Sustainability Initiatives
View this service
EU Greenwashing Crackdown: What EmpCo and Green Claims Mean for Environmental Marketing
The European Union is significantly tightening its rules on greenwashing through two complementary pieces of legislation: the Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition Directive (EmpCo) and the Green Claims Directive.
While both aim to improve transparency and prevent misleading environmental marketing, they serve different purposes.
The Green Claims Directive focuses on substantiation. Before making an environmental claim, companies must be able to support it with robust scientific evidence, using recognised methodologies and, in many cases, independent third-party verification. In short, it governs how businesses prove their claims.
EmpCo, by contrast, focuses on consumer-facing communication. It applies to business-to-consumer (B2C) marketing and strengthens protections against misleading commercial practices. Under EmpCo, companies will no longer be able to rely on vague or unsubstantiated terms such as “eco-friendly,” “green,” or “climate neutral” without clear evidence and precise explanations.
One of the pillars of EmpCo is that claims must be verifiable. This creates a direct link to the Green Claims Directive’s substantiation requirements: claims must not only be accurate in a consumer protection sense (EmpCo), but also scientifically robust and independently verified where appropriate (Green Claims). Companies cannot satisfy one directive without addressing the other.
The directive also targets claims that may technically be true but are inherently misleading. Examples include terms like “gluten-free water” or “plastic-free paper,” which imply a meaningful product benefit where none realistically exists.
EmpCo was formally adopted in 2024, and Member States must transpose it into national law by March 2026. Enforcement will begin across the European Union from September 2026 less than five months away. Companies marketing products in the EU should be reviewing their environmental claims and substantiation documentation now, not waiting for national enforcement guidance.
Regulators around the world are no longer treating greenwashing as a theoretical risk. Enforcement is accelerating, and the penalties are becoming increasingly significant. These measures reflect a broader international trend. Regulators in Canada, Australia, and the United Kingdom have also increased scrutiny of environmental marketing, with several high-profile investigations and enforcement actions already underway.
Recent enforcement examples include:
Australia: The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) fined Clorox Australia A$8.25 million in 2025 after marketing GLAD bags as containing “50% recycled ocean plastic” when the materials did not meet that description. The ACCC has also commenced proceedings against Edgewell (maker of Banana Boat and Hawaiian Tropic) over allegedly misleading “reef-friendly” sunscreen claims.
United Kingdom: The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) investigated major fashion retailers including ASOS, Boohoo, and George at Asda for potentially misleading sustainability claims. These companies ultimately agreed to change their marketing practices and provide clearer information to consumers. The UK’s Advertising Standards Authority has also repeatedly banned advertisements making unsubstantiated environmental claims, including “carbon neutral” and “sustainable” messaging.
Canada: Amendments to the Competition Act, which took effect in June 2024, now explicitly require environmental claims to be supported by adequate testing or internationally recognized methodologies. The Competition Bureau has highlighted previous enforcement actions against companies such as Keurig and Volkswagen, and private litigation risks are expected to increase substantially.
These cases demonstrate common enforcement patterns: regulators are targeting vague claims (“eco-friendly,” “sustainable”), unverifiable statements (“ocean plastic” without traceability), and technically accurate but misleading language (“reef-friendly” without scientific basis). Importantly, companies settled or were penalized even when claims were not intentionally fraudulent the standard is substantiation, not intent.”
These international developments provide a clear preview of what companies can expect under the EU’s EmpCo and Green Claims framework. Businesses will face:
For companies marketing in the EU, the compliance pathway is clear:
The window for voluntary compliance is closing. Companies that wait for national enforcement guidance risk being first-wave enforcement targets. Those that proactively audit and verify their claims now position themselves ahead of regulatory scrutiny.
Normec Verifavia provides independent verification services for environmental claims related to carbon neutrality, product carbon footprints, recycled content verification, and lifecycle assessments. Our verification approach aligns with the substantiation requirements emerging under the Green Claims Directive and supports defensible environmental marketing under EmpCo.
We support greenwashing risk assessments including environmental claims audits, substantiation gap analysis, and third-party verification for product-level and organizational-level environmental statements. Contact our team to discuss how independent verification can strengthen your environmental marketing compliance ahead of September 2026 enforcement.
