A company must first run a scoping exercise, using only reasonably available information, to find where adverse impacts are most likely and most severe, then carry out an in-depth assessment in those areas.
The requirement, in our words
Companies identify adverse impacts by first running a scoping exercise, using only reasonably available information, to find the general areas of their own operations, subsidiaries and, where it concerns their chains of activities, business partners where impacts are most likely and most severe, taking account of business partner, geographic and context, and sector and product risk factors. They then assess in depth the areas found most likely and most severe. They may use independent reports, digital tools, industry and multi-stakeholder initiatives and the complaints and notification mechanism. The former paragraph on the assessment method is deleted.
Why it matters
The two-step structure is the heart of the amended due diligence process. The scoping exercise is broad and cheap; the in-depth assessment is focused and evidence-heavy. The risk factors include the business partner's status, the geography and context, and the sector and products. The deletion of Article 8(4) removes a separate provision on the assessment method, so the two steps carry the method.
What changed
The old Article 8(2) required an assessment of adverse impacts without the scoping step. The replacement adds the scoping exercise and the in-depth assessment, and deletes paragraph 4.
What to do
- Write a scoping report that lists the areas screened, the risk factors applied and the information sources.
- Select the priority areas and open an in-depth assessment file for each.
- Record severity and likelihood ratings and the reason each area was prioritised.
Evidence to have ready
| Category | Artefact |
|---|---|
| Risk identification | Scoping exercise report listing the areas screened, the risk factors applied and the information sources |
| Risk identification | In-depth assessment files for each priority area with findings and severity and likelihood ratings |
| Risk identification | Register of external resources used (independent reports, initiatives, tools) |
Common failures
- In-depth assessment run on all suppliers without a prior scoping step and prioritisation
- Scoping relies on information that was not reasonably available or ignores complaints received
Dates
Transposition by 26 July 2028; application from 26 July 2029.
The question to test
Can you show the areas you screened out, or only the areas you assessed?
Cross-references
A4-6 Parent due diligence · A4-8 Supplier information limits · A4-9 Prioritisation protection
Source
Article 4(6)(a) and (c), amending Article 8(2) and (3) and deleting Article 8(4) of Directive (EU) 2024/1760; OJ L 2026/470, 26 February 2026; https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32026L0470. Our statement of the duty, read from the Official Journal text and the held control record, not the instrument verbatim.
Not legal advice; does not certify. A reading of the duty and the evidence commonly sampled, not a substitute for the Official Journal text, the national transposing measure or your auditor's judgement.