It’s official — a new bill is before Australia’s parliament that will make climate reporting mandatory for roughly 20,000 local entities 

Like many OECD countries, Australia has announced changes to its climate-reporting standards. Besides broadening mandatory reporting to the wider market, it will also introduce new ISSB-aligned requirements, representing a significant uplift in requirements compared to existing frameworks.

Other countries in Asia-Pacific (APAC) are also acting on similar sustainability reporting measures. Singapore’s Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority (ACRA) and Singapore Exchange Regulation (SGX RegCo) are adopting ISSB and extending mandatory reporting requirements to all listed companies from 2025 and requiring selected non-listed firms to report from 2027 onwards.

 of the Philippines announced that it will 

revise the Sustainability Reporting Guidelines

 for publicly listed companies to align with ISSB standards. It will require listed companies to submit sustainability reports in two formats: the SR Narrative and Sustainability Report (SuRe) form.

Deep diving into Australia’s growing ESG reporting requirements

Several non-voluntary reporting frameworks already exist in Australia, including the 

 (NGERS) scheme and the Safeguard Mechanism, which builds on the NGERS scheme. However, only a small number of organisations (less than 1,000) are obligated to comply with these schemes. Organisations listed on the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) are required to disclose their sustainability efforts on a 

. But, for most organisations in the country, sustainability reporting is currently voluntary.

Climate risk reporting is especially important in countries like Australia

, due to its high vulnerability to worsening extreme weather and other adverse climate effects. So, despite the lack of legal obligation, 

 listed on the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX 300) found that entities of various sizes are now disclosing financial and sustainability information, whether by creating standalone sustainability reports, including it in annual reports, or both in their annual and standalone sustainability reports. However, many stakeholders don’t find this information helpful. The lack of a common standard for reporting has made it difficult for companies 

to deliver a transparent, credible and comprehensive picture

2023 analysis of 247 Australian businesses

 found that 57% studied were guilty of “making false, misleading, unclear or unsubstantiated claims, pointing to ‘greenwashing’ — whether intentional or not —on a concerning scale.” As such, investors are seeking greater transparency of companies’ sustainability agendas to determine their long-term viability as businesses.

As such, the changes proposed in the new bill seek to fulfil these needs. But the call for better transparency and accountability brings an even higher level of responsibility.

Reporting will be challenging — even for seasoned sustainability experts

The journey to ISSB-aligned frameworks is anticipated to create substantial challenges for most organisations, even those with mature climate-reporting practices already in place. Australia’s incoming measures represent a significant uplift compared to the Financial Stability Board’s 

Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCDF) 

The new requirements proposed in the bill will closely align with the requirements in IFRS S2, which, compared to the TCDF framework, will require companies to make a few adjustments or provide additional information — as much as possible that is reasonable, supportable and available at the reporting date.

Here are a few examples of such changes based on 

a document prepared by the staff of the IFRS Foundation

The draft bill will also require Australian companies to 

prepare an annual sustainability report following these updated guidelines every financial year

From compliance exercise to competitive advantage

While the capacity uplift to accommodate these changes might be significant, they also have long-term benefits. Instead of making climate reporting a once-a-year, one-off occasion, it will give organisations more insight into the complex web of effects their business has on resources, systems, and individuals and organisations. This informs forward-looking decisions and the development of new and disruptive products and services, as well as contributes to risk mitigation. And now that stakeholders are measuring the value of an organisation not just on their financial performance but their environmental impact as well, it can help organisations connect deeper with clients and suppliers or attract investment.

The initial setup will be the hardest part. It will involve re-evaluating current sustainability reporting efforts and mapping out the areas that need to be changed or improved. It will challenge organisations to become familiar with these new standards and requirements and increase their level of understanding of climate-related risks, opportunities and financial impact.

These changes may have larger organisational implications as well. They will force organisations to take a look at their business models as a whole — everything from data management to auditability to governance and risk — ensuring that their climate strategies are aligned with their organisational objectives, or vice versa.

With mandatory reporting only months away, it’s time for Australian organisations to act. Given the substantial uplift needed, companies must turn to systems and technologies that can streamline climate-reporting processes both within their business and in the lead-up to regulatory filing.

Take charge of your climate-reporting obligations and supercharge your holistic ESG strategy by 

Enhanced sustainability reporting hitting APAC: Navigating the TCFD to ISSB uplift

The year so far has been an eventful one for entity management. Mere weeks after the 

 went live and corporations started reporting beneficial ownership data to the Department of Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), a U.S. District judge in Alabama ruled the act unconstitutional.

Does this mean the end of beneficial ownership reporting and that corporations can decrease their focus on this area?

Far from it. Here’s our view of the landscape and what we recommend for general counsel, chief legal officers, paralegals and legal operations.

, a powerful lobby, led the legal challenge against the CTA, citing an argument of governmental overreach. But even more powerful forces support the CTA and its resumption.

“Congress overwhelmingly voted to enact the bipartisan (CTA)… to crack down on illicit shell companies and combat financial crime,” a Treasury official told 

 The same article quoted a former FinCEN official as saying he does “not find the court’s opinion persuasive.” Reuters also pointed out that another small business group, Main Street Alliance, partnered with the nonpartisan FACT Coalition and Transparency International U.S. to file an amicus brief in support of the CTA.

While the next steps are still in progress, and FinCEN is complying with the injunction, the government is expected to appeal. Based on current sentiment, the appeal seems more a matter of when than if. And as the CTA’s provisions are reinstated, its tight filing deadlines will return as well — as short as 30 days in some cases.

But the seemingly inevitable return of FinCEN reporting isn’t the only reason to 

 in the area of beneficial ownership information (BOI) collection and management.

All of the work you’ve put into CTA compliance has not been in vain. As we 

, the CTA’s impact extends beyond legal compliance and promotes good corporate governance. The motivating purpose behind this act is to crack down on money laundering, tax evasion, fraud and other financial crimes — all risks your organization wants to avoid.

 monitoring by another name. By collecting detailed ownership data for entities and subsidiaries across jurisdictions and keeping this information current, you’re maintaining a sharper eye on who you’re doing business with. And that’s an important mission in today’s world of rising crime and corporate growth through mergers and acquisitions.

Loosen the reins in this important area, and your organization may face difficulties in opening bank accounts, obtaining licenses or engaging in certain financial transactions.

Collecting information on who owns a subsidiary or entity seems straightforward on the surface. But GCs, CLOs, paralegals and legal departments immersed in this work know that the reality of entity management is far more complicated.

Under CTA requirements, a beneficial owner is any individual with substantial control over 25% or more of an entity — which could mean several data points for each subsidiary. And the owner’s name is just the beginning of the information you must collect. You’ll also need date of birth, a residential or business address and a social security or passport number. After all of this information is gathered, it needs to be verified, stored securely and reported in whatever format a regulatory agency like FinCEN, a local jurisdiction or your board and executive leadership require.

Foreign-based companies with qualifying operational locations in the United States add even more complexity to the task. Within these troves of information, red flags could be lurking that could put your organization at severe financial, reputational and/or legal risk.

Buy yourself and your team a little convenience and a lot of peace of mind. If you’re still using manual systems, such as spreadsheets or paper files, now is the time for a change. A 

 can help, streamlining the task of gathering and verifying information, updating it as needed, maintaining data accuracy and meeting filing deadlines.

Whatever happens in the courts and Treasury department regarding the constitutionality of the Corporate Transparency Act, keep your reporting CTA- and AML-ready. Schedule a demo of 

Diligent

Blog

Enhanced sustainability reporting hitting APAC: Navigating the TCFD to ISSB uplift

Federal District Court declares CTA unconstitutional — but entity management still matters

Solutions

Resources

Company

Your Data Matters

Diligent

Blog

Enhanced sustainability reporting hitting APAC: Navigating the TCFD to ISSB uplift

Federal District Court declares CTA unconstitutional — but entity management still matters

SolutionsSolutions

ResourcesResources

CompanyCompany

Your Data Matters

Solutions

Resources

Company