FMA Extends Climate Reporting Relief as Reform Waits on New Zealand Election

Key Takeaways

• FMA Extends Relief: The regulator will continue its no-action approach for affected climate reporting entities across the first five 2026/2027 reporting periods.
• Reform Remains Unfinished: Proposed changes would raise the listed issuer threshold from approximately $33.8 million (NZ$60 million) to approximately $564.1 million (NZ$1 billion) and remove investment scheme managers and health and life insurers from the regime.
• Election Leaves Policy Unsettled: The legislation did not pass before the House’s final sitting day ahead of the November election, leaving its future to the incoming Government.
• Relief Has Limits: The FMA’s no-action approach concerns its enforcement intentions. It does not remove the underlying legal obligations or necessarily prevent third-party legal action.
• Reporting Could Resume: If the incoming Government does not support the proposed reforms, the FMA will work with affected entities on a transition back to climate reporting.

Deep Dive

New Zealand’s Financial Markets Authority has given a longer reprieve to climate reporting entities that were supposed to be on their way out of the country’s mandatory disclosure regime but, for now, remain caught inside it.

The FMA is extending its “no action” approach across the first five 2026/2027 reporting periods, covering affected entities with balance dates from March 31, 2027, through January 31, 2028. The relief applies to all requirements under Part 7A of the Financial Markets Conduct Act.

The reason is sitting unfinished in Parliament. The Government had announced plans to raise the climate reporting threshold for listed issuers from approximately $33.8 million (NZ$60 million) in market capitalization to approximately $564.1 million (NZ$1 billion). Investment scheme managers, including their funds, and health and life insurers were also due to be removed from the regime.

Those changes were intended to proceed through the Financial Markets Conduct Amendment Bill. The legislation, however, did not pass before the final sitting day in the House ahead of the November election.

That has left affected firms with an unusually practical problem. The Government announced that their reporting obligations would be removed, but the law has not yet removed them. With a new Government still to be formed after the election, nobody can say with certainty whether it ever will.

“We will not have clear direction on the future of this policy until the new Government forms after the November election,” FMA General Counsel Liam Mason said.

For entities deciding whether to spend money preparing climate statements they may ultimately never have to lodge, the uncertainty carries a cost.

“This means entities do not know whether they will continue to be required to lodge climate statements and may not know for some months,” Mason said. “The ‘no-action’ approach will avoid unnecessary compliance costs and provide some certainty for climate reporting entities in the interim.”

The extension covers reporting periods beginning April 1, July 1 and October 1, 2026, followed by January 1 and February 1, 2027. Their balance dates fall between March 31, 2027, and January 31, 2028, with lodgement deadlines running from July 31, 2027, through May 31, 2028.

There is a line, at least for now. The FMA has not extended the relief to the reporting period beginning April 1, 2027, with a March 31, 2028 balance date and July 31, 2028 lodgement deadline.

The regulator had already granted affected climate reporting entities no-action relief for the 2025/2026 reporting periods, with the final period covered by that decision carrying a December 31, 2026 balance date. The latest announcement pushes the relief further forward rather than allowing it to expire while the fate of the legislation remains unsettled.

There is an important limit to what the FMA has done. A no-action position does not change the law. It is a statement of the regulator’s intention not to take action against a person for breaching the relevant statutory or regulatory obligation. The FMA also makes clear that its position does not necessarily prevent a third party from pursuing legal action over the same conduct.

What comes next depends on the Government formed after the election. If the incoming Government proceeds with the policy, the FMA said it will work with affected climate reporting entities and consider further relief if the timing of the reforms makes that necessary.

If the next Government does not support passage of the bill, those entities face the opposite problem: returning to reporting after a period in which the regulator had said it would not take enforcement action over their failure to meet the requirements.

The FMA said it would work with them on a smooth transition back to reporting. It has also acknowledged that affected entities may not be able to provide comparative information for the previous reporting year.

For now, the regulator can provide enforcement relief. It cannot settle the policy question Parliament left unresolved. The first five 2026/2027 reporting periods are covered. What happens after that will depend on whether the incoming Government proceeds with the proposed changes or leaves the existing climate reporting regime in place.

The GRC Report is your premier destination for the latest in governance, risk, and compliance news. As your reliable source for comprehensive coverage, we ensure you stay informed and ready to navigate the dynamic landscape of GRC. Beyond being a news source, the GRC Report represents a thriving community of professionals who, like you, are dedicated to GRC excellence. Explore our insightful articles and breaking news, and actively participate in the conversation to enhance your GRC journey.