Sixty Days and Counting Until California Corporate GHG Emissions Disclosures Due – Observations on 2026 Reporting

The first reports under SB 253 – California’s corporate greenhouse gas emissions reporting mandate – are due 60 days from today, on August 10. In this post, we share our observations for this reporting cycle.

SB 253 is more formally known as the Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act (California Health & Safety Code Section 38532). It requires annual public disclosure of Scope 1, 2 and 3 greenhouse gas emissions by US-organized entities doing business in California with total annual revenues exceeding $1 billion. Measurement and reporting are required to be aligned with the Greenhouse Gas Protocol. SB 253 is further discussed in numerous Ropes & Gray posts available here.

Choosing a Year 1 Reporting Approach

In its FAQs (FAQ 19), CARB outlines three examples of compliant reporting approaches for this year:

• If a company develops its own annual report that includes information on Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions, that report may be submitted to CARB.

• If a company already submits annual Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions through a voluntary program or to another regulatory program, the company may submit that same information to CARB.

• A company may choose to submit data using CARB’s Scope 1 and 2 GHG reporting template.

Thus far, the prevailing approach we have been seeing is a variation of the first option: a stand-alone SB 253 report that excerpts relevant information from the more comprehensive sustainability report. The rationale behind this approach is to treat regulatory compliance and voluntary reporting separately, submitting what is necessary for regulatory compliance, but not more.

We expect CARB to release for voluntary use this year a slimmed-down version of the draft template it published for comment in October 2025. The October 2025 template is discussed in this Ropes & Gray post.

Determining What to Disclose

SB 253 and the initial regulations adopted by the CARB board are not particularly prescriptive regarding report content. By their terms, they only require reporting entities to report their Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions for the applicable preceding fiscal year using the GHG Protocol. However, companies should consider whether to also include contextual information about their methodology and assumptions underlying their reporting.

Although not required to be used, the October 2025 draft template can serve as a checklist for thinking about this year’s disclosure. 

A Lot of Latitude in 2026

At its workshops and in other public statements, CARB has reiterated the continuing applicability of its December 2024 Enforcement Notice. CARB has indicated that it will exercise its enforcement discretion for good-faith first-year submissions, focusing instead on supporting reporting entities actively working toward full compliance. The Enforcement Notice is further discussed in this Ropes & Gray post.

In its FAQs, CARB has indicated that, for 2026 reporting under SB 253, it will allow reporting entities to submit Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions data for their prior fiscal year based on information they already have or were collecting when the Enforcement Notice was issued, whether or not the data received limited assurance. (FAQ 20) In addition, CARB’s deck from its November 2025 workshop includes the following short Q&A: “Is data assurance required for 2026 reporting? For 2026 reporting, limited assurance is not required for data submission.”

Consistent with the foregoing, CARB has indicated that, if a company was not collecting or planning to collect data at the time the Enforcement Notice was issued, it is not expected to submit Scope 1 and 2 data in 2026. The company should instead submit a statement on company letterhead to CARB, stating that it did not submit a report and indicating that, in accordance with the Enforcement Notice, it was not collecting or planning to collect data at the time the Notice was issued. (FAQ 19)

Know Your In-scope Entities

Each covered subsidiary will be assessed a fee, even if reporting is at the parent level. We expect that companies will have to indicate in their CARB submission each in-scope entity covered by the report.

The fee to be set by CARB is intended to cover its program administration costs. CARB is planning a flat fee structure dependent on the number of companies required to report. CARB previously indicated that it plans to issue fee invoices later in 2026 after it sets the fee amount. It indicated that it proposes to assess the fee amount by September 10.

CARB has indicated the reporting parent may pay all fees in one combined payment. (FAQ 18)

Be Mindful of Assurance Engagement Terms

Some companies that have obtained limited assurance over Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions data in connection with their voluntary sustainability reporting plan to include the assurance report in their SB 253 submission. Companies that plan to do so should make sure that is permitted under the assurance engagement terms. 

Look for Further Details from CARB 

At its March 23 public workshop, CARB indicated that forthcoming updates will address the 2026 reporting intake process, including the reporting format, submission process and when the CARB portal will open for submissions. With 60 days to go, we expect an update soon.

CARB also has indicated that it plans to publish guidance addressing extension requests. In light of CARB’s December 2024 Enforcement Notice, it is unlikely that many companies will need an extension. In any event, CARB has indicated that the extension guidance will apply to limited situations.

Submission, Not Website Link

CARB has indicated that reporting will be via a public docket. We expect that companies will be required to upload their report to the docket, rather than just providing a link to a report posted on their website. In contrast, SB 261 climate risk reporting takes the opposite approach.

CARB has not indicated that there will be a file size limitation, and we do not expect there to be one, but companies that plan to submit their full sustainability report should check for that when the public docket is live. For example, Canada has a file size limit for modern slavery reporting that has tripped up some companies late in the reporting process.

Will the Cavalry Come to the Rescue?

As reporting companies know, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an order in January preliminarily enjoining the enforcement of SB 261 climate risk reporting pending an ongoing appeal being considered by the Court. The Court has not yet issued its opinion.

The order pertains to the lawsuit challenging SB 253 and SB 261 brought by the US Chamber of Commerce and other plaintiffs against CARB. Among other things, the Chamber is challenging the statutes on First Amendment grounds.

The Court’s order preliminarily enjoined enforcement of SB 261, but not SB 253. The Court declined to enjoin SB 253. 

As the deadline for SB 253 reporting draws near, there has been increasing speculation regarding whether SB 253 reporting also may be enjoined. We will not in this post wade into the various arguments about why that may or may not occur.

However, for 2026 reporting, the ultimate outcome of SB 253 will in many cases not make much of a difference. Companies that have never collected climate data can maintain the status quo per CARB’s Enforcement Notice and FAQs. Companies that already voluntarily report climate data can follow their current approach. There is the matter of the fee and the incremental work required to make the submission, but those are relatively minor considerations this year.

The Real Work Starts With Next Year

Expect reporting next year to be a bigger lift, although 2027 reporting requirements may change as a result of the litigation. Companies should plan for more structured reporting in a more prescriptive format required by CARB. In addition, limited assurance over Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions data will be required. Scope 3 data also will be required.

We discuss CARB’s rulemaking in respect of reporting in 2027 and beyond in this post. We expect that rulemaking process to accelerate in the back half of this year.

About our Practice

Ropes & Gray has a leading ESG, CSR and business and human rights compliance practice. We offer clients a comprehensive approach in these subject areas through a global team with members in the United States, Europe and Asia. Senior members of the practice have advised on these matters for more than 30 years, enabling us to provide a long-term perspective and depth and breadth of experience that few firms can match. 

Subscribe to Ropes & Gray ESG, CSR and Business and Human Rights compliance thought leadership here.