California SB 253/261: Who's Actually in Scope and By When

California's two climate disclosure laws are frequently talked about as one thing. They're not — they have different thresholds, different disclosure content, and, as of mid-2026, very different legal footing.

SB 253 (Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act)

• Who's in scope: U.S. companies with more than $1 billion in total annual global revenue that do business in California (the "doing business in California" test draws on existing state tax law definitions).
• What's required: Scope 1, 2, and 3 GHG emissions, calculated per the GHG Protocol.
• Timeline: Scope 1 and 2 data — first reporting deadline August 10, 2026 (pushed back from an original June 30, 2026 date). Scope 3 data — reporting begins in 2027, covering fiscal year 2026 activity, with third-party assurance requirements phasing in over subsequent years.
• Enforcement: CARB (the California Air Resources Board) has said it will exercise enforcement discretion for good-faith first-year submissions — meaning companies that were already collecting emissions data and make a genuine effort shouldn't expect penalties for imperfect first reports. Penalties for non-filing can otherwise reach up to $500,000 per year.
• Legal status: SB 253 is not currently paused by litigation and companies should plan to comply on the stated timeline.

SB 261 (Climate-Related Financial Risk Act)

• Who's in scope: U.S. companies with more than $500 million in total annual global revenue doing business in California.
• What's required: A biennial report on climate-related financial risk, aligned with TCFD or an equivalent framework (like ISSB's IFRS S2), covering governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics/targets.
• Timeline: Originally due January 1, 2026 — but this is where things get complicated.
• Legal status: In November 2025, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals granted an injunction pausing enforcement of SB 261 specifically (not SB 253) while a First Amendment challenge from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other business groups proceeds. Oral arguments were heard January 9, 2026. As of our most recent research, no ruling on the merits had been issued. This means SB 261's deadline is currently unenforceable, but could be reinstated with limited notice if the court sides with California.

What this means practically, if you're in scope

For SB 253: treat the August 2026 date as real and moving forward. If you weren't already collecting emissions data before CARB's relevant enforcement notice, you may be able to file a non-collection statement for this cycle — but that's a stopgap, not a long-term strategy, since full inventories with assurance are expected from 2027 onward.

For SB 261: don't use the litigation pause as a reason to stop preparing. Companies that keep building — mapping existing TCFD, ISSB, or CSRD disclosures against SB 261's four pillars — will avoid a compliance sprint if the injunction is lifted. Given the appeals court's own language when it granted the pause, several legal analysts read the panel as more skeptical of SB 261's narrative-style disclosures specifically than of SB 253's data-driven requirements, but that's a read of oral argument, not a decision.

The part people miss: the revenue thresholds catch companies nationally

Neither law requires your company to be headquartered in California — just to do business there and clear the revenue bar. A retailer or manufacturer based in Texas or Ohio with meaningful California sales can be squarely in scope. If you haven't checked your California nexus against these thresholds, that's the first step, not the emissions calculation.

Given the litigation is still moving, check CARB's official guidance for the latest before treating any date in this post as final.