EU Batteries Regulation update: Two-year delay proposed, but no time to pause

Summary: The EU Batteries Regulation (EUBR) due diligence requirements have been delayed to August 2027, with guidance expected in mid-2026. While the timeline has shifted, the core obligations remain unchanged. Companies must still map battery supply chains, identify and address ESG risks, and ensure third-party verification. Early action is essential, as due diligence must be fully implemented and functioning well before the enforcement deadline.

Written by James Lewry

• Enforcement of EUBR due diligence requirements is revised to 18 August 2027
• Economic operator threshold raised from €40m to €150m annual global turnover
• Due diligence guidance will come one year before (July 2026)
• No changes to the substance of the due diligence obligations
• Kumi recommends that companies continue preparing to demonstrate compliance well before August 2027 to ensure timely third-party verification

The European Union’s Batteries Regulation (EUBR) is one of the most far-reaching supply chain due diligence laws introduced to date, requiring companies that place batteries on the EU market to map their supply chains, identify ESG risks, and take action to mitigate adverse impacts. Built on the principles of the UN Guiding Principles (UNGPs) and OECD Due Diligence Guidance, the EUBR aims to make sustainable sourcing a legal obligation, not a voluntary commitment.

As part of the EU’s broader simplification agenda of regulations, which also includes adjustments to the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) and other flagship legislation, the European Commission proposed a set of revisions to streamline implementation across industry, which now includes some important changes to the EUBR’s due diligence requirements.

While the proposed changes will offer companies more time and administrative flexibility, the core obligations and compliance expectations remain unchanged. These include the due diligence systems and processes outlined in Articles 49 to 52 of the Regulation.

The changes to EUBR in brief

The proposals include:

• A two-year delay to the enforcement date for due diligence requirements under the EUBR, moving the compliance verification deadline to 18 August 2027.
• An extension of the SME exemption to mid-cap companies (SMCs) for companies to qualify as “economic operators”, raising the bar from €40 million to €150 million in annual turnover.
• Reporting will now be required every three years, starting one year after enforcement (2028)
• A shift toward electronic reporting, removing the requirement for paper-based submissions.
• A delay to the Commission’s non-binding Due Diligence Guidance, now due to be published in July 2026.

What does this mean for business?

The proposed delay may be seen as a welcome breathing space for companies struggling with the complexity of battery supply chains. However, Kumi strongly advises against interpreting the delay as a reason to pause or slow down preparations, rather to adjust their approach and think more strategically. The 18 August 2027 date is not when companies start doing due diligence; it is the point by which companies must have already had their due diligence systems verified by a notified body. Realistically, this means operational readiness will be required well in advance of the new 2027 timeline .

Due diligence under the EUBR is proactive, not retrospective. Companies must be able to demonstrate that risk identification, mitigation, and traceability systems are functioning effectively across often opaque and high-risk mineral supply chains. Given the typical 6–18-month timeframe for material flows through battery supply chains and the lag involved in designing and embedding due diligence systems, time is already tight.

Guidance delays create uncertainty, but not inaction…

The delay to the Commission’s formal Guidelines, while unfortunate, should not be seen as a justification for inaction. The Guidelines were always expected to be non-binding and should be viewed as a helpful interpretation, not a prerequisite for compliance. However, the Commission has stated its intention to align the release of the EUBR guidelines with those from adjacent forthcoming regulations, such as the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive.

Kumi’s advice to businesses: shift from reactive to strategic

While it may be tempting to see the delay as an opportunity to slow down preparations, Kumi recommends businesses use the opportunity to implement due diligence strategically, not under last-minute pressure.

Here’s what companies should do now:

1. Identify relevant due diligence legislation in addition to EUBR to understand requirements and ensure unified systems and processes.
2. Review your due diligence systems to identify gaps in processes, information collection, and traceability mechanisms.
3. Map your battery supply chains, starting at a high level, to gain visibility into upstream actors and high-risk areas.
4. Begin risk scoping, using available data and industry assessments to identify key ESG risks and decide on priority areas across your battery raw material supply chains.
5. Plan for staged implementation, design your due diligence system to your company’s specific risk exposure and resourcing capacity.
6. Engage suppliers early with a focus on collaboration, building trust and capacity to enable meaningful compliance throughout the chain.

Alignment across the EUBR, CSDDD, and other EU laws is increasing, and the core framework of risk-based, preventative due diligence is here to stay. Acting now means that companies are well-prepared to meet the EUBR requirements and the increasing expectations of downstream customers.

Need support?
Kumi is already supporting battery and downstream manufacturers to benchmark their readiness, design practical due diligence systems, and engage their suppliers. If you’d like to discuss how we can support your business to prepare for the EUBR, get in touch via the orange envelope (on the edge of the screen).

Announcement: https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/single-market/simplification_en

EUBR amendments: https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/publications/obligations-economic-operators-concerning-battery-due-diligence-policies_en

Amendments regarding EUBR turnover thresholds and public reporting: https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/document/download/d88a75de-b620-4d8b-b85b-1656a9ba6b8a_en?filename=Proposal%20for%20a%20Regulation%20-%20Small%20mid-caps.pdf

Frequently asked questions

• Has the carbon footprint calculation methodology changed for electric vehicle batteries?

  The Omnibus IV did not include any changes to the carbon footprint calculation or other non-due diligence requirements under the EUBR. The carbon footprint methodology has been developed by the Joint Research Centre and can be downloaded online (https://eplca.jrc.ec.europa.eu/EU_BatteryRegulation_Art7.html). The methodology for electric vehicles is still in the final draft version. Kumi is not aware of the publication dates.

• Does the delay to the due diligence requirements also mean other deadlines (like for battery passports) will be delayed?

  The Omnibus IV did not include any changes to other requirements under the EUBR.

• What is the impact of increasing the exemption threshold from €40 million to €150 million turnover?

  No formal impact assessment has been done. Our understanding is that the impact is anticipated to be minimal in terms of the numbers of economic operators who are subject to the Regulation, but it is likely there will be some companies who previously were in scope as economic operators who will no longer be in scope.

• Do companies still need to be audited by a notified body by August 2027?

  Yes. Economic operators need to be third-party-verified by a notified audit latest by August 2027.

• Are any national authorities close to appointing a notified body yet?

  No. There is currently no established process to select a notified body at this stage. We will update on this point once we have more information.

• If reporting is only required every three years, does auditing also happen every three years?

  No. In the proposal announced, there have been no changes to the annual audit requirements.

• Can we use CSRD reporting frameworks to report our due diligence efforts under the Battery Regulation?

  CSRD reporting should remain eligible. As for your first report including EUBR due diligence, we suggest to explicitly state the covered compliance period (e.g. Aug-Dec 2027), and to include information on the remaining period before EUBR enforcement that is part of your CSRD reporting cycle (e.g. Jan-Jul 2027). Presumably, you will have preparatory activities to be reported.

• Is SMC (small/mid-cap enterprises) exempt from reporting requirements?

  As the regulation now doesn’t apply to SMC’s there is no need to submit a report under the regulation.

• Is the due diligence requirement based on the materials used in the battery, regardless of where they are used?

  The due diligence requirements apply to the active battery materials only.

• When will notified bodies be appointed?

  There is currently no timeline for the appointment of notified bodies.

• Are the due diligence requirements in the Battery Regulation being aligned with the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD)?

  The EC is likely to seek further alignment between EUBR and CSDDD guidelines in terms of due diligence processes. However, there is no alignment currently under discussion in terms of scope and liability.

• How do changes to due diligence affect the information needed for the battery passport?

  The changes have no impact on the battery passport deadlines. There is no direct relationship between the due diligence requirements and the battery passport, other than the requirement to include the public due diligence report. The first due diligence report will be due by August 2028 and at least every three years thereafter.

• What happens if due diligence activities have only just started by the audit deadline in August 2027?

  The third-party verification will take place prior to the reporting requirement. This means that companies should be prepared to implement management systems and processes before August 2027 ready for review by a notified body.

• Does every raw material stream need to have a traceability or chain of custody tool?

  No. The EUBR does not dictate full end to end traceability. What is required is a minimal level of information about all relevant upstream suppliers as per the information requirements set out in articles 49.2. However, although not a legal requirement, it is considered best practice to have full traceability, using a tool or similar, to ensure that upstream information on suppliers is accurate and reliable.

• Is a traceability tool mandatory for all suppliers and materials, or is a risk-based approach allowed?

  It is not risk based because by default companies need to collect the minimum information as specified by article 49.2.

• What types of due diligence schemes are being assessed for official recognition?

  The recognition of due diligence schemes (article 53) is still in the process of being set up but there is currently no timeline for this.

• Does the €150 million turnover exemption apply to a single entity or a global group?

  Turnover is based on the net turnover of the group.

• What guidance should I refer to in order to meet the EU Battery Regulation due diligence requirements?

  Pending the release of the official guidelines (now due in July 2026) companies may refer to the OCED Due Diligence Guidelines and the frameworks identified in Annex X, and the UNGP’s, both of which inform the official EUBR guidelines.

• Is the due diligence requirement limited to Tier-1 suppliers, or does it apply to the whole value chain?

  Without being able to predict the final outcomes of ongoing omnibus negotiations, it is unlikely that there will be changes to the supply chain scope of the EUBR.

• Do you foresee any group compliance schemes being set up? Have you seen any evidence of this happening yet?

  The recognition of due diligence schemes (article 53) is still in the process of being set up but there is currently no timeline for this.