[jgraham]

Technically the difference between "net zero" and "carbon neutral" is supposed to be that "net zero" first eliminates all but "residual" emissions, and only then depends on offsets, whereas "carbon neutral" is more like what you describe (no required emissions cuts; possible to just buy — often dubious — offsets).

Science Based Targets Initiative for example requires companies signing up to their scheme to have credible plans to cut emissions by ~50% by 2030 and 90% by 2050 to claim that they're aiming for "net zero" [1] (SBTI itself was recently in the news because employees felt that recent policy changes leaned too heavily on offsetting; I don't really know what the current situation there is).

In practice usage of these terms my not be well regulated, so it's always worth checking out exactly whose definitions are being used.

[1] sciencebasedtargets.org/blog/net-zero-jargon-buster-a-guide-to-common-terms