Investing in the Age of AI
EU Taxonomy, Regulatory ComplianceArticles

EU Taxonomy Reporting: Incorrect Use of NACE Codes Can Lead to Greenwashing

Published: October 28, 2022
Modified: April 23, 2025
Key Takeaways

The European Commission warns once again about the risks of solely relying on NACE codes for EU Taxonomy reporting

As organizations classify EU Taxonomy activities there is a natural tendency to overestimate eligibility. If you don’t examine each activity thoroughly, you risk  greenwashing the technical criteria associated with the activity.

The European Commission initially mentions mapping NACE codes with EU Taxonomy activities, however, they recently published a FAQs document to provide additional guidance on how to report on eligible economic activities and assets under the EU Taxonomy Regulation. The document highlights how users can use NACE code “to navigate through the Taxonomy” but warns -once again- that the scope of the activities outlined in the Climate Delegated Act should prevail.

“The NACE codes should only be understood as indicative and should not prevail over the specific definition of the activity provided in its description” – European Commission

Some background on the NACE code

The NACE code is the Statistical Classification of Economic Activities in the European Community, the industry standard used in the EU. Each activity within the EU Taxonomy will tell you the NACE code that the activity can be associated with. One thing to keep in mind is that the EU Taxonomy and the NACE code were created based on different motivations and drivers so although it is helpful to relate associated activities and even use them as a proxy when appropriate we must remember that they are not a perfect match. 

Clarity AI increases accuracy with best-in-class treatment of NACE codes

Clarity AI goes beyond the surface to not just assume direct match between the business activity and NACE code. In fact, we use the exact description in the technical annex. Looked at in detail, there are very specific definitions associated with each activity.

Let’s take “Data processing, hosting and related activities” as an example. According to the technical annex, this category could be associated with “NACE code J63.11”. Viewing the activity on its own you may assume it’s an eligible activity but if you dig into the details of the technical annex it focuses on one specific area and not the total activities listed under the NACE code.

Learn more about incorrect uses of the NACE codes through relevant case studies.

Access Case Studies

Research and Insights

Latest news and articles

ESG Impact

Are We Investing for the World We Have, or the One We Wish We Had?

Alex Rayón breaks down the hidden economic, social, and data risks of AI, explaining how unseen costs in today’s models could reshape investor decisions.

Climate, ESG Risk

The Water Cost of the Energy Transition: Where Corporate Disclosure Falls Short

Water risks are emerging as a major constraint on low-carbon technologies. Explore global disclosure gaps and what they mean for investors in our latest report.

Regulatory Compliance

Beyond the Rewrite: Implications of the SFDR 2.0 Proposal for Investors

As SFDR 2.0 takes shape, financial market participants face important decisions that go beyond interpreting updated definitions. This 45-minute session will focus on helping teams understand what truly matters for implementation, product strategy, and the sustainability data they need today and throughout the transition to the new SFDR. Join us on Wednesday, 3 December to…