Перейти к сути раскрытия
Бесплатно · Участникам сообщества
＋ Показать ещё 5− Показать меньше
＋ Показать ещё 6− Показать меньше
Реальные опубликованные отчёты
Открыть отчёт →
Открыть отчёт →
Открыть отчёт →
✓ AI-ассистент LRA · С участием человека
Открыть официальный источник →
Explore the California course →
California SB 261: Climate-Related Financial Risk Act·Disclosure SB261-APPLICABILITY
Covered entity applicability
Практическое руководство по подготовке этого раскрытия. Используйте карточку, чтобы определить, какую информацию подготовить, проверить утверждения и организовать подтверждающие доказательства. За точными требованиями всегда обращайтесь к официальному источнику CARB.
Опубликованный паспорт
Проверка ожидается
···
На проверке
Идёт редакционная проверка
Подготовлено по официальным первоисточникам и данным опубликованных отчётов. Утверждающий пока не указан, поэтому у страницы нет подписи автора.
Пользуйтесь ею вместе с официальным источником CARB, пока проверка не завершена.
Стандарт
California SB 261: Climate-Related Financial Risk Act
Disclosure SB261-APPLICABILITY · 2026-initial-regulation-as-amended-sb219
Последняя проверка
—
Учебные материалы LRA · Не выпущено и не одобрено CARB
Чтобы подготовить это раскрытие
Суть раскрытия
This disclosure is about whether your organisation falls within the scope of the California climate-risk reporting requirement. In practice, it asks you to determine if you are a covered entity and, if so, to explain the climate-related risks and governance matters that are relevant to the business as a whole, rather than only to a single site or flagship location.
The practical focus is on the organisation’s overall exposure and management approach across its operations, assets, and activities that matter to the reporting boundary. That means looking beyond headline facilities to the parts of the business that could materially affect climate risk, resilience, and oversight, so the report reflects the full covered entity rather than a narrow operational snapshot.
Это учебное руководство LRA помогает в подготовке раскрытия. За точными требованиями всегда обращайтесь к официальному источнику CARB.
Прежде чем начать
Прежде чем начать
Короткий чек-лист перед подготовкой этого раскрытия — отмечайте пункты по мере их закрытия.
Подготовка
Ключевая информация для подготовки
| Поле подготовки | Что зафиксировать | Подсказка по доказательствам | Ответственный |
|---|---|---|---|
| Annual turnover | Capture the entity’s annual turnover or gross receipts for the reporting period, using the same basis used in the finance records. | Audited accounts, management accounts, or tax filings that show the annual revenue figure and period covered. | Finance |
| California trading presence | Capture whether the entity carries on business activities in California, using the organisation’s own operating footprint and legal presence assessment. | Entity registration records, state filings, sales or operating records, and legal entity mapping showing California activity. | Legal |
| Exemption position | Capture the entity’s current exemption position for this filing, including which exemption applies or that none applies. | Legal memo, internal eligibility assessment, and supporting correspondence or filings that document the exemption decision. | Legal |
| Insurance carve-out | Capture whether the entity falls within the insurance carve-out for this requirement, based on its actual regulated status. | Regulatory authorisation records, entity classification documents, and legal review of the insurance status. | Legal |
| Entity legal type | Capture the entity’s legal form as recorded in corporate records, using the exact legal type that applies to the reporting entity. | Certificate of incorporation, registry extract, constitutional documents, or equivalent corporate registry evidence. | Legal |
| Parent-level reporting | Capture whether the disclosure will be prepared at parent level, and confirm the parent entity that will hold the consolidated report. | Group structure chart, consolidation policy, and reporting instructions showing the parent entity and consolidation basis. | Finance |
| Revenue threshold test | Capture whether annual revenue is above the $500 million threshold, using the same revenue figure and period as the financial records. | Finance pack, audited statements, or revenue schedule showing the amount tested against the threshold. | Finance |
| US domicile status | Capture whether the reporting entity is based in the United States, using the entity’s registered and operational base for the assessment. | Registered office records, tax residency documents, and legal entity information showing the entity’s base location. | Legal |
＋ Показать подпункты SB261-APPLICABILITY (рабочий чек-лист LRA)
State the organisation’s annual revenue or gross receipts.
Identify the legal form of the business entity.
Confirm whether the business operates in California.
Record whether any exemption applies.
Indicate whether the insurance-entity exclusion applies.
Say whether the report is prepared at parent level on a consolidated basis.
Confirm whether revenue is above $500 million.
Indicate whether the entity is based in the United States.
Как это подготовить
Confirm the reporting perimeter first: identify the legal entity or group you are assessing, note the business form, and record whether the reporting is being prepared at parent level or for a standalone entity.
Check whether the organisation is in scope by testing the California nexus and the U.S. base, then capture a clear yes/no conclusion with the supporting source documents.
Measure the relevant turnover figure for the period used in the assessment, using the same basis consistently, and keep the working papers that show how the number was derived.
Assess the threshold condition against the revenue figure and record the result, together with the evidence used to support the calculation and any assumptions applied.
Review whether any exclusion or exemption applies, including any insurance-related carve-out, and document the reason for the conclusion plus any changes from prior assessments.
Before finalising, compare the completed assessment with the official source material to make sure the scope, figures, and exemption conclusions still align with the latest wording and any updates.
Запросить данные
Request the entity and revenue evidence
Переведите раскрытие на язык внутреннего бизнес-вопроса, а затем адаптируйте его под терминологию вашей организации.
Do we sit within the scope test for this California reporting obligation, based on our entity type, California activity, revenue level, and any exclusion or consolidation position?
Use your organisation’s own terms first, then map them to the reporting fields. For example, ask for the group structure, legal entity type, turnover or gross receipts, California trading footprint, any insurance-related exclusion position, and whether the figure is held at parent or local level.
Слабый запрос
Please confirm whether we are covered and send the SB 261 applicability evidence.
Почему он не работает: This uses framework language that may not match how the business tracks the information, and it does not specify the exact evidence needed to test the scope position. It also leaves out the source, basis, period, and ownership details needed to trace the answer back to records.
Более удачный запрос
Please send the evidence pack for [entity] and [period] covering: the revenue or gross receipts figure used for the scope review, the California business activity check, the legal form, any insurance-related exclusion position, and whether the figure is held at parent or entity level. Include the source system or file, the basis used, and the name of the person who can confirm the position.
Шаблон официального письма
Subject: Request for scope evidence – California reporting review Dear [name], We are preparing the internal scope assessment for the California reporting review and need your help with the underlying evidence. Please provide, for [entity name] and [reporting period]: - the revenue or gross receipts figure used for the scope check, with the source and basis - confirmation of whether the entity has business activity in California - the entity’s legal form - whether any insurance-related exclusion position applies - whether the figure is held on a parent-consolidated basis or at entity level - any note on whether the revenue level is above the internal threshold used for this review - the source system or file reference for each item, where available Please return the information in the attached table, with any supporting documents or links. If any item is not available, please note the reason and the best available substitute. This is a possible LRA training template only. Please adapt it to your organisation’s own terms and check the official source before sign-off. Kind regards, [preparer name] [team] [contact details]
Короткая версия для Teams / Slack
Hi [name] — could you send the evidence for the California scope check for [entity] and [period]? We need the revenue/gross receipts basis, California activity confirmation, legal form, any insurance exclusion position, and whether the figure is parent-level or entity-level. Please include the source file/system and any supporting note. This is a possible LRA training template only — please adapt it to your organisation’s own terms and check the official source before sign-off.
Отраслевые примеры
Retail
Контекст. A group sells through stores, online channels, and a California distribution footprint.
Адаптированный запрос. Please provide the scope evidence for [entity] and [period]: revenue or gross receipts used for the review, confirmation of California trading activity, legal form, any insurance exclusion position, and whether the figure is taken from the group pack or the local ledger. Include the source file and owner.
Пример ответа. Entity: [name]; Period: FY2025; Revenue basis: group turnover from the finance pack; California activity: Yes, online sales and a warehouse; Legal form: corporation; Insurance exclusion: No; Reporting basis: parent-level consolidated; Threshold assessment: Yes, above internal threshold; Source: FY2025 group pack; Owner: [name], Finance Manager.
Financial services
Контекст. A regulated group has multiple legal entities and needs a clear view of which entity is being assessed.
Адаптированный запрос. Please share the entity-level evidence for [entity] and [period]: gross receipts or revenue used in the scope review, legal form, California business presence, whether the entity is treated as an insurance business for this check, and whether the assessment is based on the parent view or the standalone entity. Please attach the supporting register or accounts extract.
Пример ответа. Entity: [name]; Period: FY2025; Revenue basis: statutory accounts extract; California activity: Yes, client servicing and sales support; Legal form: LLC; Insurance exclusion: Yes, treated as insurance entity for this check; Reporting basis: standalone entity; Threshold assessment: No, below internal threshold; Source: statutory accounts pack; Owner: [name], Legal Counsel.
Составьте раскрытие
Заметки, которые превращают данные в раскрытие
Учебные шаблоны LRA — адаптируйте их под вашу организацию и сверьтесь с официальным источником перед утверждением.
Примечание о методике
State the basis used to decide whether the entity is in scope, including how revenue was measured, how California activity and U.S. location were assessed, whether the report was prepared at parent level, and how any exemption or insurer exclusion was applied.
Примечание о контексте
Explain that the figures are being used to determine whether the business falls within the reporting population, rather than to describe performance, and note which recorded facts support the final applicability conclusion.
Заявление о колебаниях
If the applicability result changes from one period to the next, point to the specific driver, such as a revenue movement across the threshold, a change in business presence, a different consolidation basis, or a revised exemption assessment.
Запись в указателе содержания
SB261-APPLICABILITY Covered entity applicability — [location / page] / [notes]Центр загрузок
Инструменты и формы для подготовки
Профессиональные инструменты подготовки для SB261-APPLICABILITY — бесплатно с членством в LRA Community. Зарегистрируйтесь один раз (это бесплатно), и откроются все загрузки, а вместе с ними Библиотека раскрытий, шаблоны и AI-ассистент LRA.
01XLSРабочая книга по подготовке и аудитуТочки данных, риски, доказательства для проверки, ответственный и пакет доказательств.Получить бесплатно ↧
02XLSПакет для запроса данныхПисьмо-запрос, шаблон сообщения, поля ответа и структура утверждения.Получить бесплатно ↧
03PDFБиблиотечная карточкаОдностраничная сводка этой карточки раскрытия для печати.Получить бесплатно ↧
Готовность к заверению
Для каждого утверждения проверьте доказательства
| Утверждение | Риски | Доказательства для проверки |
|---|---|---|
| We used the prior year’s revenue figure from the approved finance records, converted and presented in US dollars. | Assurer may ask whether the amount came from the right period, whether the currency conversion was applied consistently, and whether the figure matches the underlying accounts. | ['Prior-year management accounts or audited financial statements', 'Working paper showing the source ledger and any currency conversion', 'Finance sign-off or reconciliation to the reported amount'] |
| We checked the business footprint before concluding that the entity has California activity. | Assurer may probe whether the conclusion is supported by a documented review rather than a general assumption about trading presence. | ['Internal assessment memo on California activity', 'Entity structure and operating-location records', 'Tax, legal, or compliance review notes supporting the conclusion'] |
| We recorded the coverage position after testing the relevant conditions and documenting the outcome. | Assurer may question whether the status was determined from a complete and current assessment, and whether the basis for the conclusion is retained. | ['Applicability assessment worksheet', 'Decision log showing the criteria reviewed and the final status', 'Approval from the responsible finance or legal reviewer'] |
| We checked whether the insurance-related carve-out applied before finalising the disclosure. | Assurer may ask whether the exclusion was considered at the right entity level and whether the conclusion is backed by evidence. | ['Legal or compliance memo on the insurance carve-out', 'Entity classification documents', 'Review sign-off showing who confirmed the position'] |
| We confirmed the entity’s legal form from corporate records and used that in the assessment. | Assurer may probe whether the legal form was taken from authoritative records and whether it was current at the reporting date. | ['Certificate of incorporation or equivalent registry extract', 'Group legal entity register', 'Working paper linking the legal form to the reported conclusion'] |
| Where the parent prepared a group-level report, we kept evidence that the separate-report relief was based on that consolidated report. | Assurer may ask whether the parent-level basis is real, complete, and available for inspection, and whether the reporting entity is actually covered by it. | ['Copy of the consolidated climate-related risk report', 'Group reporting pack showing the parent-level basis', 'Cross-reference between the entity and the parent report'] |
Пакет доказательств для подготовки
Типичные пробелы в отчётности
Figures are stated without the supporting narrative, or narrative without figures.
Scope is inconsistent between the text and the numbers.
The reporting boundary is left undefined.
Material changes since the previous period are not disclosed.
Estimates and measured values are not distinguished.
Source records for the figures are not identified.
Типичные пробелы
Ошибки, которых стоит избегать при сборе данных
Wrong owner askedTeams often ask the sustainability lead for legal form, revenue, or US presence when those facts sit with finance, tax, legal entity management, or the parent-company reporting team.
Framework language used too earlyPeople ask for answers in disclosure terms instead of the organisation’s own records, which makes source teams translate rather than simply confirm the underlying fact.
Scope not fixedThe data pull starts before everyone agrees which legal entity, group perimeter, or reporting population is in scope, so the figures and status checks do not line up.
Wrong period basisCollectors mix a current snapshot with a prior-year revenue basis or another timing point, so the applicability check is built on mismatched dates.
Counting bases mixedOne team uses standalone entity figures while another uses group-level numbers, which can make the revenue test and the entity status check point to different populations.
Source labels lostOriginal file names, system tags, or ledger labels are stripped away, so later reviewers cannot trace where each revenue or entity-status value came from.
Separate populations mergedInsurance-related entities, parent-level reporting units, and operating subsidiaries are blended into one file even though they should be checked separately.
Evidence trail incompleteThe pack contains the answer but not the supporting extract, date stamp, or reviewer sign-off, so no one can show how the applicability call was reached.
Где часто требуется профессиональное суждение
Group boundary after a buy-in or saleSet the reporting perimeter using the business structure in place for the reporting period, and explain any material change caused by an acquisition, disposal or similar transaction.
Which revenue figure to use when records differChoose one clearly defined revenue basis, apply it consistently, and disclose the source and timing if internal and external figures do not match exactly.
Cross-border legal form and local labelsMap overseas legal forms to your own entity description in a way that is consistent and explain any judgement where local naming does not align neatly with the California test.
Operations that sit close to the California lineDecide whether the organisation is in scope based on how it actually trades or operates in California, and state the practical basis used where the position is not clear-cut.
Parent-level reporting versus entity-by-entity reviewIf the group can be assessed at parent level, use that approach consistently; if not, explain why a different boundary was used and how the conclusion was reached.
Insurance-related exclusion where activities are mixedWhere the organisation has both insurance and non-insurance activities, explain how you separated them and how you decided whether the exclusion applies to the relevant part of the business.
Estimated figures where measured data are not availableUse estimates only where direct figures are not yet available, describe the method and assumptions, and flag any areas where the result could change once better data arrive.
Rounding and threshold proximityState the exact or rounded figure used for the threshold test, and disclose any rounding approach where the result sits close to the cut-off.
Privacy limits on sharing supporting detailIf data protection rules prevent full disclosure of underlying records, provide the highest level of aggregation that still supports the conclusion and explain the limitation.
Примеры
Иллюстративные примеры
Синтетические, написаны LRA — это не выдержки из отчёта компании и не текст какого-либо стандарта.
Illustrative (synthetic) example — Utilities
We would say our group is a UK-incorporated parent filing on a consolidated basis, with our California activity captured through a U.S. subsidiary. Our latest annual turnover is **$620 million**, so the revenue threshold is met; we do business in California (**Y**), we are not using an insurance-company carve-out (**N**), and we are not claiming any other exemption (**N**).
- Legal form: corporation
- Parent-level reporting: **Y**
- U.S.-based entity: **Y**
This example shows how a reporter can describe the applicability check in plain language while still covering the key status points. It is synthetic and internally consistent.
Illustrative (synthetic) example — Consumer goods
We are a non-U.S. limited liability company that reports at the parent level, and our California sales activity means we do business in the state (**Y**). Our annual receipts are **$480 million**, so we do **not** clear the revenue threshold (**N**); we also do not rely on an insurance-only exclusion (**N**) and we are not otherwise exempt (**N**).
- Legal form: limited liability company
- Parent-level reporting: **Y**
- U.S.-based entity: **N**
This example shows a different fact pattern where the revenue threshold is not met, while the other applicability indicators are still stated clearly. It is synthetic and internally consistent.
Отчёты компаний
Как компании раскрывают SB261-APPLICABILITY на практике
Примеры полного и частичного раскрытия на практике. Это разборы на основе доказательств, а не готовые шаблоны для копирования.
Sands China Ltd.
Hotels, Restaurants, Leisure, Tourism Services · Macao · 2025
Sands China Ltd.'s 2025 ESG Report identifies California, Utah, Singapore, and Macao as significant locations of operation where the company owns property (p.49). However, the report does not provide quotable evidence regarding annual revenue, exemption status, insurance exclusion, legal form, parent consolidation availability, revenue threshold, or US-based entity status. This leaves several key applicability criteria unclear or unaddressed in the report.
Ingersoll Rand Inc.
Electrical Equipment and Machinery · United States · 2024
Ingersoll Rand Inc.'s 2024 Sustainability Report provides some related context on exemption status, noting risk categories such as Green (low risk), Yellow (medium risk), and Red (high risk), but does not clearly disclose the exemption status itself (p.61). The report includes references to revenue and acquisitions (p.5, p.75) and discusses material issues related to labor and employee matters (p.55-56), but it does not provide explicit information on SB261 applicability criteria such as annual revenue, business category, legal form, or insurance exclusions. Overall, key datapoints required for SB261 applicability are largely missing or unclear in this report.
CSX Corporation
Ground Transportation — Railroads · United States · 2024
CSX Corporation's 2024 Sustainability Report includes discussion of climate-related risk assessment integrated with their enterprise risk management program, as noted on page 48. The report also outlines alignment with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, specifically SDG 3 on health and well-being, on page 4. However, there is no quotable evidence regarding the applicability of SB261 disclosures, such as annual revenue, business category, exemption status, or legal form, found anywhere in the report.
Спросите AI-ассистента Study Studio об этом раскрытии
Получайте практические ответы для вашего контекста отчётности. Первые два ответа бесплатны — вступите в LRA Community бесплатно, чтобы продолжить без ограничений.
Попробуйте
Как подготовить SB261-APPLICABILITY?
Какие данные нужно собрать?
Где посмотреть пример из реального отчёта?
Каких ошибок избегать?
2 бесплатных ответа
Проверьте себя
Сценарии для разбора
A group has a US-incorporated parent with several operating subsidiaries. The parent prepares a single set of group accounts, and one subsidiary sells into California through local distributors.
ВShould the preparer assess the parent group as a whole, or treat the California-facing subsidiary on its own for this applicability check?
Показать образцовый ответ →Скрыть ответ ↑
Use the entity that will be reporting, then decide whether the group can be looked at at parent level. If the parent is the reporting unit and group reporting is available, the preparer should test the parent-led position rather than isolating one subsidiary. The California activity still matters for the 'does business in California' point, but it does not by itself change which legal entity is being assessed.
Почему это важно · Start with the reporting perimeter, then test California activity and group reporting position against that perimeter.
A company is organised as a limited liability company and had annual gross receipts of 520 million currency units in the latest year. It has no staff or office in California, but it ships products there through third parties.
ВDoes the absence of a California office mean the business can stop the applicability assessment?
Показать образцовый ответ →Скрыть ответ ↑
No. The preparer still needs to check whether the business is active in California in some way and whether the revenue level is above the threshold. A lack of premises or employees in the state does not, on its own, end the assessment if the business still reaches the market there.
Почему это важно · Physical presence is only one part of the picture; California market activity and revenue both need to be considered.
A financial services group has a regulated insurance subsidiary with 610 million currency units of annual revenue. The rest of the group is a non-insurance trading business, and the insurance arm is the only part with California customers.
ВShould the preparer treat the insurance subsidiary as excluded, or include it in the covered-entity review because the wider group is above the revenue threshold?
Показать образцовый ответ →Скрыть ответ ↑
The preparer should first identify whether the insurance-related exclusion applies to that entity. If it does, that subsidiary is not treated the same way as the rest of the group for this check, even if the wider group is large and active in California. The decision turns on the entity’s own status, not just the group’s size.
Почему это важно · Check whether a specific exclusion applies to the entity before relying on group revenue alone.
A multinational has a US parent and a non-US holding company above it. The non-US parent owns the US operating company, which has 505 million currency units of annual revenue and sells into California.
ВWhich entity should the preparer test for this applicability screen: the non-US holding company, the US operating company, or both?
Показать образцовый ответ →Скрыть ответ ↑
The preparer should test the entity that sits within the reporting scope and is actually being assessed for this disclosure. If the US operating company is the relevant reporting entity, its own legal form, revenue, California activity, and any exclusion status need to be checked. The non-US holding company is only part of the analysis if it is itself the reporting entity or if the reporting approach is at parent level.
Почему это важно · Match the assessment to the actual reporting entity, then apply the revenue, California activity, legal form, and exclusion checks to that entity.
Ссылки на стандарты
Соответствующие требования California и смежные раскрытия
Доступные ссылки на стандарты и близкие раскрытия, полезные при подготовке этого требования.
California
SB261-APPLICABILITY
в составе California SB 261: Climate-Related Financial Risk Act
Связанное и другое
Climate-related financial risk disclosure → КарточкаImplementation fee and administration →TCFD or equivalent framework alignment → КарточкаReporting gaps and completion plan →Biennial reporting timeline and enforcement status → Карточка
Все раскрытия →
Больше в California SB 261 → Открыть полный каталог → Главная Библиотеки раскрытий → Искать по всем раскрытиям →
FAQ
Вопросы, на которые отвечает эта страница
How do I use the SB261-APPLICABILITY page to work out whether my organisation should prepare a California SB 261 climate-related financial risk disclosure?+−
Start with the plain-language explainer and the datapoints to prepare, then use the step-by-step preparation section to organise the information you already hold. The page is designed to help you turn those inputs into a draft and an evidence pack, rather than to act as an official source.
What data do I need to gather for SB261-APPLICABILITY before I start drafting?+−
The page says to prepare annual turnover, California trading presence, exemption position, insurance carve-out, entity legal type, parent-level reporting, revenue threshold test, and US domicile status. Use those items as your collection checklist so you can build the disclosure from a complete set of inputs.
How should I set scope and methodology for the SB261-APPLICABILITY disclosure using this page?+−
Use the step-by-step 'how to prepare' section to decide which entity or group is in scope and to line up the datapoints that support that decision. The page also flags parent-level reporting and exemption position, which are useful anchors when you document your approach.
Who should own the SB261-APPLICABILITY data collection and drafting work?+−
The page is set up for a sustainability or ESG manager, HR or data owner, or an assurance reviewer to use together, so ownership should sit with the person coordinating those inputs. In practice, assign each datapoint and each assurance claim to a named owner so the evidence pack can be completed on time.
What should I put in the evidence pack for SB261-APPLICABILITY to be assurance-ready?+−
The page includes an evidence pack with five items and a separate set of six assurance claims to verify. Use those together so each claim is backed by a clear claim, risk and evidence trail before you finalise the draft.
What are the common mistakes people make when preparing the SB261-APPLICABILITY disclosure?+−
The page has a section on common reporting gaps and mistakes, which is there to help you spot weak points before review. Use it as a pre-submission check so you can correct missing data, unclear scope or unsupported statements early.
How do I use the Prep & Assurance workbook for SB261-APPLICABILITY?+−
The Download Centre includes a Prep & Assurance workbook in .xlsx format, which is intended to help you organise the preparation and assurance steps. Use it alongside the page’s datapoints, assurance claims and evidence pack so your draft and support files stay aligned.
What can I do with the printable Library Card PDF for SB261-APPLICABILITY?+−
The Download Centre also provides a printable Library Card in PDF format, which is useful as a quick reference while you are collecting data or checking the draft. It can help you keep the key preparation points and assurance items in view without reopening the full page.
Are the synthetic example disclosures on the SB261-APPLICABILITY page useful for building my own draft?+−
Yes — the page includes synthetic illustrative example disclosures, including a quantitative table, to show how the information can be presented. Treat them as examples only and adapt the structure to your own data, making sure any figures you use are internally consistent.
Can I reuse data prepared for ESRS E1 (Climate Change) for SB261-APPLICABILITY?+−
The page says ESRS E1 (Climate Change) is the closest correspondence, so some of the same underlying data may be reusable. Do not assume the disclosures are identical; use the page to see where your existing climate data can support the California disclosure.
Другие вопросы, с которыми поможет эта страница
SB261-APPLICABILITY checklist for annual turnover, California trading presence and US domicile statusHow to document exemption position for SB261-APPLICABILITY in a working paperSB261-APPLICABILITY parent-level reporting: what evidence should I keepHow to build an assurance evidence pack for SB261-APPLICABILITYWhat are the six assurance claims to verify on the SB261-APPLICABILITY pageHow to use the SB261-APPLICABILITY workbook and printable Library CardSB261-APPLICABILITY common reporting gaps and mistakes to avoidHow to turn SB261-APPLICABILITY data into a draft disclosureSB261-APPLICABILITY synthetic example disclosure table and narrative startersESRS E1 climate data reuse for SB261-APPLICABILITYHow to assign ownership for SB261-APPLICABILITY data collectionWhat does the SB261-APPLICABILITY plain-language explainer cover
Углубиться · SB261-APPLICABILITY
Научитесь готовить это раскрытие от начала до конца
This guide covers one statutory requirement. The California Climate Regulation course walks SB 253 and SB 261 end to end — applicability, GHG inventories, climate-risk reporting and assurance — with exercises on your own data.
Available as Guided Flex, Live Cohort, 1:1 Expert Mentorship or Corporate Programme.
Как построена эта библиотека
312 опубликованных отчётов проиндексировано
63 171 страниц с постраничными ссылками
272 карточек раскрытий, созданных практиками
/ru/knowledge-hub/disclosure-cards/sb261-applicability/
Бесплатно · LRA Community
Получите инструменты для SB261-APPLICABILITY — бесплатно
Инструменты подготовки бесплатны для участников LRA Community и студентов. Зарегистрируйтесь один раз (это бесплатно), и ваша загрузка начнётся сразу же — плюс Библиотека раскрытий, шаблоны и AI-ассистент LRA.
✓
Готово — загрузка начинается
Файл загружается. Ваш кабинет Community — с Библиотекой раскрытий, шаблонами и AI-ассистентом LRA — тоже готов.
Открыть кабинет →