New Anti-Greenwashing Rules from 27 September: Be Careful with General Environmental Claims
Tags
Consumer
Legal
Sustainability
Risk & regulation +4
On 7 July 2026, the Austrian National Council passed an amendment to the Austrian Unfair Competition Act by majority vote. The amendment implements the Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition Directive (EmpCo Directive, 2024/825), which aims to further combat greenwashing. Environmental claims and claims relating to social impacts will in future need to be clearly substantiated. The Directive will apply across the EU from 27 September 2026.
The EmpCo consumer rights directive makes sustainability communication stricter, but also fairer: consumers will gain a clearer understanding of the actual environmental and social benefits behind sustainability claims, while demonstrable sustainability performance will become a competitive advantage for companies. The objective of the Directive is to help consumers make informed purchasing decisions and facilitate the comparison of corporate environmental claims.
What does the EmpCo Directive cover?
Greenwashing and Bluewashing
The Directive covers claims relating to the environmental and social impacts of a company and/or a product.
B2C Communication
The EmpCo Directive primarily concerns sustainability-related communication directed at consumers. This includes not only product labelling, but any form of advertising or public communication capable of influencing consumers’ perceptions of the environmental or social characteristics of a product or of the company itself, and therefore potentially affecting purchasing decisions.
As a result, website content, social media content, posters, statements made to the press and similar communications may also fall within its scope.
Where does greenwashing begin?
According to the Directive, greenwashing arises where environmental and/or social claims are overly ambitious, exaggerated or too vague.
Where should companies exercise caution in their sustainability communications? Some examples
General Environmental Claims
Terms such as**"environmentally friendly", "green", "ecological", "sustainable", "climate-friendly"** or**"energy-efficient"** are considered general environmental claims. In future, they will only be permissible where they are supported by recognised, outstanding environmental performance (e.g. the Austrian Ecolabel) and where the claim is clearly and prominently specified within the same medium in which the general claim appears.
Importantly, even established labels must satisfy the relevance criterion: only a label that is actually relevant as evidence for the environmental claim in question may be used.
| Not Permitted | Permitted |
| A claim such as “climate-friendly packaging” without further information. | The statement “100% of the energy used to produce this packaging comes from renewable sources” is considered a specific environmental claim and is therefore permissible. |
| Use of the EU Ecolabel as evidence for the claim “biodegradable” (where the label does not contain biodegradability criteria). | Use of the EU Energy Efficiency Label as evidence for the claim “energy-efficient”. |
General environmental claims are defined in the UWG amendment as:
“an environmental claim made in writing or orally, including via audiovisual media, that is not contained in a sustainability label and for which the specification of the claim is not clearly and prominently provided within the same medium.”
Such general environmental claims are generally prohibited under the EmpCo framework.
Where existing brand or product names contain terms such as “eco” or “green”, the European Commission FAQ states that an assessment must be carried out on a case-by-case basis to determine whether such names could be interpreted as environmental or social claims.
Climate Neutrality Through Offsetting
Terms such as**“climate-neutral”, “carbon-neutral”, “climate-friendly”** and similar expressions will in future be prohibited where climate neutrality is achieved solely through carbon offsetting, i.e. by financing carbon compensation projects outside the company’s own value chain.
Support for climate protection projects remains fully permissible. However, these offsetting measures may no longer be used to portray a product’s environmental footprint as lower than it actually is.
| Not Permitted | Permitted |
| “This product is climate-neutral” (where the product does not genuinely cause zero greenhouse gas emissions throughout its entire life cycle and/or where no further specification is provided). | “The carbon footprint of this product has been calculated. We support a Gold Standard climate protection project to compensate for the emissions associated with this product.” (A link to further information could subsequently be provided.) |
Self-Created Sustainability Labels
In future, only established labels based on independent or officially recognised certification schemes will be permitted. Self-created graphics that resemble official environmental labels will be regarded as misleading and will no longer be allowed.
Recognised and established labels such as the EU Ecolabel, the Austrian Ecolabel, and independent certifications such as FSC, PEFC, Fairtrade, Blue Angel and similar schemes remain permissible.
Claims that Present Environmental Performance More Favourably Than It Is
Both exaggeration of environmental performance and the omission of relevant information may in future be classified as unfair commercial practices.
| Not Permitted | Permitted |
| Generalised claims that only apply to a specific aspect of the product (e.g. “fairly produced” where only one ingredient carries Fairtrade certification, or “made from recycled materials” where only the packaging is recycled). | “The following ingredients are Fairtrade-certified:”, followed by a list or identification of the relevant ingredients. |
| Advertising irrelevant characteristics or legally required minimum standards (e.g. “gluten-free water” or “CFC-free”). | “This bakery product is gluten-free.” |
| Misleading claims regarding durability or reparability (e.g. where a product is theoretically repairable but spare parts are not available). | |
| Failure to disclose material limitations or conditions relating to an environmental or social claim. |
Recommended reading: GS1 Germany has published comprehensive implementation guidance for complying with the EmpCo requirements, developed with the involvement of several retail companies. The guidance can be accessed here: https://www.gs1-germany.de/fileadmin/gs1/fachpublikationen/GS1_Germany_EmpCo_AWE_V1.1_D.pdf
What does the EmpCo Directive mean for retailers?
In its FAQ, the European Commission clarifies (on page 17) that the Directive will apply from 27 September 2026 and that retailers must ensure from that date onwards that environmental claims and sustainability labels used in communications directed at consumers comply with the new requirements.
This principle also applies to existing inventory. However, the Austrian UWG amendment provides for a three-year transitional period for products that were placed on the market before 27 September 2026.
The European Commission nevertheless recommends that where retailers identify claims that are not compliant with the new requirements, they should restore compliance through practical measures such as covering claims with stickers or providing supplementary information at the point of sale.
Responsibility for enforcing the EmpCo requirements lies with national authorities. It can be expected that enforcement actions will be prioritised according to the severity of infringements and the principle of proportionality, taking into account whether retailers have made reasonable efforts to ensure compliance.
Have you got specific questions or are you unsure how to adapt your existing communications? We would be pleased to support you.
Want to know more?
Do you have questions about sustainability reporting, ESG strategies, or regulatory requirements?
Our Sustainability team is happy to support you. Contact us for a no-obligation discussion!