws on due diligence.

Amendment 825

Tobiasz Bocheński, Kosma Złotowski

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(12) [...]

(12) Article 29 is deleted;

Or. en

Amendment 826

Lukas Mandl

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(12) Article 29 is amended as follows:

[...]

The applicable national law of the respective Member State governs the civil liability arising from the application of this Directive.

Or. en

Justification

The civil liability provisions in Article 29 should be limited to this one sentence to respect Member States’ national procedural autonomy and legal traditions. Civil liability is best governed by national law, which already provides effective remedies and avoids unnecessary legal fragmentation. This approach aligns with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality and ensures legal certainty.

Amendment 827

Arash Saeidi, Mario Furore

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point a

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) paragraph 1 is deleted;

deleted

Or. fr

Justification

Liability of companies should be at the level of the Directive and not limited to national law. Removing the Union-wide liability regime creates more difficulties for those seeking to have their rights upheld, and more uncertainty for companies that will have to comply with a series of national legal systems.

Amendment 828

Pascal Canfin

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point a

Directive (EU)2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) paragraph 1 is deleted;

deleted

Or. en

Justification

Removing the Union-wide liability regime would lead to fragmenting the single market, which runs counter the very idea of EU-wide due diligence replacing national laws on due diligence.

Amendment 829

Adrián Vázquez Lázara, Maravillas Abadía Jover

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point a

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) paragraph 1 is deleted;

(a) paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:

‘1. Member States shall ensure that a company can be held liable for damage caused to a natural or legal person, provided that:

(a) the company intentionally or negligently failed to comply with the obligations laid down in Articles 10 and 11, when the right, prohibition or obligation listed in the Annex to this Directive is aimed at protecting the natural or legal person; and

(b) as a result of the failure referred to in point (a), damage to the natural or legal person’s legal interests that are protected under national law was caused.’

Or. en

Justification

This amendment aims to ensure the harmonisation of civil liability rules across Member States, avoiding legal fragmentation within the internal market. A clear and common liability framework enhances legal certainty for companies and ensures that victims have effective access to remedies. It strengthens the level playing field by preventing diverging national approaches that could undermine the Directive’s objectives.

Amendment 830

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point a

Directive (EU)2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) paragraph 1 is deleted;

(a) paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:

‘1. Member States shall ensure that a company can be held liable for damage caused to a natural or legal person arising from a failure to comply with the obligations laid down in Articles 10 and 11, in accordance with national law.

A company cannot be held liable if the damage was caused only by its business partners in its chain of activities.’

Or. en

Amendment 831

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point a

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragaph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) paragraph 1 is deleted;

(a) paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:

Member States shall ensure that a company can be held liable for damage caused to a natural or legal person, as a result of a failure by that company to comply with the due diligence requirements under this Directive.

Or. en

Amendment 832

Arash Saeidi, Mario Furore

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point b

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) paragraph 2 is replaced by the following:

deleted

Or. fr

Justification

Amendment 833

Pascal Canfin

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point b

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) paragraph 2 is replaced by the following:

deleted

Or. en

Justification

Removing the Union-wide liability regime would lead to fragmenting the single market, which runs counter the very idea of EU-wide due diligence replacing national laws on due diligence.

Amendment 834

Lukas Mandl

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point b

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) paragraph 2 is replaced by the following:

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 835

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point b

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) paragraph 2 is replaced by the following:

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 836

Mario Mantovani

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point b

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) paragraph 2 is replaced by the following:

(b) paragraph 2 is deleted;

2. Where a company is held liable pursuant to national law for damage caused to a natural or legal person by a failure to comply with the due diligence requirements under this Directive, Member States shall ensure that those persons have a right to full compensation. Full compensation shall not lead to overcompensation, whether by means of punitive, multiple or other types of damages.’;

Or. it

Amendment 837

Lukas Mandl

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point b

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 838

Pascal Canfin

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point b

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Justification

Removing the Union-wide liability regime would lead to fragmenting the single market, which runs counter the very idea of EU-wide due diligence replacing national laws on due diligence.

Amendment 839

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point b

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Where a company is held liable pursuant to national law for damage caused to a natural or legal person by a failure to comply with the due diligence requirements under this Directive, Member States shall ensure that those persons have a right to full compensation in respect of all losses resulting from the damage. Full compensation shall not lead to overcompensation, whether by means of punitive, multiple or other types of damages.;

Or. en

Amendment 840

Arash Saeidi, Mario Furore

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point c

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 3 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. fr

Justification

Trade unions and non-governmental organisations should be able to take a case on behalf of an injured party, in line with the Aarhus Convention.

Amendment 841

Pascal Canfin

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point c

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 3 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Justification

Removing the Union-wide liability regime would lead to fragmenting the single market, which runs counter the very idea of EU-wide due diligence replacing national laws on due diligence.

Amendment 842

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point c

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 3 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 843

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point c

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 3 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 844

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point c

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 3 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Or. en

Amendment 845

Mario Mantovani

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point c a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 3

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(ca) paragraph 3 is deleted;

Or. it

Justification

Although the Omnibus proposal removes the EU-wide liability regime provided for in Article 29, some elements relating to liability remained unchanged. This is not in line with the Omnibus approach and therefore the remaining features of the EU liability regime (e.g. rules on limitation periods, provisions on access to justice, provisions on proof and joint and several liability) should be removed.

Amendment 846

Pascale Piera, Julie Rechagneux, Ton Diepeveen, Ernő Schaller-Baross, Raffaele Stancanelli

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point c a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(ca) Paragraph 4 is deleted.

Or. en

Amendment 847

Arash Saeidi, Mario Furore

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point d

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d) paragraph 4 is replaced by the following:

deleted

Or. fr

Justification

Amendment 848

Pascal Canfin

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point d

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d) paragraph 4 is replaced by the following:

deleted

Or. en

Justification

Removing the Union-wide liability regime would lead to fragmenting the single market, which runs counter the very idea of EU-wide due diligence replacing national laws on due diligence.

Amendment 849

Pascale Piera, Julie Rechagneux, Ton Diepeveen, Ernő Schaller-Baross, Raffaele Stancanelli

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point d

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d) paragraph 4 is replaced by the following:

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 850

Lukas Mandl

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point d

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Companies that have participated in industry or multi-stakeholder initiatives, or used independent third-party verification or contractual clauses to support the implementation of due diligence obligations may nevertheless be held liable in accordance with national law.;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 851

Pascal Canfin

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point d

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

deleted

Or. en

Justification

Removing the Union-wide liability regime would lead to fragmenting the single market, which runs counter the very idea of EU-wide due diligence replacing national laws on due diligence.

Amendment 852

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point d

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 4

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

4. Member States shall ensure that companies that have participated in industry or multi-stakeholder initiatives, or used independent third-party verification or contractual clauses to support the implementation of due diligence obligations can nevertheless be held liable in accordance with this Article and national law.’;

Or. en

Amendment 853

Lukas Mandl

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point e

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(e) in paragraph 5, the first subparagraph is replaced by the following:

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 854

Pascal Canfin

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point e

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(e) in paragraph 5, the first subparagraph is replaced by the following:

deleted

Or. en

Justification

Removing the Union-wide liability regime would lead to fragmenting the single market, which runs counter the very idea of EU-wide due diligence replacing national laws on due diligence.

Amendment 855

Mario Mantovani

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point e – introductory part

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(e) in paragraph 5, the first subparagraph is replaced by the following:

(e) paragraph 5 is deleted.

Or. it

Justification

Although the Omnibus proposal removes the liability regime at EU level provided for in Article 29, some elements relating to liability remained unchanged. This is not in line with the Omnibus approach and therefore the remaining features of the EU liability regime (e.g. rules on limitation periods, provisions on access to justice, provisions on proof and joint and several liability) should be removed.

Amendment 856

Pascal Canfin

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point e

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The civil liability of a company for damages as referred to in this Article shall be without prejudice to the civil liability of its subsidiaries or of any direct and indirect business partners in the chain of activities of the company.;

deleted

Or. en

Justification

Removing the Union-wide liability regime would lead to fragmenting the single market, which runs counter the very idea of EU-wide due diligence replacing national laws on due diligence.

Amendment 857

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point e

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

The civil liability of a company for damages covered by this Article shall be without prejudice to the civil liability of its subsidiaries or of any direct and indirect business partners in the chain of activities of the company.;

Or. en

Amendment 858

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point e a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 3 (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(ea) in paragraph 5, the following third subparagraph is added:

‘Member States shall ensure that a parent company can be held liable for damage to a natural or legal person resulting from its subsidiary’s failure to comply with the due diligence obligations under this Directive.’;

Or. en

Amendment 859

Mario Mantovani

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point e a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 6

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(ea) paragraph 6 is deleted;

Or. it

Justification

The removal of the EU-wide liability regime makes this reference irrelevant.

Amendment 860

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point f

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(f) paragraph 7 is deleted;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 861

Pascal Canfin

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point f

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(f) paragraph 7 is deleted;

deleted

Or. en

Justification

Removing the Union-wide liability regime would lead to fragmenting the single market, which runs counter the very idea of EU-wide due diligence replacing national laws on due diligence.

Amendment 862

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point f

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 29 – paragraph 7

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(f) paragraph 7 is deleted;

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 863

Arash Saeidi, Mario Furore

on behalf of The Left Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 13

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 36 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(13) in Article 36, paragraph 1 is deleted.

deleted

Or. fr

Justification

The review of the CSDDD should consider whether the Directive should be expanded to cover financial undertakings. There is already a body of evidence and best practice showing the impact of financial undertakings on sustainability, human rights and the environment, which can form the basis of the review. Moreover, this amendment from the Commission risks turning the ‘temporary carve-out’ for financial undertakings into a permanent carve-out.

Amendment 864

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 13

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 36 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(13) in Article 36, paragraph 1 is deleted.

deleted

Or. en

Amendment 865

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 13

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 36 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(13) in Article 36, paragraph 1 is deleted.

(13) in Article 36, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:

1. The Commission shall submit a report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the necessity of laying down additional sustainability due diligence requirements tailored to regulated financial undertakings with respect to the provision of financial services and investment activities, and the options for such due diligence requirements as well as their impacts, in line with the objectives of this Directive.

The report shall take into account other Union legislative acts that apply to regulated financial undertakings. It shall be published at the earliest possible opportunity after the entry into force of this Directive, but no later than two years after the entry into force of this Directive. It shall be accompanied, if appropriate, by a legislative proposal.

Or. en

Amendment 866

Pascale Piera, Julie Rechagneux, Ton Diepeveen, Ernő Schaller-Baross, Raffaele Stancanelli

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 13

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 36

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(13) in Article 36, paragraph 1 is deleted.

(13) Article 36 is amended as follows:

Or. en

Amendment 867

Pascale Piera, Julie Rechagneux, Ton Diepeveen, Ernő Schaller-Baross, Raffaele Stancanelli

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 13 – point a (new)

Directive (EU)2024/1760

Article 36 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(a) Paragraph 1 is deleted.

Or. en

Amendment 868

Pascale Piera, Julie Rechagneux, Ton Diepeveen, Ernő Schaller-Baross, Raffaele Stancanelli

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 13 – point b (new)

Directive (EU)2024/1760

Article 36 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

Present text

Amendment

(b) In paragraph 2, subparagraph 1 is amended as follows:

By 26 July 2030, and every three years thereafter, the Commission shall submit a report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the implementation of this Directive and its effectiveness in reaching its objectives, in particular in addressing adverse impacts. The report shall be accompanied, if appropriate, by a legislative proposal. The first report shall, inter alia, assess the following issues:

"By 26 July 2030, and every three years thereafter, the Commission shall submit a report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the implementation of this Directive and its effectiveness and its effects on administrative burdens. The first report shall, inter alia, assess the following issues:"

Or. en

Amendment 869

Axel Voss, Radan Kanev

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 13 a (new)

Directive (EU)2024/1760

Article 37 - paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(13a) In Article 37, paragraph 1 shall be replaced by the following:

1. Member States shall adopt and publish, by 26 July 2026, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive. They shall forthwith communicate the text of those measures to the Commission.

They shall apply those measures:

(a) from 26 July 2027 as regards companies referred to in Article 2(1), points (a) and (b), which are formed in accordance with the legislation of the Member State and that had more than 5 000 employees on average and generated a net worldwide turnover of more than EUR 1 500 000 000 in the last financial year preceding 26 July 2027 for which annual financial statements have been or should have been adopted, with the exception of the measures necessary to comply with Article 16, which Member States shall apply to those companies for financial years starting on or after 1 January 2028;

(b) from 26 July 2028 as regards companies referred to in Article 2(1), points (a) and (b), which are formed in accordance with the legislation of the Member State and that had more than 3 000 employees on average and generated a net worldwide turnover of more than EUR 900 000 000 in the last financial year preceding 26 July 2028 for which annual financial statements have been or should have been adopted, with the exception of the measures necessary to comply with Article 16, which Member States shall apply to those companies for financial years starting on or after 1 January 2029;

(a) from 26 July 2029 as regards companies referred to in Article 2(1), points (a) and (b), which are formed in accordance with the legislation of the Member State and that had more than 3 000 employees on average and generated a net worldwide turnover of more than EUR 900 000 000 in the last financial year preceding 26 July 2028 for which annual financial statements have been or should have been adopted, with the exception of the measures necessary to comply with Article 16, which Member States shall apply to those companies for financial years starting on or after 1 January 2029;

(c) from 26 July 2027 as regards companies referred to in Article 2(2), points (a) and (b), which are formed in accordance with the legislation of a third country and that generated a net turnover of more than EUR 1 500 000 000 in the Union, in the financial year preceding the last financial year preceding 26 July 2027, with the exception of the measures necessary to comply with Article 16, which Member States shall apply to those companies for financial years starting on or after 1 January 2028;

(b) from 26 July 2029 as regards companies referred to in Article 2(1), points (a) and (b), which are formed in accordance with the legislation of a third country and that generated a net worldwide turnover of more than EUR 900 000 000 in the Union in the last financial year preceding 26 July 2028, with the exception of the measures necessary to comply with Article 16, which Member States shall apply to those companies for financial years starting on or after 1 January 2029;

(d) from 26 July 2028 as regards companies referred to in Article 2(2), points (a) and (b), which are formed in accordance with the legislation of a third country and that generated a net turnover of more than EUR 900 000 000 in the Union, in the financial year preceding the last financial year preceding 26 July 2028, with the exception of the measures necessary to comply with Article 16, which Member States shall apply to those companies for financial years starting on or after 1 January 2029;

(c) from 26 July 2030 as regards all other companies referred to in Article 2 (1), points (a) and (b) and Article 2(2), points (a) and (b), and companies referred to in Article 2(1), point (c) and Article 2(2). point (c), with the exception of the measures necessary to comply with Article 16, which Member States shall apply to those companies for financial years starting on or after 1 January 2030;

(d) from 26 July 2029 as regards companies referred to in Article 2(2), points (a) and (b), which are formed in accordance with the legislation of a third country and that generated a net turnover of more than EUR 900 000 000 in the Union, in the financial year preceding the last financial year preceding 26 July 2028, with the exception of the measures necessary to comply with Article 16, which Member States shall apply to those companies for financial years starting on or after 1 January 2029;

(e) from 26 July 2029 as regards all other companies referred to in Article 2(1), points (a) and (b), and Article 2(2), points (a) and (b), and companies referred to in Article 2(1), point (c), and Article 2(2), point (c), with the exception of the measures necessary to comply with Article 16, which Member States shall apply to those companies for financial years starting on or after 1 January 2029.

(e) from 26 July 2030 as regards all other companies referred to in Article 2(1), points (a) and (b), and Article 2(2), points (a) and (b), and companies referred to in Article 2(1), point (c), and Article 2(2), point (c), with the exception of the measures necessary to comply with Article 16, which Member States shall apply to those companies for financial years starting on or after 1 January 2029.

When Member States adopt those measures, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or be accompanied by such a reference on the occasion of their official publication. Member States shall determine how such reference is to be made.

Or. en

Justification

Despite "stop the clock", the current timeline is still highly unrealistic. The Commission cannot adopt guidelines by 2026, since the omnibus will barely be finished by then. Companies need guidelines before starting to implement the Directive.

Amendment 870

Angelika Winzig, Lukas Mandl

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 13 a (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 37a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

13a. The following new article is inserted:

‘Article 37a – Emergency clause

1. In the event of an exceptional economic situation, the European Commission shall, within 30 days of the publication of the relevant information, adopt temporary measures by means of delegated acts to suspend, reduce or make more flexible the obligations provided for in this Directive. Member States shall take all necessary measures to implement those delegated acts effectively within one month of their entry into force, in particular by temporarily adapting or suspending the corresponding national transposition measures.

2. An exceptional economic situation within the meaning of this Article shall be deemed to exist where the Commission determines that a significantly negative macroeconomic environment prevails. This shall be the case, in particular, if the gross domestic product (GDP) of the Union or of a Member State falls by at least 0.5 percentage points compared to the previous year.

3. When making the determination referred to in paragraph 2, the Commission shall take into account in particular: (a) macroeconomic data published by Eurostat; and (b) relevant analyses, in particular by the European Central Bank and the European Court of Auditors.

4. The measures referred to in paragraph 1 shall apply for a maximum period of five years from the entry into force of the relevant delegated act. The Commission shall review, at the latest twelve months before the end of that period, whether the exceptional economic situation persists and whether an extension is justified.

5. The measures may in particular provide for: (a) the extension of deadlines for the fulfilment of the obligations laid down in this Directive; (b) the temporary suspension of individual obligations, in particular in the area of reporting, disclosure and due diligence; (c) the recommendation to Member States to exclude civil liability in respect of suspended or adjusted obligations for the duration of the measure; (d) guidelines to facilitate the practical implementation of this Directive at national level during the period of the exceptional economic situation.

6. The measures shall be proportionate to the economic situation identified, temporary and limited to the extent necessary to achieve the objectives pursued by this Directive.’

Or. de

Justification

The regulation creates a legal basis for temporary relief in exceptional economic situations. Companies should not be burdened with disproportionate obligations in times of crisis. The Commission can react flexibly; the Member States implement the measures in accordance with Union law.

Amendment 871

Angelika Winzig, Lukas Mandl

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 13 b (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 37b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

13b. The following new article is inserted:

‘Article 37b – Individual emergency

1. Companies falling within the scope of this Directive may apply to the European Commission for exemption from one or more of the obligations laid down in this Directive, provided that they prove that fulfilment of those obligations is unreasonable in the case in question on account of objective and exceptional circumstances.

2. Unreasonableness within the meaning of paragraph 1 shall be deemed to exist in particular if:

(a) the measures required to fulfil the obligations in question cannot actually be implemented due to a lack of or inadequate infrastructure, state regulation or international framework conditions in the country of origin or along the value chain;

(b) the company proves that, despite reasonable, documented efforts, there is no reasonable alternative to complying with the obligation; or

(c) fulfilment of the obligation would entail disproportionate financial, administrative or operational burdens that would jeopardise or significantly impair the business activity as a whole.

3. The application can also be submitted retrospectively for a calendar year that has already ended. It must contain a detailed justification and all relevant evidence. The Commission shall decide within eight weeks of receipt of the application whether the application is to be granted.

4. If the application is granted, the company shall be exempted from the obligation in question for a period of five years. An extension shall be possible upon request, provided that the conditions continue to be met.

5. If a request pursuant to paragraph 1 is granted, Member States shall ensure that the relevant national provisions adopted to implement the obligations concerned do not apply to the company concerned during the period requested.

6. The applicant company shall have the right to appeal against a negative decision of the Commission before the General Court of the European Union.

7. The Commission shall issue guidelines on the interpretation and application of paragraphs 1 to 4. These guidelines shall contain in particular:

(a) Criteria for assessing unreasonableness;

(b) Examples of typical case scenarios;

8. The Commission shall inform the European Parliament and the Council annually of the number and type of exemptions that have been granted.’

Or. de

Justification

The case-by-case approach to regulation ensures that companies may be exempted from individual obligations in objectively unreasonable circumstances. This ensures proportionality and improves the practical feasibility of the directive, without jeopardising its objective. A centralised review by the Commission ensures consistency and legal certainty throughout the Union.

Amendment 872

Angelika Winzig, Lukas Mandl, Angelika Niebler

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 13 c (new)

Directive (EU) 2024/1760

Article 38 - Paragraphs 2–4 (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

13c. in Article 38, the following paragraphs are added:

"(2) The provisions of this Directive shall expire on 31 December 2035, unless they are expressly extended or replaced by a new act before that date.

(3) Member States shall ensure that the national provisions adopted to implement this Directive expire no later than six months after the date of expiry of this Directive.

(4) The European Commission shall review the effectiveness, efficiency and necessity of the obligations laid down in this Directive no later than three years before the expiry date referred to in paragraph 3. It shall submit a report on the outcome of this review to the European Parliament and the Council no later than two years before said expiry date. If the Commission considers it necessary to maintain or to adapt the provisions of the Directive, it shall submit a legislative proposal to that effect in good time.’

Or. de

Justification

The sunset clause ensures that the directive is reviewed after a fixed period and extended only if it is proven necessary. This forces an active examination to be carried out of the impact and proportionality of the provisions. The automatic sunset clause prevents the directive from expiring due to inactivity and strengthens legal certainty.

Amendment 873

Kira Marie Peter-Hansen

on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Article4a

Digital solutions

The Commission in cooperation with Member States shall establish a dedicated and accessible digital reporting portal serving as a one-stop-shop for companies. The portal shall provide free access to all templates and information relating to all reporting requirements imposed on companies in Union law, tailored to a company’s size, sector, products and services, and risk exposure. It shall also provide access to information on funding and tendering opportunities to help companies implement, comply with and benefit from their due diligence obligations. For the purposes of the first subparagraph, the Commission shall ensure that the relevant European and national data platforms providing information to companies and data users are interoperable and that data can be transmitted, exchanged and analysed in a technically seamless manner.

Or. en

Amendment 874

Mario Mantovani

Proposal for a directive

Article 5 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Directive 2025/794

Article 2 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by [12 months after entry into force] at the latest. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions.

Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by [24 months after entry into force] at the latest. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions.

(This amendment applies throughout the text and specifically also replaces the terms set out in the first and second sub-paragraphs of Article 37(1) of Directive EU (2024/1760).)

Or. it