EmpCo goes live: What businesses need to know as the new rules take effect

As of 27 September 2026, the rules introduced by Directive (EU) 2024/825 on empowering consumers for the green transition (EmpCo Directive) are applicable across the European Union following a two-and-a-half-year implementation period. The EmpCo Directive amended the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (UCPD) and introduced a range of new restrictions relating to environmental claims, climate-related claims, sustainability labels and future environmental performance claims. The EmpCo Directive therefore marks an important milestone in the EU’s regulation of environmental and sustainability-related marketing. It does not regulate the intrinsic characteristics of goods or services but only how they are presented to consumers in a business-to-consumer context, and it is a maximum harmonisation instrument, meaning that Member States generally cannot maintain or introduce divergent rules in the areas harmonised by the Directive, except where EU law expressly allows them to do so.For many businesses, the past two years have been characterised by extensive compliance exercises, including reviews of product packaging, websites, sustainability reports, advertising materials and internal approval processes. As of today, however, the key question is no longer what the new rules require, but how they will be enforced in practice.

Although Member States were required to transpose the EmpCo Directive by 27 March 2026 and the new rules apply from 27 September 2026, the implementation landscape across Europe remains uneven. While a number of Member States have completed transposition, not all Member States had communicated complete transposition measures to the European Commission by the expiry of the transposition deadline. In May 2026, the European Commission therefore launched infringement proceedings against 20 Member States for failing to communicate the complete transposition of the EmpCo Directive.

Key requirements under the EmpCo Directive

Businesses operating in the EU must comply with a number of new requirements relating to environmental marketing and sustainability-related communications. These include, among others, a ban on:

• generic environmental claims such as "green", "environmentally friendly" or "sustainable", unless the trader is able to demonstrate recognised excellent environmental performance relevant to the claim;
• claims about future environmental performance, unless supported by clear, objective, publicly available and verifiable commitments and targets set out in a detailed implementation plan – including measurable, time-bound targets and allocated resources – that is regularly verified by an independent third-party expert whose findings are made available to consumer;
• product-level climate-neutrality, carbon-neutrality and similar claims that are based on greenhouse gas offsetting schemes; 
• sustainability labels, unless where they are established by public authorities or are based on certification schemes meeting specified requirements;
• environmental claims presenting the entire product or the trader's entire business as environmentally beneficial where only one aspect of the product or one activity of the business is concerned; and 
• claims presenting requirements imposed by law on all products in the relevant category as a distinctive feature of the trader's offer.

The EmpCo Directive also extends to circularity and digital products – prohibiting, for example, presenting a good as repairable when it is not, inducing consumers to replace consumables earlier than technically necessary, or presenting an update as necessary when it only enhances functionality, and requiring traders to disclose the minimum software-update period. Comparative claims are caught as well: where a trader provides a service comparing products on environmental or social characteristics or on circularity aspects, the method of comparison, the products and suppliers compared and the measures in place to keep that information up to date all qualify as material information.

Old stock remains one of the most challenging practical questions

One of the most debated issues during the implementation process has been how businesses should deal with products that were placed on the market before the new rules became applicable. The Commission's September 2026 Q&A is explicit that the Directive provides no transition period: from 27 September 2026 the rules apply to products already manufactured, ordered, distributed or sitting on retailers' shelves. What the Commission offers is practical remediation rather than legal relief, such as covering or correcting claims by stickers, or adding supplementary information at the point of sale in proximity to the products concerned. However, when deciding on enforcement measures, national authorities and courts may take into account the gravity of the infringement and the specific circumstances of the case. This may include whether the trader has made reasonable and proportionate efforts to comply, including in relation to products already in the distribution chain, and whether the measures required to ensure compliance would entail disproportionate costs or unnecessary environmental harm. Relevant considerations may also include proportionality, legal certainty and legitimate expectations. Enforcement authorities may nonetheless take account of specific transitional difficulties, and the national authorities in the CPC Network have developed a Common Understanding on old stock situations.

Under Austria's implementation, certain civil law claims relating to goods placed on the market on or before 27 September 2026 may be excluded for a period of three years, effectively creating a limited grace period for existing stock.

Shortly before the application date, the German legislature adopted a new Section 15b of the German Act Against Unfair Competition (UWG). The provision applies to certain EmpCo-related claims concerning products placed on the market before 27 September 2026 and requires courts to consider principles of good faith and proportionality when assessing injunction claims. In practice, this means that plaintiffs may face a higher hurdle when seeking immediate injunctive relief against non-compliant claims appearing on older products. Courts must take into account factors such as the seriousness of the infringement, the company's efforts to remedy the issue, the costs of corrective measures and the environmental impact associated with removing or reworking existing stock. 

The Dutch implementing act contains no comparable provision, but companies may still invoke proportionality arguments in civil and/or regulatory proceedings. Importantly, this does not create a safe harbour and does not make non-compliant claims lawful. Rather, it reflects a growing recognition that immediate corrective measures may, in some circumstances, themselves have undesirable environmental consequences, particularly where products or packaging would otherwise have to be destroyed.

Where is enforcement likely to focus first?

Although the first enforcement trends remain to be seen, certain areas appear more likely than others to attract regulatory and private enforcement attention.

One area that is likely to attract particular attention is environmental and sustainability-related information communicated through websites and other digital channels. Unlike product packaging or other forms of physical old stock, digital content can generally be amended quickly and at comparatively low cost. As a result, businesses may face greater difficulties in relying on proportionality or transitional arguments in relation to online claims.

This may include environmental claims appearing on product webpages, dedicated sustainability pages, ESG sections, marketing materials, digital brochures and other consumer-facing communications. Businesses should therefore prioritise a review of publicly accessible online content to ensure that existing claims comply with the new requirements.

Generic claims such as "sustainable", "environmentally friendly", "green" or similar broad environmental statements continue to attract particular scrutiny. Such claims are often prominently displayed and can be identified without extensive factual investigation, making them attractive enforcement targets.

Future environmental performance claims may also attract early enforcement attention. Where businesses prominently communicate future environmental ambitions but cannot demonstrate the existence of an implementation plan, such claims may present relatively straightforward enforcement targets for regulators, competitors and consumer organisations.

More generally, initial enforcement activity may focus on issues that can be identified quickly and objectively. Claims that are prominently displayed, broadly worded, or unsupported by readily available evidence may be easier targets than more complex disputes involving detailed scientific assessments or lifecycle analyses.

An additional question concerns historical content that remains available online. The EmpCo rules are generally not intended to apply retrospectively to communications made before the application date. Accordingly, historical reports, press releases or archived website content that are clearly identified as such, remain accessible for documentation purposes only and are not actively reused should generally present a lower risk. The position may be different, however, where older environmental claims are republished, referenced in current marketing materials, presented without a clear indication of their historical nature or otherwise appear to consumers as current claims. In such cases, businesses should carefully assess whether the continued use of such content may trigger the application of the new rules.

The consequences are not limited to being required to stop. In various Member States, such the Netherlands, a breach of the new rules can be sanctioned by the regulator with administrative fines calculated by reference to turnover and civil consequences may run in parallel – so withdrawing a non-compliant claim is not necessarily the end of the matter.

Looking ahead

The next twelve months are likely to provide the first meaningful insights into how regulators, consumer authorities, competitors and courts will apply the new rules in practice. In particular, it will be interesting to observe whether national approaches begin to diverge, especially in areas such as old stock, remedial measures and enforcement priorities. Austria and Germany have already legislated transitional softening where the Netherlands has not, so the same sticker-or-rework decision may carry a different litigation risk depending on where the product is sold. Further guidance is also expected, the Commission having been asked to issue guidelines on the new provisions, including the prohibition on generic environmental claims.

If you would like to discuss the implications of the new rules for your business or require support in reviewing environmental claims, sustainability labels, climate-related communications or broader ESG messaging, please do not hesitate to contact our team.

To receive the latest ESG developments globally, subscribe to the Freshfields Sustainability Blog.