Lythouse Logo
Register Now for Launch of our ESG platform, explore the ESG trends for 2024.

Home » Blog » Uncategorized » California SB 253 and SB 261: Essential Business Guide & FAQs

California SB 253 and SB 261: Essential Business Guide & FAQs

SB 253 and SB 261

California’s Climate Accountability Package, comprising SB 253 and SB 261, sets new standards for corporate environmental responsibility by mandating comprehensive greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reporting and climate-related financial risk disclosures. These regulations represent a significant shift towards greater transparency and accountability in addressing climate change. Unlike the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) narrower scope, California’s laws demand full value chain emissions disclosure and third-party verification, establishing a robust framework for sustainable business practices. Companies must adapt their data collection, verification processes, and corporate governance to meet these stringent requirements, positioning themselves as pioneers in environmental stewardship and resilience.

SB 253 and SB 261: California’s Climate Accountability Package

California’s Climate Accountability Package, comprising Senate Bills 253 and 261, marks a significant legislative advancement in corporate climate accountability. SB 253, known as the Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act, mandates that businesses operating in California with over $1 billion in annual revenue must disclose their greenhouse gas emissions. This includes Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions direct emissions from owned or controlled sources, indirect emissions from the generation of purchased electricity, and all other indirect emissions that occur in a company’s value chain, respectively. Additionally, SB 261, the Climate-Related Financial Risk Act, requires public companies to assess and report their climate-related financial risks. This means businesses must evaluate how climate change could impact their financial health and integrate these considerations into their overall risk management strategies.

The Climate Accountability Package resulted from growing concerns over climate change impacts and the pressure on corporations to contribute more actively to environmental stewardship. It aims to enhance transparency, allowing stakeholders including investors, consumers, and regulatory agencies to better understand a company’s environmental footprint and climate risk exposures. The legislation’s passage followed extensive deliberations, consultations with environmental experts, business leaders, and public input. The requirements are expected to drive changes in corporate behavior by incentivizing emissions reductions, promoting sustainable business practices, and fostering innovation in climate risk mitigation.

Key elements of the legislation include:

  • Annual GHG emissions reporting for applicable businesses.
  • Mandated climate risk assessments and disclosures.
  • Third-party verification of emission reports to ensure accuracy and reliability.
  • Penalties for non-compliance to enforce accountability.

These measures align closely with global efforts to standardize climate disclosures. The package emphasizes the importance of data accuracy and integrity, making third-party verification a critical component. This scrutiny aims to prevent greenwashing misleading claims about environmental practices and ensure that disclosed information genuinely reflects companies’ climate impacts. The legislation contrasts with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) proposed climate disclosure rules by extending beyond financial risk to require comprehensive reporting on all GHG emissions.

As the implementation deadlines approach, businesses are advised to prepare diligently. Steps include upgrading data collection systems, training staff on new compliance requirements, and seeking expertise in climate accounting and reporting. Proactively addressing these changes not only aids compliance but also positions companies favorably in a market increasingly driven by sustainability considerations.

SB 253 and SB 261: Why It Matters

The California Climate Accountability Package, consisting of SB 253 and SB 261, is pivotal not only for the state but also globally, setting a precedent for corporate environmental responsibility. Firstly, it brings much-needed transparency to corporate climate practices, enabling stakeholders to make informed decisions based on reliable data. Investors, who are increasingly prioritizing ESG criteria, can now assess the climate impact and risks of potential investments more accurately. This legislative framework pushes companies to recognize their roles in climate change, compelling them to adopt more sustainable practices and reduce their environmental footprint.

Moreover, the mandated disclosures and risk assessments promote long-term corporate resilience. By forcing companies to analyze and report their climate-related financial risks, they are better prepared to handle potential disruptions caused by climate change. This might include physical risks, such as damage from extreme weather events, or transition risks stemming from shifts to low-carbon technologies and regulations. Preparing for these eventualities can protect businesses from severe financial loss and operational setbacks.

The significance extends beyond individual companies. Collectively, these regulations can drive substantial reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. As companies strive to comply, the aggregate effect could contribute significantly to California’s ambitious climate goals, thus playing a critical part in the global fight against climate change. Consumers also stand to benefit, gaining access to transparent information about the environmental impact of the companies they patronize. This can influence purchasing decisions and fuel demand for greener products and services.

The ripple effects of California’s legislation could influence other states and countries to adopt similar measures, accelerating global progress towards climate sustainability. Companies that operate internationally might find themselves meeting diverse regulatory standards more effortlessly, having already adapted to California’s stringent requirements.

Additionally, the legislation incentivizes innovation. Firms are likely to invest more in green technologies and sustainable practices to not just meet regulatory expectations but also gain a competitive edge. This scenario fosters an environment where eco-friendly solutions and corporate sustainability are at the forefront of business agendas.

In essence, the California Climate Accountability Package matters because it intertwines corporate accountability with environmental stewardship, fostering an economy where business success and climate responsibility go hand in hand. The laws push companies beyond compliance towards leadership in sustainability, setting up a robust framework for a resilient, low-carbon future.

Comparison to SEC’s Proposed Climate Disclosure Rules

The California Climate Accountability Package (SB 253 and SB 261) and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) proposed climate disclosure rules share the common objective of enhancing corporate transparency and accountability in addressing climate change. However, they differ significantly in scope, approach, and enforcement mechanisms. Understanding these differences is crucial for businesses navigating these regulatory landscapes.

California’s SB 253 mandates comprehensive greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reporting, including Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions, thereby encompassing the entire value chain of a corporation. In contrast, the SEC’s proposed rules focus primarily on Scope 1 and 2 emissions, with Scope 3 disclosures being required only if they are material or if the company has set a GHG emissions target that includes Scope 3 emissions. This distinction emphasizes California’s aggressive stance on getting a full picture of corporate emissions, pushing for greater accountability across the entire supply chain.

SB 261 requires businesses to assess and disclose their climate-related financial risks comprehensively. This aligns with the SEC’s proposal, which also mandates public companies to disclose climate-related risks that are reasonably likely to have a material impact on their business, results of operations, or financial condition. Both regulations aim to integrate these disclosures into existing financial reporting structures, thereby embedding climate risk into the fabric of corporate governance and risk management.

A notable difference lies in the verification process. California mandates third-party verification of emissions data under SB 253. This step is crucial for ensuring accuracy and preventing greenwashing. Conversely, while the SEC’s proposal requires companies to undergo some level of external assurance for their climate-related disclosures, it stops short of demanding mandatory third-party verification for all emissions data. The SEC’s approach allows for a level of flexibility but may lead to concerns over the reliability and comparability of the disclosed data.

Enforcement mechanisms also vary. California enforces its regulations through penalties for non-compliance, which can be stringent and impact the financial standing of businesses significantly. The SEC, while also imposing penalties for failing to meet disclosure requirements, typically operates within a broader spectrum of regulatory compliance and enforcement practices, potentially leading to less immediate financial consequences.

The legislative ethos behind these regulations also differs. California’s laws are part of a broader environmental strategy aimed at achieving substantial GHG emissions reductions statewide. The SEC’s proposed rules, meanwhile, are part of a growing trend to incorporate ESG factors into financial markets, driven by investor demand and the recognition of climate change as a material financial risk.

For businesses, adapting to these regulations requires a robust and integrated approach to climate reporting, combining rigorous data collection, accurate risk assessments, and strategic planning to meet the varying demands of both state and federal mandates.

Prepare for GHG Emissions Reporting Under SB 253 Adjustments

Preparing for GHG emissions reporting under California’s SB 253 requires businesses to undertake a series of strategic adjustments to meet the compliance standards effectively. Given the comprehensive nature of the reporting requirements, companies must develop robust processes for capturing, managing, and verifying their emissions data. Here are key steps to navigate this complex regulatory environment:

  1. Establish a Dedicated Climate Reporting Team: Form a cross-functional task force that includes representatives from environmental compliance, sustainability, finance, operations, and IT. This team should coordinate all efforts related to emissions data collection, reporting, and verification.
  2. Upgrade Data Collection Systems: Invest in advanced data management systems capable of tracking Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions. Leveraging technology such as Internet of Things (IoT) sensors, smart meters, and specialized software can streamline data collection, improve accuracy, and ensure real-time monitoring.
  3. Conduct a Baseline Emissions Assessment: Perform an initial assessment to establish a baseline for current emissions across all relevant scopes. This involves a thorough audit of direct and indirect emissions sources and provides a foundation for ongoing tracking and reporting.
  4. Collaborate with Suppliers and Partners: Engage with supply chain partners to gather Scope 3 emissions data. Building strong partnerships and standardized data sharing protocols ensures that the entire value chain’s emissions are accounted for accurately.
  5. Implement Data Verification Procedures: To comply with SB 253’s requirement for third-party verification, develop internal verification procedures that can be cross-checked during external audits. This includes detailed documentation, data validation checks, and rigorous internal audits.
  6. Train and Educate Staff: Provide training sessions for employees involved in data collection, reporting, and verification processes. Ensuring that staff understand the legal requirements and the importance of accurate reporting is crucial for compliance.
  7. Integrate Reporting into Corporate Governance: Ensure that GHG emissions reporting is embedded in broader corporate governance frameworks. Regularly update the board and senior management on progress and challenges, and align emissions reduction targets with corporate objectives.
  8. Stay Updated on Regulatory Changes: Continuously monitor updates and clarifications related to SB 253. Stay informed about additional guidance from California regulators and adapt processes accordingly to remain compliant.
  9. Communicate Transparently: Maintain transparent communication with stakeholders about efforts to comply with SB 253. Regularly publish emissions reports, highlight progress, and discuss strategies for ongoing improvements in sustainability practices.

By following these steps, businesses can not only ensure compliance with SB 253 but also position themselves as leaders in environmental stewardship, ultimately benefiting from enhanced investor confidence and consumer trust.


In conclusion, California’s SB 253 and SB 261 represent critical advancements in corporate climate accountability, demanding comprehensive GHG emissions reporting and climate risk disclosures. These regulations set a high bar for transparency and sustainability, with potential ripple effects across the globe. By comparing these state laws to the SEC’s proposed rules, it’s evident that California is leading the charge in environmental stewardship. Businesses must strategically adapt their systems and governance to comply, ultimately gaining competitive advantage through responsible practices. This legislative push not only fosters corporate resilience but also aligns business success with climate goals, crucial for a sustainable future.

How we can help

Lythouse offers comprehensive tools to help companies comply with California’s SB 253 by facilitating efficient ESG management, precise emissions tracking, and robust reporting capabilities. The platform’s Carbon Analyzer assists in accurately measuring and managing Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions through advanced AI-powered spend classification. The Green Supplier Network streamlines data collection from suppliers, enhancing collaboration and data integrity. Additionally, the Goal Navigator aids in setting, monitoring, and achieving sustainability targets aligned with global frameworks like UNSDG and SBTi. Lastly, the ESG Reporting Studio ensures compliance with global ESG regulations by supporting various frameworks and offering seamless data integration and audit trails .


For everyday updates, subscribe here.