Omnibus – Latin for ‚for all‘. A fitting name for the legislative package meant to streamline the EU’s sustainability regulations, you might think. But as the debate unfolds, it seems that this omnibus won’t be carrying everyone along. In fact, it seems to be threatening to leave some of the most committed businesses stranded at the curb.
The idea of simplification isn’t the problem. Who wouldn’t support less bureaucracy, clearer processes and synergies in reporting? But what’s on the table seems to go well beyond fine-tuning. It risks gutting fundamental commitments, rewriting the rules in the middle of the game and throwing legal certainty out the window.
For whom, exactly, is this an advantage?
Certainly not for the businesses that took sustainability seriously – those that invested early, built compliance infrastructure and integrated ESG into their strategies. These companies – whether global players, green tech start-ups or consultancies like ours – have invested resources, time and capital on the promise of clear rules. Now, just as momentum is building, they might face regulatory whiplash.
The narrative of “sustainability as a burden” has been told so often, it almost sounds convincing. But reality tells a different story:
- Companies that integrate sustainability outperform. For example, a McKinsey study found that businesses excelling in revenue growth, profitability, and ESG performance consistently deliver higher returns than their peers. (Read more here)
- Consumers demand it. For instance, a PwC survey found that consumers are willing to spend an average of 9.7% more on sustainable products, even amid inflation concerns. (Read more here)
To put it bluntly: Sustainability isn’t compliance—it’s survival. We don’t need a “regulatory pause” to see what’s happening to our climate, human rights, our supply chains, our resources.
The cost of mitigation is rising. Delaying sustainability commitments only increases future expenses, from adapting to extreme weather to rebuilding disrupted supply chains. Studies show that the economic impact of inaction often far outweighs the short-term costs of proactive sustainability investments. For example, an Oxford Economics study found that a 2.2°C increase in global temperatures by 2050 could reduce global GDP by up to 20%. (Read more here)
So, let’s be clear: The real economic and competitive disadvantage isn’t sustainability regulations. It’s failing to adapt to the now and the future.
Yes, let’s simplify where it makes sense. But gutting core principles in the name of efficiency? That’s not simplification—that’s short-termism.
And if this is truly an Omnibus, why does it feel like many are about to be left behind?