Materiality · the concept and its sources
Double materiality: the EU’s two-lens test, and the UK’s one
Double materiality is the test EU sustainability reporting uses to decide what a company must disclose: its impacts on people and the environment, and the ways sustainability matters affect its own finances.
The CSRD requires it, through the ESRS.
UK SRS does not: like the ISSB standards it is built on, UK SRS S1 applies single, financial materiality only.
The two lenses
Impact outward, finance inward
Impact materiality, the inside-out lens, asks how the company’s operations, products and value chain affect people and the environment, whether or not that ever reaches its accounts.
Financial materiality, the outside-in lens, asks how sustainability matters affect the company’s development, financial position, performance, cash flows, access to finance or cost of capital, over the short, medium or long term.
Under the ESRS a matter is material when it meets the criteria for impact materiality or financial materiality, or both.
That “either” is the whole practical difference from the UK: an impact that will never move the numbers is still reportable under the ESRS, and invisible under UK SRS unless it would.
It is a concept UK companies meet through their European obligations, not their UK ones; CSRD in the UK sets out when those arise.
The official source
Where double materiality is written in EU law
Almost everything published on this cites a consultancy.
These are the provisions, and the detail that trips people up: the phrase “double materiality” is not in the Directive’s operative text.
The binding text
Article 19a(1) of the Accounting Directive requires “information necessary to understand the undertaking’s impacts on sustainability matters, and information necessary to understand how sustainability matters affect the undertaking’s development, performance and position”.
Article 29a(1) is the group analogue, on a consolidated basis.
The name
Recital 29 of the CSRD as adopted: undertakings report on both, and “that is referred to as the double materiality perspective”, considering “each materiality perspective in its own right”.
Recitals are not consolidated, so the adopted text is the right citation for them.
The principle
The revised ESRS 1 ¶2: reporting under the impact and the risk-and-opportunity perspectives “constitutes the double materiality principle”.
In the 2023 text the principle sat at ESRS 1 ¶21.
The CSRD is an amending directive: it does not itself carry the test but rewrites Articles 19a and 29a of the Accounting Directive, as the consolidated CSRD text shows.
The two-limb wording was first inserted by the Non-Financial Reporting Directive in 2014, which never uses the word “materiality”.
The earliest EU document located using the phrase itself is the Commission’s 2019 guidelines on non-financial reporting, which described the Directive as having “a double materiality perspective” without claiming to coin the term.
Omnibus I in 2026 changed who reports, adding a €450 million and 1,000-employee test to the front of Article 19a(1), and left the two limbs word for word.
Fewer undertakings are in scope; the test they apply is the same one.
So if you are asked for the official source and you send Article 19a, you are right; if you are asked where the words appear, that is recital 29 or ESRS 1.
The official source, question by question
Seven questions, seven provisions
People asking for “the official source” usually mean one of these questions.
Each has its own instrument, and only the first two are the Directive.
| Question | The provision | Status |
|---|---|---|
| What must be reported? | Accounting Directive Art 19a(1): impacts on sustainability matters, and how sustainability matters affect the undertaking; Art 29a(1) for groups | EU law, consolidated 18 March 2026 |
| Where is it called double materiality? | CSRD recital 29: “the double materiality perspective” | Recital of the adopting directive |
| What is the principle in the standards? | Revised ESRS 1 ¶2: the two perspectives together constitute “the double materiality principle” | Delegated regulation, applies from FY2027 |
| How is materiality assessed? | Revised ESRS 1, Chapter 3: severity and likelihood for impacts (¶40), likelihood and magnitude for financial effects | Delegated regulation |
| What do I disclose about the process? | ESRS 2 IRO-1, as rendered in EFRAG’s Knowledge Hub: methods, inputs, thresholds and when the assessment was last updated | Delegated regulation |
| Is the process assured? | Accounting Directive Art 34(1): the opinion covers “the process carried out by the undertaking to identify the information reported” | EU law |
| Is there official guidance? | EFRAG IG 1, written for the 2023 standards and non-authoritative | Guidance, not law |
How the idea arrived
From two limbs in 2014 to a principle in 2026
The substance is older than the name.
The Non-Financial Reporting Directive of 2014 wrote both limbs into Articles 19a and 29a, yet the word “materiality” appears nowhere in it.
The Commission’s general guidelines of 2017 discussed the impact of a company’s activities as a new element in assessing materiality, but did not use the label.
Its 2019 guidelines on reporting climate-related information are the earliest EU document we have located that uses the phrase, describing the Directive as having “a double materiality perspective”, without claiming to have coined it.
The CSRD then named it in recital 29, the first ESRS turned it into a principle in 2023, and the revised ESRS keep it, renumbered, from 2027.
Through all of that the operative test has barely moved: what Omnibus I changed in 2026 was who must apply it, not what it asks.
- 2014NFRD inserts the two limbs
Directive 2014/95/EU; the word “materiality” does not appear.
- 2017Commission guidelines
Both limbs discussed; no “double” label.
- 2019Climate reporting guidelines
The earliest located use: “a double materiality perspective”.
- 2022CSRD recital 29
“the double materiality perspective”.
- 31 Jul 2023ESRS adopted
DR (EU) 2023/2772; the principle at ESRS 1 ¶21.
- 18 Mar 2026Omnibus I in force
Fewer reporters; the two limbs unchanged.
- FY2027Revised ESRS apply
The principle moves to ESRS 1 ¶2.
Which ESRS 1?
Paragraph numbers moved in the 2026 revision
Three versions of ESRS 1 are in play: the 2023 text, that text as amended by Delegated Regulation (EU) 2025/1416, and the revised Annex I in Delegated Regulation (EU) 2026/1563.
The revision replaced the Annex in full, so every paragraph number moved.
For a financial year starting in 2026 a company may use either, and must say which, so “ESRS 1 paragraph 37” with no version is no longer a safe reference.
The revised financial limb, ¶47, is worded almost exactly as UK SRS S1 is: effects on “cash flows, access to finance or cost of capital over the short, medium or long term”.
The divergence is not in the financial test; it is that the EU adds the impact perspective.
The revised ESRS 1 ¶24 also says immaterial information “shall not” be disclosed, so over-reporting is now a defect rather than caution.
| What | ESRS 1 (2023) | ESRS 1 (revised, FY2027) |
|---|---|---|
| The principle | ¶21 | ¶2 |
| Either or both | ¶28 | Chapter 3 |
| Severity of impacts | ¶45 | ¶40 |
| Financial materiality | ¶49 | ¶47 |
Single, double, impact
UK SRS, the ESRS and GRI, side by side
| UK SRS and ISSB (single) | EU ESRS (double) | GRI (impact) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Question asked | How does it affect the company? | How does it affect the company, and how does the company affect the world? | How does the organisation affect the economy, environment and people? |
| Whose decisions | Primary users of general purpose financial reports | Those users plus other users such as business partners, trade unions and civil society | Stakeholders broadly |
| Test | Could it reasonably influence those users’ decisions (UK SRS S1 ¶18) | Impact or financial materiality, or both | Most significant impacts (GRI 1 §2.2) |
| Typical result | A narrower set of topics | A wider set, including impact-only topics | Impact topics only |
| Status for a UK company | Voluntary; comply or explain for listed companies from 2027 | Only where the CSRD reaches it | Voluntary |
UK SRS S1 asks for information about sustainability-related risks and opportunities that could reasonably be expected to affect the entity’s cash flows, access to finance or cost of capital.
It does not ask for impacts for their own sake: an impact enters only as the source of a risk or opportunity to the company.
That follows the ISSB, whose educational material on materiality and the standards navigator set out the investor-focused basis.
GRI sits at the other end: its Standards ask the organisation to report the topics representing its most significant impacts, and the GRI Standards page sets out its wording on both sides.
The result is a spectrum rather than a pair: financial (ISSB and UK SRS), double (ESRS) and impact (GRI); global sustainability standards sets them in the wider landscape.
Try it on one matter
Same matter, four different answers
The quickest way to see what double materiality changes is to run one matter through every test at once.
Take excessive working hours among a supplier’s workers: a serious impact on people that may never move the company’s cash flows.
Under the ESRS it is reportable on impact alone, and under GRI it is a material topic if it is among the most significant impacts.
Under UK SRS S1 it is reportable only if, and when, it becomes a risk the company’s investors would care about — a lost contract, a fine, a financing condition.
Now take an insurer’s exposure to flood-driven claims: a financial risk to the company, but not an impact the company has on people or the environment.
Under UK SRS and the ESRS it is reportable on the financial lens; under GRI and the draft ESRS-40a it is not, because both look at impacts.
The tool beside this text applies each regime’s test to your two judgements; it does not make them for you.
One matter, four tests
Answer both to see how each regime treats the matter.
Tests: Directive 2013/34/EU Art 19a(1) and CSRD recital 29 (either perspective); revised ESRS 1 ¶24 (immaterial information not disclosed); UK SRS S1 ¶¶3, 18; GRI 1 §2.2; EFRAG’s ESRS-40a exposure draft.
You make the two judgements; this applies each regime’s test to them.
Nothing is stored or sent.
Single materiality
Single materiality is not half of double materiality
Single materiality is the investor-facing test the ISSB standards and UK SRS use.
UK SRS S1 ¶18 says information is material if omitting, misstating or obscuring it could reasonably be expected to influence decisions that primary users of general purpose financial reports make on the basis of those reports.
¶3 frames the sustainability-related risks and opportunities in scope as those that could reasonably be expected to affect the entity’s cash flows, its access to finance or cost of capital over the short, medium or long term.
The phrase “enterprise value” appears nowhere in UK SRS S1; it was exposure-draft language that did not survive into the final ISSB standard.
The EU’s financial perspective is worded almost the same way, which is why the joint guidance can say the definitions are aligned.
So the difference between single and double materiality is not that the EU asks a harder financial question; it is that the EU asks a second question.
A UK company that reports under UK SRS is therefore not doing “half” of a double materiality assessment by accident: it is doing one of the two, and none of the impact work.
People also speak of three types of materiality — financial, impact and double — and the third is simply the first two applied together, each in its own right.
The assessment, in brief
How a double materiality assessment is run and recorded
This page is about the concept; the procedure has its own page, but the outline belongs here because most people searching for double materiality want to know what an assessment involves.
An assessment starts from the ten topical standards, not from the topics a company already planned to talk about, and screens them for material impacts, risks and opportunities.
Impacts come first: the revised ESRS 1 says that in general the starting point is the assessment of impacts, and risks and opportunities that do not arise from impacts, such as physical climate risk, are then added.
Negative impacts are scored on severity — scale, scope and irremediable character — and, if potential, likelihood; for a potential human rights impact, severity takes precedence over likelihood.
Risks and opportunities are scored on a combination of likelihood and the potential magnitude of financial effects.
The output is not a chart but three disclosures in ESRS 2: IRO-1 on the process, IRO-2 on what was found and which disclosure requirements were met, and SBM-3 on how the material matters interact with strategy.
The revised IRO-1 asks for information specific to the company’s own process and warns against boilerplate that merely recites the standard.
The full method, a worked example and the scoring grid are on the double materiality assessment.
| Step | Where the rule is |
|---|---|
| Choose top-down or bottom-up, topic by topic | Revised ESRS 1 ¶¶27–28, AR 10 |
| Focus where material matters are likely | Revised ESRS 1 ¶32 |
| Score impacts on severity and, if potential, likelihood | Revised ESRS 1 ¶40 |
| Score risks and opportunities on likelihood and magnitude | Revised ESRS 1, Chapter 3 |
| Record thresholds; qualitative may suffice | Revised ESRS 1 ¶37, AR 13 |
| Disclose the process and the results | ESRS 2 IRO-1, IRO-2, SBM-3 |
Positive impacts and opportunities
Good news is assessed too, and never netted
Double materiality is not only about harm.
The revised ESRS 1 assesses positive impacts as well as negative ones: on scale and scope, and, for a potential positive impact, its likelihood.
It also says positive impacts are assessed on their own, without netting them against negative ones, so a product that helps customers cut emissions does not offset the emissions of making it.
Complying with the law is not a positive impact, which rules out a common padding move in older reports.
On the financial side, opportunities sit beside risks: a sustainability matter can be financially material because it could open a market or lower a cost, not only because it could close one.
UK SRS asks about opportunities too, so this is one place where the financial halves of the two regimes look alike in practice as well as in definition.
The matrix question
Is a double materiality matrix required?
A double materiality matrix — impact on one axis, financial effect on the other — is the picture most people associate with the subject.
Nothing we have read in the revised ESRS 1 or ESRS 2 requires one.
The standards require the assessment, its thresholds and its results to be disclosed, and ESRS 2 allows the material impacts, risks and opportunities to be presented in a table alongside the policies and actions that manage them.
A matrix can still be a useful working tool, as long as it does not average away what the rules say must stand alone.
Two of those rules matter most: any one of scale, scope or irremediable character can make an impact severe, and a matter material on one axis is material even if it sits at zero on the other.
A matrix that only lights up the top-right corner has quietly turned an “either” test into a “both” test.
Interoperability
The financial definition is aligned; the regimes are not
The ISSB and the European Commission services, together with EFRAG, worked together while both sets of standards were developed.
Their joint interoperability guidance states that “the definition of financial materiality in ESRS is aligned with the definition of materiality in IFRS S1”.
It adds that “almost all the disclosures in ISSB Standards related to climate are included in ESRS”.
The same guidance is explicit that ESRS materiality “covers also the impact materiality lens”, so the regimes still differ.
It was published on 2 May 2024 and maps the 2023 ESRS paragraph numbers, so check any mapping against the revised standards before relying on it.
The practical consequence: a company that runs the broader double materiality assessment can take its financially material subset as the starting point for UK SRS, rather than running a second process.
EFRAG’s IG 1 materiality guidance makes the related point that one assessment should reflect both perspectives without two separate processes.
The UK position
Why the UK stays on the single lens
There is no proposal to adopt double materiality in the UK.
The UK standards published on 25 February 2026 endorse the ISSB’s financial lens, and the FCA’s final rules in PS26/19 ask listed companies to report against them on a comply-or-explain basis from 2027.
HM Treasury decided on 15 July 2025 not to proceed with a UK Green Taxonomy, naming UK SRS, assurance and transition plans as the tools instead; green taxonomy covers the EU’s.
A UK group with a large EU subsidiary may therefore run both lenses: double materiality for the EU entity’s ESRS statement, single for the group’s UK SRS report.
How that plays out is on UK SRS S1 and S2, what comply or explain requires and UK sustainability reporting.
The EU side is on the ESRS page, the CSRD explainer and CSRD reporting requirements for UK groups; the CSDDD guide and the VSME guide cover the due diligence and supplier ends.
A UK company runs a double materiality assessment because an EU parent, customer or lender asked, never because UK law requires it.
Who can ask, what the value-chain cap lets you decline, and how the assessment is run and scored are on the double materiality assessment.
What goes wrong
Five double materiality mistakes
“A matter must be material both ways to be reported.”
Either is enough.
“The words ‘double materiality’ are in Article 19a.”
The limbs are; the label is in recital 29 and ESRS 1.
“UK SRS uses enterprise-value materiality.”
The phrase appears nowhere in UK SRS S1; the test is the influence on primary users’ decisions, by reference to cash flows, access to finance or cost of capital.
“The ESRS and ISSB define financial materiality differently.”
The joint guidance says the definitions are aligned.
“Report everything to be safe.”
The revised ESRS 1 ¶24 prohibits disclosing information that is not material.
These informed our reading and support no fact on this page: PwC on ESRS (2026), EY’s EU sustainability developments, Hogan Lovells on the UK SRS exposure drafts, Macfarlanes on the taxonomy decision, Novata, Enhesa, Pulsora and Socious.
Double materiality: true or false?
Under the ESRS a matter must be material from both perspectives to be reported.
The words “double materiality” appear in Article 19a(1) of the Accounting Directive.
UK SRS S1 applies single, financial materiality.
The ESRS and IFRS S1 define financial materiality in materially different ways.
Under the revised ESRS, a company may report immaterial information to be safe.
For a potential human rights impact, likelihood can outweigh severity.
0 of 6 answered.
Nothing you choose is stored or sent.
Frequently asked
Questions people ask
What is double materiality?
Double materiality is the EU test for deciding what goes into a sustainability statement.
It has two lenses: impact materiality, meaning how the company affects people and the environment, and financial materiality, meaning how sustainability matters affect the company’s development, financial position, performance, cash flows, access to finance or cost of capital.
A matter that is material through either lens, or both, is reported.
Where is the official EU source for the CSRD double materiality requirement?
The binding text is Article 19a(1) of Directive 2013/34/EU, the Accounting Directive, which requires information necessary to understand the undertaking’s impacts on sustainability matters and how sustainability matters affect the undertaking; Article 29a(1) is the group equivalent.
The words "double materiality" are not in that article.
Recital 29 of the CSRD, Directive (EU) 2022/2464, names it the double materiality perspective, and ESRS 1 calls it the double materiality principle.
Does UK SRS use double materiality?
No. UK SRS S1 applies single, financial materiality, like the ISSB’s IFRS S1 it is based on.
Information is material if omitting, misstating or obscuring it could reasonably be expected to influence the decisions of primary users of general purpose financial reports, judged by reference to the entity’s cash flows, access to finance or cost of capital.
What is the difference between single and double materiality?
Single materiality asks one question: could this sustainability matter affect the company’s prospects in a way investors would care about?
Double materiality asks that and also: does the company have a material impact on people or the environment, whether or not it ever affects the accounts?
Double materiality usually surfaces more reportable topics, especially on social matters.
Is the ESRS financial materiality test the same as ISSB materiality?
The definition is aligned.
The joint ESRS–ISSB interoperability guidance says the definition of financial materiality in ESRS is aligned with the definition of materiality in IFRS S1.
What differs is the regime: ESRS add the impact lens on top, so a matter can be reportable under ESRS on impact alone.
Does GRI use double materiality?
Not in those words.
GRI’s test, in GRI 1 §2.2, is to report on the topics that represent the organisation’s most significant impacts on the economy, environment and people, which it calls material topics. That is close to the impact half of double materiality.
GRI the organisation uses the phrase "impact materiality" in commentary, but the GRI Standards themselves do not.
Is double materiality mandatory for UK companies?
Only where the CSRD reaches them, through an EU subsidiary or EU parent above the thresholds, an EU listing, or, from financial year 2028, Article 40a.
A UK company in that position may face both UK SRS on single materiality and the ESRS on double materiality.
Will the UK adopt double materiality?
There is no proposal to do so.
The FCA’s final rules of 30 September 2026 apply UK SRS, which uses financial materiality, and the government decided on 15 July 2025 not to proceed with a UK Green Taxonomy.
Must a matter be material from both perspectives to be reported under ESRS?
No. Either is enough.
Impacts count whether or not they are financially material, and a financial risk counts whether or not it arises from an impact.
What is a double materiality assessment?
It is the process by which an undertaking reporting under the ESRS decides what to disclose.
It screens the ten topical standards for material impacts on people and the environment and for material financial risks and opportunities, scores them under the revised ESRS 1, records the thresholds used, and reports the process in ESRS 2 IRO-1 and the results in IRO-2.
How do you do a double materiality assessment?
Choose a top-down or bottom-up approach for each topic; focus where material matters are likely; assess impacts first, scoring negative impacts on severity (scale, scope, irremediable character) and, if potential, likelihood; assess risks and opportunities on likelihood and magnitude of financial effects; record thresholds; and report ESRS 2 plus the material topics only.
The full method is on the double materiality assessment page.
Is a double materiality matrix required?
Not by anything we have read in the revised ESRS 1 or ESRS 2.
The standards require the assessment, its thresholds and its results to be disclosed, and allow results to be presented in a table.
A matrix is a working tool; it must not turn an either-or test into a both test.
What is single materiality?
The investor-facing materiality test used by the ISSB standards and UK SRS.
Information is material if omitting, misstating or obscuring it could reasonably be expected to influence decisions that primary users of general purpose financial reports make, judged by effects on cash flows, access to finance or cost of capital.
What are the three types of materiality?
In sustainability reporting the three usually named are financial materiality (how sustainability matters affect the company), impact materiality (how the company affects people and the environment) and double materiality, which applies both together with either one sufficient.
UK SRS uses the first, GRI is close to the second, and the ESRS use the third.
What is impact materiality?
The inside-out lens.
A sustainability matter is material from the impact perspective when it relates to the undertaking’s material actual or potential, positive or negative impacts on people or the environment.
Under the revised ESRS 1, negative impacts are assessed on severity and, if potential, likelihood.
Does SECR or ESOS use double materiality?
No. SECR and ESOS are UK energy and carbon regimes with their own scope tests and prescribed content, and neither applies a double materiality assessment.
Materiality of this kind decides content in standards-based regimes such as UK SRS and the ESRS.
Can positive impacts make a matter material under the ESRS?
Yes.
The revised ESRS 1 assesses positive impacts on their scale and scope and, if potential, their likelihood.
They are assessed on their own and never netted against negative impacts, and complying with the law does not count as a positive impact.
Is double materiality the same as GRI materiality?
No. GRI reports an organisation’s most significant impacts on the economy, environment and people, which resembles the impact half of double materiality.
Double materiality adds the financial perspective, under which a risk or opportunity is reportable even when it is not an impact the company has on the world.
Sources
Primary sources
Every figure, date and status on this page traces to the instrument’s owner.
Secondary commentary is never the source for a number.
- EUR-LexDirective 2013/34/EU, consolidated 18 March 2026 — Art 19a(1) and Art 29a(1), first subparagraphs
The operative text: impacts on sustainability matters, and how sustainability matters affect the undertaking.
- EUR-LexDirective (EU) 2022/2464 (CSRD) — recital 29
Where the EU names the two limbs “the double materiality perspective”.
- EUR-LexDirective 2014/95/EU (the Non-Financial Reporting Directive)
Inserted the two-limb wording in 2014; never uses the word “materiality”.
- EUR-LexCommission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/2772 — ESRS 1, Chapter 3 (2023 text)
The 2023 numbering: ¶21 (principle), ¶28 (either or both), ¶37, ¶43, ¶49.
- EUR-LexCommission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2026/1563 — the revised ESRS
Applies from financial years beginning on or after 1 January 2027.
- Council of the EUC(2026) 5010 final, Annex I — revised ESRS 1 ¶¶2, 24, 40, 47
The principle, the prohibition on reporting immaterial information, severity, and the financial limb.
- EFRAGESRS Knowledge Hub — ESRS 2 General Disclosures, IRO-1 and IRO-2 (delegated-act text)
What a company discloses about its materiality process and its results.
- EFRAGIG 1: Materiality Assessment Implementation Guidance, ¶65
One assessment, both perspectives, not two separate processes. Non-authoritative; written for the 2023 ESRS.
- IFRS Foundation / EFRAGESRS–ISSB Standards Interoperability Guidance, 2 May 2024 — Introduction and §1.1
“the definition of financial materiality in ESRS is aligned with the definition of materiality in IFRS S1”.
- Department for Business and TradeUK SRS S1 General Requirements — ¶3 and ¶18
Single, financial materiality, judged by the decisions of primary users of general purpose financial reports.
- IFRS FoundationIFRS S1 General Requirements
The ISSB standard UK SRS S1 endorses.
- Global Reporting InitiativeGRI 1: Foundation 2021, §2.2
GRI’s test: the organisation’s most significant impacts on the economy, environment and people.
- Global Reporting InitiativeGRI 3: Material Topics 2021
How GRI’s material topics are determined.
- HM TreasuryUK Green Taxonomy consultation and outcome
The government decided on 15 July 2025 not to proceed with a UK taxonomy.
- Financial Conduct AuthorityPS26/19 — UK SRS on a comply-or-explain basis for listed companies
The UK regime that applies single materiality to listed companies from 2027.
Continue reading
Read next
The double materiality assessment
Who can ask a UK company for one, how it is run and scored, and what carries over to UK SRS.
UK SRS S1
The general standard and its single, financial materiality test.
ESRS, read from the UK
The twelve standards double materiality decides between.