Net Zero Compare

What Is Scope 3? Understanding Indirect Emissions and Their Regulatory Impact

Karin Svensson
Written by Karin Svensson
Published June 18th, 2025
What Is Scope 3? Understanding Indirect Emissions and Their Regulatory Impact
5 min read
Our principle

Cut through the green tape

We don't push agendas. At Net Zero Compare, we cut through the hype and fear to deliver the straightforward facts you need for making informed decisions on green products and services. Whether motivated by compliance, customer demands, or a real passion for the environment, you’re welcome here. We provide reliable information—why you seek it is not our concern.

Until recently, Scope 3 emissions were often seen as a distant or optional part of carbon accounting. Only a handful of companies actively measured them, given the complexity involved. That is changing. Scope 3 is now an important part of emerging climate disclosure frameworks. Several jurisdictions already require reporting, and many others are moving in that direction. As regulations tighten and supply chain expectations grow, most companies will eventually need to address their full value chain emissions.

What Is Scope 3?

Scope 3 refers to indirect greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that occur outside an organization’s direct control, but across its value chain. It is one of the three emission scopes defined by the Greenhouse Gas Protocol, a widely used framework for carbon accounting.

What Does Scope 3 Cover?

Upstream Activities (before goods or services reach the company):

  • Purchased goods and services

  • Capital goods

  • Fuel- and energy-related activities not included in Scope 1 or 2

  • Upstream transportation and distribution

  • Waste generated in operations

  • Business travel

  • Employee commuting

  • Upstream leased assets

Downstream Activities (after the company sells its products or services):

  • Downstream transportation and distribution

  • Processing of sold products

  • Use of sold products

  • End-of-life treatment of sold products

  • Downstream leased assets

  • Franchises

  • Investments

How Scope 3 Differs from Scope 1 and 2

  • Scope 1 refers to direct emissions from sources owned or controlled by the company, such as fuel combustion and company vehicles.

  • Scope 2 includes indirect emissions from purchased energy, including electricity, steam, heating, and cooling.

  • Scope 3 covers all other indirect emissions that occur throughout the full value chain.

In many industries, Scope 3 accounts for the largest share of emissions, often exceeding 70% of a company’s total carbon footprint.

Why Scope 3 Matters

  • Scale: Scope 3 often represents the majority of emissions.

  • Transparency: Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) reporting and investor demands increasingly focus on full emissions disclosure.

  • Responsibility: Reducing Scope 3 requires cooperation with suppliers, logistics partners, and even customers. Companies that ignore Scope 3 risk providing an incomplete picture of their climate impact.

Where Is Scope 3 Reporting Mandatory?

Scope 3 reporting is already required in several jurisdictions, and momentum is building globally. It is now mandatory in the EU, California, and is being introduced in Australia. Other countries encourage or require it under specific conditions, particularly when emissions are deemed material. The table below summarizes the current regulatory landscape:

Region

Is Scope 3 Mandatory?

Notes

EU

Yes

Required under CSRD for large companies beginning in 2024 (public) and 2025 (others)

UK

Encouraged or based on materiality

Scope 1 and 2 are mandatory; Scope 3 required if material and must be disclosed under SECR for listed companies

Canada

Not yet (delayed)

Reporting paused; federal rules expected by 2028 under Canadian Sustainability Standards Board

Australia

Phased in starting 2025

Reporting begins voluntarily in 2025 for large entities; mandatory Scope 3 expected from 2026 under Treasury reforms

USA (Federal)

No

SEC finalized rules in 2024 that exclude Scope 3; voluntary disclosure still encouraged

USA (California)

Yes

SB 253 and SB 261 require Scope 3 disclosure for public and private companies with over $1 billion in revenue, starting 2026

Others

Encouraged or sector-specific

New Zealand, Japan, and South Korea have voluntary or industry-specific guidance for Scope 3 reporting

What Are the Penalties for Non-Compliance?

Failure to report Scope 3 emissions can lead to financial penalties, operational consequences, and in some countries, even criminal charges. Below is an overview by region:

Region

Financial Penalty

Criminal Penalty

Other Consequences

France

Up to €75,000; €30,000 for audit noncompliance (Code de l’environnement)

Up to 5 years in prison

Penalties for obstructing mandatory disclosures or verification

Germany

Up to €10 million, 5% of annual turnover, or twice the profits gained (LkSG)

None

Applies under the German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act

Italy

€20,000 to €150,000 (Legislative Decree 254/2016)

None

Enforcement varies by regional authority

Ireland

€5,000 plus up to 6 months imprisonment

Up to 6 months

Applies under Companies Act obligations for non-financial reporting

Other EU

Varies (from thousands to millions depending on national law)

Jail possible in some cases

Can include formal warnings, compliance orders, and publication

California

$500,000 per year (SB 253); $50,000 per year (SB 261)

No criminal penalty

Safe harbor until 2030 for Scope 3 if progress is demonstrated

Other US

Up to $50,000 or more, depending on violations and frequency

None

May affect ESG scores, state contracts, or investor trust

Key Takeaways:

  • Fines can range from thousands to several million euros or dollars per year.

  • Criminal penalties apply in certain EU countries.

  • Companies may be barred from tenders or face increased scrutiny from investors.

  • Even in regions with safe harbor periods, companies are expected to show real progress or risk losing those protections.

Conclusion

Scope 3 emissions are no longer a secondary concern. With regulatory frameworks tightening and stakeholder expectations rising, organizations must develop robust strategies to understand and address these indirect emissions. What was once considered optional is now a critical part of credible climate disclosure.

Ignoring Scope 3 may save effort in the short term but can lead to financial and reputational consequences in the long term. Taking action now is not only a matter of compliance but also of maintaining trust and market relevance.


Karin Svensson
Written by:
Karin Svensson
Research Analyst at Net Zero Compare
Karin Svensson, a Research Analyst at Net Zero Compare, excels in evaluating environmental data and identifying practical eco-friendly practices. Her attention to detail ensures clients receive actionable comparisons, simplifying compliance and optimizing operations to enhance both efficiency and brand strength.