On paper, the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) framework looks manageable. In practice, Polish companies facing their first reporting cycle discover that double materiality assessments, data collection across supply chains, and audit-ready documentation require months of preparation – not weeks. The gap between regulatory text and operational readiness is where compliance failures happen.
ESRS implementation in Poland is governed by the Ustawa o rachunkowości (Accounting Act) as amended to transpose the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD). Polish entities meeting the relevant thresholds must publish their first ESRS-compliant sustainability statement as part of the management report. The first wave of large public-interest entities with over 500 employees reported for the financial year 2024. Subsequent waves extend to large companies and, eventually, listed small and medium-sized enterprises.
This alert covers three things: what the ESRS framework requires, which Polish entities are affected and when, and the immediate steps your organisation should take now. Each section includes a concrete deadline or threshold so you can assess your position without delay.
What has changed under ESRS and who is affected in Poland?
The ESRS framework replaces the earlier non-financial reporting regime under the dyrektywa NFRD (Non-Financial Reporting Directive, NFRD). The shift is significant. Where NFRD required a narrative disclosure, ESRS demands structured, auditable data across environmental, social, and governance topics. The National Court Register (KRS) and the Polish Financial Supervision Authority (KNF) both monitor compliance for entities within their respective remits. The Financial Reporting Standards Committee in Poland has issued guidance on domestic transposition.
Three reporting waves define who is affected and when. The first wave – large public-interest entities with more than 500 employees – reported for financial year 2024. The second wave covers all other large companies meeting at least two of three criteria: net turnover above EUR 40 million, balance sheet total above EUR 20 million, or more than 250 employees. These entities report for financial year 2025. The third wave covers listed SMEs, reporting for financial year 2026 with an opt-out available until 2028.
ESG reporting under ESRS is not voluntary for in-scope entities. Failure to include a compliant sustainability statement in the management report constitutes a breach of the Accounting Act. Personal liability of board members for false or missing disclosures is a live risk – the same statutory framework that governs board liability for tax arrears applies analogously to reporting obligations. That consequence is irreversible once an audit opinion is qualified.
Polish subsidiaries of foreign groups face an additional layer. A parent preparing a consolidated ESRS report may exempt a Polish subsidiary – but only if the parent's report covers the subsidiary and is published in a language accepted under Polish law. Many groups have not yet confirmed whether that exemption will apply, leaving subsidiaries in a planning vacuum.
- Wave 1: over 500 employees, public-interest entities – reporting year 2024
- Wave 2: large companies meeting two of three size criteria – reporting year 2025
- Wave 3: listed SMEs – reporting year 2026 (opt-out to 2028)
- Group exemption: available only if parent report covers the Polish entity
What are the immediate ESRS implementation steps for Polish entities?
The double materiality assessment is the foundation of every ESRS report. It requires a company to assess both financial materiality (how sustainability matters affect the business) and impact materiality (how the business affects people and the environment). This assessment must be documented, defensible, and reviewed annually. Starting it fewer than six months before the reporting deadline leaves insufficient time to gather the data the assessment identifies as material.
We assisted a manufacturing client in the Mazowieckie region (autumn 2025) in completing its double materiality assessment and data gap analysis within an eight-week engagement. The exercise identified 14 data points that the client's existing ERP system could not produce – each requiring a process change before year-end.
Data architecture is the second pressure point. ESRS requires quantitative disclosures on topics including Scope 1, 2, and 3 greenhouse gas emissions, workforce metrics, and supply chain due diligence. Scope 3 data alone typically requires engagement with at least the top 20 suppliers. For companies also subject to whistleblower compliance obligations under the Polish Whistleblower Protection Act, the internal reporting channel must be operational before the sustainability statement is finalised – both obligations share the same board-level accountability structure.
For companies designing or upgrading their compliance architecture, the approach taken for compliance programme design for subsidiaries provides a useful structural model. Governance, policy documentation, and internal audit integration follow the same logic whether the driver is ESRS, AML, or whistleblower regulation.
Third-party assurance is mandatory. For the first reporting cycles, limited assurance by a statutory auditor is required. Reasonable assurance will follow in later years. Engaging your auditor at least nine months before the report publication date is the minimum prudent timeline. Auditors are already reporting capacity constraints for the 2025 reporting cycle.
- Commission double materiality assessment – allow at least six months before year-end
- Map data gaps against ESRS disclosure requirements
- Engage statutory auditor for limited assurance – no later than nine months before publication
- Confirm group exemption status if part of a multinational structure
- Align whistleblower and AML compliance channels with ESG governance framework
Our team secured a complete ESRS readiness roadmap for a logistics group in Lower Silesia (spring 2026), identifying the three highest-risk disclosure gaps and proposing remediation steps within a 12-week project. The client avoided a qualified audit opinion on its sustainability statement by addressing those gaps before the auditor's fieldwork began.
For a broader view of the ESRS implementation framework and its interaction with Polish corporate law, see our earlier analysis at ESRS implementation steps for Polish reporting entities.
Every Polish entity in scope should now answer three questions. First: which reporting wave applies, and has the board formally acknowledged the deadline? Second: is the double materiality assessment either complete or formally commissioned? Third: has the statutory auditor confirmed capacity to provide limited assurance for the relevant reporting year? A "no" to any of these is a compliance gap that compounds over time.
Specific situations require specific analysis. The interaction between CSRD Poland transposition, group exemption mechanics, and the personal liability of management board members for disclosure failures is not a matter to address with a generic checklist alone.
To receive an expert assessment of your ESRS readiness position, contact info@kordeckipartners.com. If your company is approaching a reporting deadline without a completed materiality assessment or auditor engagement – we will conduct a structured gap analysis, identify the highest-risk disclosure areas, and provide a prioritised action plan: info@kordeckipartners.com.
Frequently asked questions
Q: Does ESRS apply to Polish subsidiaries of foreign groups?
A: A Polish subsidiary may be exempt if its foreign parent prepares a consolidated ESRS-compliant report that covers the subsidiary and is published in a language accepted under Polish law. The exemption is not automatic. The subsidiary's board must verify that all conditions are met and document that verification. If the parent report does not cover the Polish entity, the subsidiary must report independently.
Q: How long does a double materiality assessment typically take?
A: For a mid-sized Polish company, a well-structured double materiality assessment takes between six and twelve weeks from kick-off to a board-approved, audit-ready document. The timeline depends on the complexity of the value chain and the availability of internal data owners. Companies that begin fewer than three months before year-end routinely face data gaps that cannot be closed in time.
Q: Is limited assurance the same as a financial audit?
A: No. Limited assurance is a lower standard than the reasonable assurance applied in a financial audit. Under limited assurance, the auditor concludes that nothing has come to their attention indicating the sustainability statement is materially misstated. Reasonable assurance – required in later ESRS cycles – involves more extensive testing and a positive conclusion. Both require the company to maintain audit-ready documentation throughout the year, not only at year-end.
KORDECKI & Partners is a law firm based in Warsaw and Krakow, advising business clients across 30 jurisdictions. Our team combines expertise in Polish and international law with a practical approach to ESG compliance, CSRD transposition, and sustainability reporting. We work with Polish entrepreneurs, foreign investors, and in-house legal teams navigating ESRS implementation, whistleblower compliance, and AML obligations. To discuss your situation, contact info@kordeckipartners.com.
Disclaimer: This publication is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information herein should not be relied upon as a substitute for professional legal counsel tailored to your specific circumstances. KORDECKI & Partners assumes no liability for actions taken or not taken based on the contents of this material. For advice regarding your particular situation, please contact info@kordeckipartners.com.