For more from Tim Mohin, sign up for his newsletter here

Governor Gavin Newsom proposed amendments to California climate laws SB 253 and 261 that would postpone implementation by two years and give the California Air Resources Board (CARB) more flexibility in creating the rules. 

These policies, signed into law last October, are the US’s most far-reaching climate disclosure mandates. They require both public and private companies that ‘do business’ in California to report on their Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions and climate risks.  

SB 253 requires approximately 5,000 companies (> $1 billion annual revenue) to disclose Scope 1 and 2 emissions in 2026 and Scope 3 the year after. SB 261 requires 10,000 companies (> $500 million annual revenue) to report on climate risks beginning in 2026 and every other year after that. 

Governor Newsom signaled his concerns when he signed these bills into law, saying: “The implementation deadlines in this bill are likely infeasible, and the reporting protocol specified could result in inconsistent reporting across businesses subject to the measure. I am directing my Administration to work with the bill’s author and the Legislature next year to address these issues… I look forward to working with the Legislature on these modifications to ensure we achieve this bill’s goals.”

The proposed amendments would delay Scope 1 and 2 until 2028 and Scope 3 until 2029, giving CARB an additional two years to develop implementing rules. They would also give CARB the option to work with a third-party reporting agency and provide more flexibility to phase in Scope 3 reporting.

Delays were widely expected as the deadline for CARB to finalize the rules was in less than six months (Jan 1st, 2025), and SB 253 and 261 are under litigation.

Senator Scott Weiner, the architect of SB 253, challenged the proposed delay, saying, “The language…does not represent an agreement with the Legislature… The Administration’s proposal significantly delays the implementation of a landmark climate action law that already has a 6-year phase-in.”

The California climate disclosure policies are more stringent than the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) climate rule – which is currently on hold while multiple lawsuits challenging the rule are resolved – and added a sense of inevitability to mandatory climate reporting in the US. The proposed amendments introduce uncertainty about when and how companies will have to report and may cause some to pause their preparations. Negotiations on the proposed delays will likely continue up until an August 31st deadline. 

Related Article: Tim Mohin: Chevron Doctrine Overturned – What’s Next for Climate Rules?