ESRS, VSME, and Taxonomy: Less Bureaucracy, More Value for ESG Data
European sustainability reporting enters a new phase. On 3 July 2026, the European Commission adopted the ESRS revised, that is, the European Sustainability Reporting Standards, together al new voluntary VSME standard, Voluntary Sustainability Reporting Standard for SMEs, intended for companies excluded from the scope of the CSRD.
The novelty fits into the path started Omnibus package I, with the purpose of reduce administrative burdens without weakening the quality of ESG information. The revised standards provide for a reduction of over 60% of mandatory data, over 70% of the total information requested and an expected decrease in reporting costs of over 30% per company.
Il change concerns especially the larger companies subject to the CSRD, ma will have effects also on SMEs and on companies not required to reportMany organizations, in fact, already receive ESG requests from corporate clients, banks, investors, or large industrial groups. In this context, the VSME becomes a useful reference for communicating sustainability information in a simpler, more proportionate, and consistent manner.
A central point is the value chain capCompanies subject to the CSRD will not be able to request additional ESG data beyond that required by the voluntary standard from partners in their value chain with fewer than 1.000 employees. This principle aims to reduce the risk of overly complex questionnaires, fragmented requests, and disproportionate data collection for smaller companies.
Simplification does not only concern ESRS. Even on the front of EU Taxonomy Interventions are being evaluated to make disclosures simpler, more relevant and comparable. In July, EBA, ESMA ed EIOPA they started a consultation on possible changes to the information regime, with Consultation open until August 12, 2026 e technical opinion expected by the end of October.
For businesses, the message is clear: the ESG reporting will be less bureaucratic, but no less importantThe European direction is to move from a compliance-based approach to a more targeted management of data that is truly useful for the market, finance, and stakeholders.
Getting ready therefore means organize essential information on emissions, energy consumption, workforce, governance, climate risks, value chain and corporate strategy. The revised ESRS and VSME reduce the formal burden of reporting, but confirm that sustainability will be increasingly linked to the ability to demonstrate, with solid data, the value and reliability of the company.
ESG Ratings and Greenwashing: Sustainability Must Be Demonstrable
Sustainability is entering a phase where simply declaring commitments, objectives, or best practices is no longer enough. Companies, investors, banks, clients, and consumers are increasingly demanding clear, comparable, and verifiable ESG information. In this context, ESG ratings e environmental communication become two central areas for corporate credibility.
From 2 July 2026 it is fully applicable EU Regulation 2024/3005 on ESG ratings. The provider operating in the European Union they will have to be authorized and supervised byESMA, the European Securities and Markets Authority, and comply with new obligations on methodological transparency, governance, and management of conflicts of interest.
The news does not introduce a single ESG rating methodologyEach provider will continue to be able to use different models, indicators, and weights. The goals eclecticism è But make more clear How ratings are constructed, what data is used e what the rating actually measures: the financial risk linked to ESG factors, the company's impact on the environment and society, or both.
For businesses, this step is important. A ESG rating is not a “stamp” of sustainability, but a tool that can influence access to capital, the relationship with banks and investors, participation in qualified supply chains and the relationship with large clients. For this reason it is becoming increasingly important to have solid, up-to-date and consistent ESG data.
The theme also directly connects to the risk of greenwashingAccording to FFIND's Sustainability Study 2026, the 77,1% of Italians consider it not very credible the messages with which companies communicate their environmental commitment. Furthermore, from 27 September 2026 The new European framework that limits the use of claims such as “green,” “sustainable,” “eco-friendly,” or “carbon neutral” unless supported by verifiable evidence will come into full effect.
For companies, the challenge is not to communicate more, but to communicate betterEnvironmental declarations, ESG ratings, sustainability reports, and climate targets must be based on measurable data, traceable processes, and information consistent with the business model.
La verifiable sustainability thus becomes a competitive factor: strengthens confidence of the market, reduces reputational risk and helps the company to communicate more credibly with customers, investors, banks and stakeholders.
ESG Supply Chain: Supplier Management Remains the Weak Point
Sustainability is becoming increasingly structural within companies, but fatigue more to extend throughout the supply chain. This is the picture that emerges from Sustainability Ratings Index 2026 di EcoVadis, which depicts a supply chain that is still "two-speed": on the one hand, companies' internal environmental, social, and governance policies are improving; on the other, significant gaps remain in the ESG management of suppliers, subcontractors, and business partners.
The most relevant fact is that 80% of assessed tier-1 suppliers do not have a documented process to identify and manage ESG risks in their supply chainAdded to this is a significant weakness on the climate front: 73% of companies do not report Scope 3 emissions generated upstream in the value chain and 77% do not monitor those downstream.
For companies, the topic is increasingly strategic. Le ESG demands no longer concern only internal activities, but also the entire supply network: origin of raw materials, transportation, indirect emissions, working conditions, safety, human rights, ethics, and sustainable procurement. Corporate clients, banks, investors, and large industrial groups are demanding more robust data to assess partner risks, performance, and reliability.
Il sustainable procurement it then becomes a lrisk management eva. It's no longer enough to require suppliers to sign a code of conduct or complete generic questionnaires. According to EcoVadis, less than 1% of companies provide their customers with sustainability data that is granular, verified, and structured enough to be used in decision-making processes. This highlights a key shift: supply chain sustainability requires actionable data, documented processes, and continuous monitoring.
Technology can help, but it doesn't solve the problem by itself. Many organizations are already using it. digital tools and artificial intelligence to analyze supplier data, but these systems they only work if the information base is solidIf providers don't collect reliable data or report it incompletely, even the most advanced tools risk producing ineffective assessments.
The data relating to Italy but it also offers a positive signal: the number of evaluated companies is growing e the share of companies with advanced ESG performance is increasingThis confirms that sustainability assessments, if repeated over time, can become not only control tools but also levers for continuous improvement.
For businesses, the priority is to build a more structured approach: map critical suppliers, define ESG selection and monitoring criteria, collect data on emissions and social risks, update purchasing procedures e train buyers and managers Functional. Supply chain sustainability is no longer an ancillary requirement, but a key element for competitiveness, market access, and risk management.
Electrification and ETS: Decarbonization as a lever for industrial competitiveness
The European climate transition is entering a phase increasingly linked to industrial competitiveness. July 2026 la European Commission presented a package of measures connecting electrification, revision of the EU ETS and support for investments in sectors more exposed to the energy transformation.
The underlying message is clear: the decarbonization It is no longer read only as an environmental obligation, but as aeva to reduce dependence on imported fossil fuels, strengthen energy security and support European production capacity. In this framework, theelectrification becomes one of the central instruments of European industrial policy.
Today about 70% of electricity produced in the European Union already comes from clean sources, ma la quota of electricity in final consumption stay still around the 23 %The objective indicated by Brussels is to bring it to 46% within the 2040, particularly in the industrial, transport and buildings sectors. According to the Commission, This step could significantly reduce Europe's spending on fossil fuel imports.
La second lever concerns the EU ETS, work eclecticism di emissions tradingThe Commission aims to strengthen the link between carbon pricing and industrial investment by allocating a greater share of ETS revenues to the decarbonization of sectors covered by the system. The proposed measures also include the creation of a European Bank for Industrial Decarbonisation, with an expected allocation of 100 billion euros.
The proposal also provides that the Member States to allocate a higher share of national ETS revenues to investments in sectors covered by the system, strengthening the link between carbon pricing and industrial transformation.
For businesses, this scenario opens up a double perspective. On one side, the pressure regulatory on emissions remains high and the carbon pricing will continue to impact industrial strategies. On the other, an greater use of ETS resources towards clean technologies, energy efficiency, electrification of processes and innovation could create new investment opportunities.
The key point will be the ability of companies to prepare. transition will require more robust energy plans, investment assessments in electrification, consumption monitoring, management of emissions costs and access to public and subsidized finance instrumentsFor industrial sectors, sustainability is therefore increasingly becoming a question of strategy, competitiveness, and economic resilience.
The evolution of the ETS confirms a now clear direction: European climate policy aims to transform the carbon price from a simple compliance cost to a driver of industrial investment. For companies, anticipating this trajectory can make the difference between undergoing the transition or using it as a competitive positioning lever.
