Connect with us

California

Businesses Must Determine Before 2025 If They Fall Under California Climate Reporting Law

Published

on

Businesses Must Determine Before 2025 If They Fall Under California Climate Reporting Law


In 2023, California approved the Climate Accountability Package, a pair of bills aimed at creating climate reporting requirements. Reporting is set to begin in 2026 for data collected during 2025. Companies need to determine now if they are required to report and establish the processes to collect the data. However, delays in drafting the standards and ambiguous language are making it difficult for businesses to determine if they qualify.


The Rise of Climate Reporting

California’s climate reporting regulation is part of a global movement to require companies to disclose their greenhouse gas emissions, climate policies, and to evaluate climate risks. Driven by the net zero 2050 goal of the Paris Agreement, jurisdictions around the world are looking to reduce GHG emissions.

Advertisement

The European Union has been leading the way with the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive. Initially adopted in 2022, the CSRD requires climate and environmental, social, and governance reporting by most companies that operate within the EU. Reporting for large companies began in 2024. Reporting for non-EU companies and small and medium-sized enterprises has been delayed to 2026.

In the U.S., the Securities and Exchange Commission adopted a Climate-Risk Disclosure Rule in early 2024, only to delay implementation while it faced legal challenges. California and other states are moving forward with their own reporting requirements.

California’s Climate Accountability Package established the broad parameters for the reporting standards. The responsibility of drafting specific regulations and implementing the reporting standards was delegated to the California Air Resources Board. CARB was initially given until January 1, 2025 to draft the rules and processes. In September, the Legislature extended the deadline by six months to July 1.

The original legislation states that CARB shall develop and adopt regulations requiring for the reporting entity’s prior fiscal year.” Meaning, while the reporting does not take place until 2026, the data is from 2025. Businesses must determine before January 1, 2025 if they qualify as a reporting entity so they can begin collecting the required information.

Advertisement

Reporting requirements are divided into two categories, based on the total annual revenue of the company. Unlike the SEC, the California reporting requirements apply to both publicly traded and privately held companies. Only U.S. companies will have to report.


Reporting Entities

The highest level of reporting is required of large companies. Senate Bill 253 required companies who do business in California and have an excess of $1 billion in revenue, defined as “reporting entities”, to submit an annual report for Scope 1 and Scope 2 starting in 2026. Scope 3 reporting will begin in 2027.

Generally, Scope 1 GHG emissions are those that come directly from the company. Scope 2 are indirect GHG emissions from the company’s power source. Scope 3 are GHG emissions from the value chain, both from suppliers and consumers.

Scope 3 has been highly debated as it is considered by the business community as being overly burdensome. When the SEC implemented their rule, they chose to not require Scope 3. The EU requires it.


Covered Entities

Senate Bill 261 required companies who do business in California and an excess of $500 million in revenue, defined as “covered entities”, to submit a biennial climate-related financial risk report.

Advertisement

Climate risk is defined as “material risk of harm to immediate and long-term financial outcomes due to physical and transition risks, including, but not limited to, risks to corporate operations, provision of goods and services, supply chains, employee health and safety, capital and financial investments, institutional investments, financial standing of loan recipients and borrowers, shareholder value, consumer demand, and financial markets and economic health.”

This is a much lower requirement as it does not include any level of GHG emission reporting.


What Classifies As “Doing Business in California”?

In the development and interpretation of law, words matter. Codes, ordinances, laws, and regulations typically begin with a list of definitions of key terms. Frequently, those definitions are prefaced with the phrase “for purposes of this section.” This allows lawmakers to define a term for limited use in that section of the law preventing new legislation from negatively impacting established law. Definitions bring clarity, allowing those subjected to the law, regulators, attorneys, and judges to know the exact intent of the lawmakers.

In the Climate Accountability Package, the phrases “covered entity” and “reporting entity” are both defined in their respective sections. The only notable distinction between the definitions is the annual revenue threshold. Both include the phrase “that does business in California.”

While the dollar amount thresholds are clear, there is a question as to what classifies as “doing business” in California. The definition varies by section of the state code and by state agency. The Climate Accountability Package amended the state’s Health and Safety Code, that does not have a definition of doing business.

Advertisement

Presumably, CARB will provide a clear definition when they release the standards in July. However, companies will need to determine by January 1 if they need to collect data. In the interim, there are two key definitions that help provide some guidance.

California Corporations Code

Section 191 (a) of the California Corporations Code gives a definition of “entering into repeated and successive transactions of its business in this state, other than interstate or foreign commerce.” However, that definition is for the phrase “transact intrastate business” and is only for “the purposes of Chapter 21”, requiring registration with the Secretary of State.

Notably, “a foreign corporation shall not be considered to be transacting intrastate business merely because its subsidiary transacts intrastate business.” This leaves raises a question as to if a subsidiary can trigger reporting by the parent company. The 2024 amendment clarified that a subsidiary does not have to file separate from the parent company, but did not address this question.

California Revenue and Taxation Code

Article 1, Section 23101(a) of the California Revenue and Taxation Code gives a definition of “doing business.” The California Franchise Tax Board interprets the definition to mean meeting one of five conditions. The board updates the dollar thresholds annually. A company is considered doing business in California if

  1. The company is “actively engaging in any transaction for the purpose of financial or pecuniary gain or profit”;
  2. The company is “organized or commercially domiciled” in the state;
  3. The company has annual sales in California exceed the lower of $711,538 or 25% of the company’s total sales;
  4. The company has real property or tangible personal property in California exceeds the lower of $71,154 or 25% of the company’s total; or
  5. The company has payroll compensation in California exceeds the lower of $71,154 or 25% of the company’s total payroll.

The Struggle For Businesses

While there will likely be a delay in implementing California’s climate reporting requirements, companies have to decided soon how to respond. The choice comes with a hefty price tag. The SEC estimated compliance with their rule would cost a company approximately $1 million the first year. There is no reason to think California’s will be any different. As a result, companies are faced with a difficult decision – move forward with costly programs or hope for a delay.

There are a lot of unanswered questions while CARB drafts the climate reporting standards. However, given the current timeline, companies need to act now to evaluate if they meet the minimums and get their process in place by January 1.

Advertisement



Source link

California

Tory Lanez Sues California Prison System for $100 Million Over Stabbing

Published

on

Tory Lanez Sues California Prison System for 0 Million Over Stabbing


Rapper was stabbed 16 times by fellow inmate in May 2025 while 10-year sentence in Megan Thee Stallion shooting case

Tory Lanez has filed a $100 million lawsuit against the California Department of Corrections stemming from a May 2025 incident where the rapper was stabbed in prison.

Advertisement

Lanez — born Daystar Peterson and currently serving a 10-year sentence after being found guilty in the Megan Thee Stallion shooting case — also sued the warden and guards at the California Correctional Institute in Tehachapi, where the rapper was stabbed 16 times in an “unprovoked life-threatening attack” by another inmate, the lawsuit states. 

Peterson was hospitalized following the May 2025 incident, suffering a collapsed lung among stab wounds to his back, torso, and head.

According to the Associated Press, the lawsuit criticized the Department of Corrections for housing Peterson with fellow inmate and alleged attacker Santino Casio, who was serving a life sentence for second-degree murder. “The choice to house Casio with Peterson was known or should have been a known danger,” the lawsuit said, adding that Tory Lanez’ “high-profile celebrity status” made him a target.

The lawsuit also said that prison guards were slow to respond to the shanking, and didn’t employ flash grenades or other measures to halt Casio’s attack.; Casio was not charged for stabbing Peterson, the Associated Press notes.

Trending Stories

Advertisement

Lanez, who following his hospitalization was transferred to San Luis Obispo County’s California Men’s Colony, also alleges in the lawsuit that he never received his possessions from the California Correctional Institute in Tehachapi, including songbooks filled with lyrics to his unreleased music.

Lanez is serving a 10-year prison sentence for shooting Megan Thee Stallion in the foot during a confrontation in the summer of 2020. He was eventually convicted on several firearms charges, including assault with a firearm, in December 2022. In November 2025, his appeal was denied by a three-judge panel, and the 10-year sentence was upheld.



Source link

Continue Reading

California

California DOJ cracks down on hospice fraud. Takes shot at Trump Administration

Published

on

California DOJ cracks down on hospice fraud. Takes shot at Trump Administration


From one crackdown on hospice fraud to another.

A few weeks ago, the FBI arrested multiple people in Southern California that were accused of defrauding the government for millions of dollars.

In a more recent announcement last Thursday, California’s State Attorney General Rob Bonta held a press conference to announce a fraud bust of their own.

“Operation Skip Trace uncovered and ended a hospice fraud scheme that defrauded Medi-Cal of $267 million,” Bonta said. “So just to be clear, a quarter billion dollars over funds that are paid for by California taxpayers, funds that are meant to provide care to Californians in need. It is unacceptable. It is illegal and we will not stand for it.”

Advertisement

The operation saw a total of 21 suspects charged as a result and dismantled a major hospice fraud scheme, with two handguns and over $750 thousand in cash seized as well.

According to the state’s attorney general, this is just one of the many cases over the years the state has cracked down on.

“This is just the latest example of the California DOJ’s longstanding ongoing and successful efforts to combat hospice and medical fraud,” Bonta said. “We have been doing this work for years. We’ve been doing it successfully before certain people in this country decided to think about it for the first time. We will continue to do this work. Heads down, sleeves rolled up, important investigative work, prosecutorial work.”

He added to that by taking a shot at the Trump Administration’s latest fraud operations.

“While healthcare fraud might be President Trump’s shiny new political talking point, the California DOJ has been going after healthcare fraud since 1979,” Bonta said. “For decades, Trump is late to the party. Protecting taxpayer dollars and protecting programs sick and vulnerable Californians rely on have been our priority for nearly five decades.”

Advertisement

Governor Gavin Newsom also spoke out about this latest crackdown while taking a shot of his own at President Trump.

In a post to “X” the Governor’s Press Office wrote in part quote…

“California has been cracking down on hospice fraud long before Trump gutted oversight and pardoned the architect of the biggest health care fraud scheme in U.S. history.”

State Republicans have responded to this latest announcement from Attorney General Bonta, calling for a special session to demand accountability from the Governor on widespread fraud.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

California

Xavier Becerra surges in poll after Eric Swalwell drops out of California governor’s race

Published

on

Xavier Becerra surges in poll after Eric Swalwell drops out of California governor’s race


A new poll shows a major shift in the California governor’s race after former Rep. Eric Swalwell, who was once a frontrunner, dropped out of the election following several allegations of sexual misconduct.

“This definitely throws this race into even more volatility, creates a huge vacuum,” Pomona College politics professor Sara Sadhwani said. 

According to the new numbers, Xavier Becerra, the former state attorney general and Health and Human Services Secretary under President Biden, is surging in popularity. 

In Emerson College’s Inside California Politics poll, Becerra is now polling at 10%, a seven-point jump since March.

Advertisement

Republican Steve Hilton remains in the lead with 17%, followed by Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco at 14%.

Among Democrats, billionaire Tom Steyer leads the pack with 14%, followed by Becerra and former Rep. Katie Porter at 10% each. San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan sits at 5%.

The poll showed that 23% of voters remain undecided.

“Xavier Becerra should be the happiest of them all because he’s the biggest move in this survey,” said Zev Yaroslavsky, director at UCLA’s Luskin School of Public Affairs.

Emerson College conducted the poll right after Swalwell dropped out of the race and President Trump endorsed Hilton.

Advertisement

“I believe over time, because Trump has endorsed Hilton for the governorship, that Hilton will continue to edge up and Bianco by definition will have to go down,” Yaroslavsky said. 

Last weekend, the California GOP held its convention, and, similar to the Democrats, the party did not make an endorsement. However, Bianco received the most votes from the GOP delegates.

“We’re extremely happy with how it came out,” Bianco said. “There was a lot of effort put in by my opponent. Hundreds of thousands of dollars to try and win this election.

With the large number of undecided voters, Yaroslavky believes that the race is still in the air. 

“It’s still early,” Yaroslavsky said. “It’s a little less than seven weeks before the election. The ballots go out at the beginning of next month. People, at least 30%, still haven’t made up their mind.”

Advertisement

In the state’s primary system, only the top two vote-getters in the June primary will advance to the November general election.   



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending