EmpCo 2026: How the New Greenwashing Rules Redefine “Green”

For years, we have seen how marketing is using sustainability language in a way that is not so straightforward. For example, a leaf on the packaging, the word “eco” in a product name, and a “carbon neutral” badge backed by offsets bought on the other side of the world. All of it was open to challenge but never really treated as a clear legal breach. As of 27 September 2026, that grey zone has narrowed considerably.

The EU’s Directive on Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition—Directive (EU) 2024/825, widely known as EmpCo, now applies across the European Union. It amends two long-standing consumer laws, the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive and the Consumer Rights Directive, and it turns several common forms of greenwashing into practices that are prohibited outright.

In our previous article on the shift from ESG to “resilience”, we noted that greenwashing has been evolving away from bold overstatement and towards vaguer, harder-to-check language. EmpCo is the EU’s direct response to that trend, and, as vague as it is, it is now unsafe.

Why the EU acted

The directive used clear evidence at its base. A European Commission study found that more than half of the environmental claims it examined were vague, misleading or unfounded, and around 40% had no supporting evidence at all. When consumers cannot tell a credible claim from a decorative one, the companies doing genuine work lose their advantage, and trust in sustainability communication as a whole erodes.

EmpCo’s aim is simple to state: environmental claims made to consumers must be clear, specific and verifiable.

What EmpCo now prohibits

The directive adds twelve new practices to the EU’s “blacklist” of commercial practices that are considered unfair in all circumstances. For these, a regulator or competitor does not need to prove that consumers were actually misled; the practice itself is the breach. The most significant for sustainability communication are:

• Generic environmental claims. Terms such as “eco-friendly”, “green” or “biobased” are banned unless the company can demonstrate recognised excellent environmental performance. For example through the EU Ecolabel or an officially recognised EN ISO 14024 ecolabel. A claim can still be used if it is made specific on the same medium: “packaging made from 80% recycled content” is acceptable where “climate-friendly packaging” is not, provided the specific figure is accurate and evidenced.
• Offset-based neutrality claims. Claiming that a product is “climate neutral”, “CO₂ neutral” or has a reduced or positive climate impact because the company has bought carbon offsets outside the product’s value chain is prohibited. Such claims are only permitted when based on the product’s actual life-cycle impact.
• Self-made sustainability labels. Labels must be based on a certification scheme with independent third-party monitoring or established by a public authority. In-house “eco” marks are no longer allowed — and a design that simply looks like a label, such as a framed green leaf, can be treated as one.
• Partial claims. Presenting a claim as if it applies to a whole product or business when it only covers one aspect — for example, promoting a product as “made with recycled material” when only the packaging qualifies — is banned.

It is worth being precise about one distinction: EmpCo does not stop companies from talking about climate action. A contribution statement such as “we invest in verified climate projects” is fundamentally different from “this product is climate neutral”, and the former remains permissible.

Net zero pledges now need a plan behind them

EmpCo also addresses forward-looking claims. Statements about future environmental performance, including net zero or climate-neutrality targets may be considered misleading unless they are backed by a detailed and realistic implementation plan with measurable, time-bound targets. That plan should be verified by an independent third-party expert, with the findings made available to consumers. The Commission’s guidance suggests reviewing it annually or every two years as good practice.

For many companies, this is where marketing and sustainability reporting meet. A 2040 net zero target announced in a campaign now needs the same underlying evidence that a transition plan in a sustainability report would.

A broader definition of “claim” than most teams expect

One of the most practical points in the Commission’s updated Q&A guidance is how widely it reads the term “environmental claim”. It is not limited to written statements. According to the guidance, a claim can include:

• Imagery and colour — pictures of trees, rainforests, water or animals, and green or blue backgrounds, depending on the context.
• Brand, product and company names — names containing terms like “eco”, “green” or “natural” can count as claims in themselves.
• Social claims — statements about working conditions, human rights or ethical engagement are now covered by the same framework, which means “social washing” carries the same risk as greenwashing.

This matters because many of the riskiest claims were never approved as “claims” in the first place. They sit in a logo, a colour palette or a product name that was chosen years ago.

Who is affected by EmpCo

EmpCo applies to business-to-consumer communication: advertising, packaging, labelling, websites, social media and point-of-sale information directed at consumers in the EU. It applies to companies of all sizes, including those outside the EU that sell to EU consumers.

This is an important contrast with the CSRD. Following the Omnibus simplification, most small and mid-sized companies are no longer required to produce a CSRD sustainability report. EmpCo has no such threshold. A small company with a single “eco” product line is fully in scope.

Two further scope points are worth noting:

• Sustainability reports are generally outside EmpCo, but reused content is inside. Investor-facing reports and business-to-business communications typically fall outside the directive. However, the Commission’s guidance confirms that when a company reuses material from its sustainability report in consumer advertising, product pages or social media, that content may be caught.
• Financial products are included. Consumer-facing claims about green loans, green mortgages or ESG-labelled retail funds fall within the scope of the amended consumer rules.

EmpCo across Europe: one directive, many national versions

Because EmpCo is a directive and not a regulation, each Member State had to write it into national law, with a deadline of 27 March 2026. Progress has been uneven. On 28 May 2026, the European Commission sent formal notices to 20 Member States that had not completed transposition on time: Belgium, Bulgaria, Czechia, Estonia, Greece, Spain, France, Croatia, Cyprus, Latvia, Luxembourg, Hungary, Malta, the Netherlands, Austria, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Finland and Sweden. As of late August, some countries had still not finished the process.

A few examples show how the picture varies:

• Germany was among the first to act, amending its Act Against Unfair Competition (UWG), with the implementing law promulgated in February 2026.
• Italy has transposed the directive through its Consumer Code.
• France was still finalising its transposition bill as of June 2026 and French law already extends parts of the unfair commercial practices rules to business-to-business communication.
• Greece received a formal notice in May but has since caught up. Law 5317/2026, published in the Government Gazette on 10 July 2026, incorporates the directive through Articles 79 to 90, which amend the country’s consumer protection law, Law 2251/1994.

Enforcement also differs from country to country. Some Member States rely mainly on public consumer authorities, while others, such as Germany and Austria, have strong private enforcement, where competitors can obtain court injunctions against a claim within days. Member States may also set penalties above the EU minimum.

For companies selling in more than one European market, the practical conclusion is to set a single group-wide standard for environmental claims that meets the strictest market, and then check national rules country by country rather than relying on the EU text alone.

No grace period but a realistic path for existing stock

There is no transition period. From 27 September, the rules apply to all consumer-facing claims, including those on products and materials already on the market. The Commission’s guidance accepts practical remedies for existing stock, such as covering or correcting non-compliant claims with stickers, or adding information at the point of sale. National consumer authorities have also indicated that they expect prompt, good-faith steps towards compliance, while leaving room for a phased approach where companies face genuine difficulties with packaging cycles or stock already in circulation.

The penalties are significant. Under EU consumer law, Member States must allow for maximum fines of at least 4% of a company’s annual turnover in the countries concerned, or at least €2 million where turnover information is not available. Competitors and consumer organisations can also bring challenges, and in some Member States can obtain injunctions within days.

How to prepare for EmpCo: six steps for companies

The practical priorities are consistent across legal and advisory guidance:

1. Audit every consumer-facing claim. Review websites, packaging, advertising, social media, product and brand names, and imagery. Pay particular attention to older content, which often carries more exposure than new campaigns.
2. Sort claims by type. Identify which are generic, partial, offset-based or forward-looking — each category has different rules.
3. Substantiate, specify or withdraw. Claims that can be supported should be made specific and backed by evidence. Claims that cannot be qualified or removed.
4. Review labels and certifications. Confirm that each label rests on an independent certification scheme or a public authority, and retire self-declared marks.
5. Connect net zero messaging to a verified plan. Any public target used in marketing needs a detailed implementation plan and independent verification behind it.
6. Update sign-off processes and train teams. Marketing, product, packaging and compliance teams need a shared understanding of the new rules, and environmental claims — including visuals and naming — should be reviewed before launch.

The practical takeaway

EmpCo does not ask companies to stop talking about sustainability. It asks them to be precise. The organisations best placed under the new rules are those that already treat environmental claims the way they treat financial figures: specific, evidenced and reviewable.

That is ultimately a capability question as much as a legal one. Marketing and communications teams now need a working knowledge of what makes a claim credible, and sustainability teams need to be part of the approval process rather than consulted after the fact. Building that shared understanding across functions is where EcoSkills Academy’s CPD-certified sustainability and ESG courses can help teams move from uncertainty to confident, compliant communication.