What the CPC Network's Common Understanding and the European Commission's Updated Q&A mean for old stock under the EmpCo Directive

When the EmpCo Directive (Directive (EU) 2024/825) becomes applicable on 27 September 2026, traders must ensure that environmental claims and sustainability labels in a business-to-consumer context comply with the new rules. The Directive does not directly regulate the placing of products on the market but focuses on how products are presented to consumers, such as through marketing.

This raises a practical question for businesses sitting on inventory: what happens to "old stock" – products or packaging bearing environmental claims or sustainability labels that were manufactured, ordered, distributed or shelved before 27 September 2026?

Guidance by the CPC-Network and the European Commission

Recently, the network of EU consumer enforcement authorities (CPC Network) and the European Commission (EC) have provided further guidance on this issue. The CPC Network published its Common Understanding on old stock situations. In parallel, the EC updated its EmpCo Q&A, sharpening its view on existing products.

The update matters because it provides further insight on the potential enforcement approach of the EmpCo obligations following its hard deadline on 27 September 2026. The earlier EC Q&A confirmed that traders "will need to ensure that their environmental claims and sustainability labels in a business-to-consumer context comply with the new provisions, including for existing products". The updated EC Q&A goes further and:

• expressly introduces the term "old stock" and defines it as "products or packaging already manufactured, ordered, distributed or placed on retailers' shelves before the application date";
• cross-refers to the CPC Common Understanding, noting that the CPC Network has "developed a Common Understanding concerning such 'old stock' situations" to support a coherent approach.

A key takeaway for businesses: Whereas the EC has not created a grace period after 27 September 2026, it has acknowledged the old stock problem and explicitly referenced the CPC's enforcement approach. This creates potential relief of immediate enforcement pressure, even if not of the underlying legal obligation.

What the CPC Common Understanding is – and what it is not

The Common Understanding sets out a set of principles intended to provide a pragmatic approach to old stock situations, which national authorities are expected to consider when exercising their enforcement powers. However, it remains within the power of national authorities to assess and take action in a specific case.

The core message: Enforcement may be phased but not stayed

The first principle of the Common Understanding highlights that old stock situations "do not exempt traders from complying with the new ECGT rules". Traders "must act without delay to bring their B2C practices into compliance also with the ECGT rules by 27 September 2026".

The CPC rather suggests a phased enforcement approach where old stock gives rise to genuine and specific transitional difficulties in the early stages of application. During this period, authorities may prioritise, among other things:

• online claims, as they do not face the same challenges as offline claims;
• practices that are most harmful to consumers;
• non-packaging claims and marketing materials;
• products with shorter shelf-life or faster stock rotation.

Authorities may also weigh the trader's role, size, resources, economic capacity and good-faith efforts to comply, as well as objective practical constraints such as packaging cycles, stock volumes, prior production or purchase orders, supply-chain dependencies, the long shelf-life of a product, and the technical feasibility and proportionality of corrective measures.

What businesses are expected to do

The Common Understanding sets a clear expectation of "all reasonable and proportionate efforts to achieve full compliance" by 27 September 2026. Depending on the case, these may include removing or correcting online claims, updating advertising, adapting future packaging and new orders, using stickers or removing labelling, displaying corrective information at the point of sale, and coordinating with suppliers. 

Businesses should document these good faith efforts contemporaneously. Maintaining a clear record of compliance efforts and a documented timeline of internal decisions provides businesses with robust evidence should their conduct later be scrutinized by enforcement authorities or in private court proceedings.

Destruction or recall?

As a welcome signal for both businesses and the environment, the Common Understanding highlights that authorities may refrain from requiring the destruction or recall of old stock in genuine transitional cases. More broadly, a measure may be considered unreasonable and disproportionate if it would create disproportionate costs or unnecessary environmental harm.

The Common Understanding also endorses a "compliance-oriented before a sanction-oriented approach" in justified old stock situations, especially in the early stages – including awareness-raising, guidance, requests for information, and requests for corrective action with a reasonable timeline.

Practical takeaways for businesses

• The compliance requirement remains. Neither the CPC understanding nor the EC’s updated Q&A removes the obligation to comply by 27 September 2026.
• Do not forget online and marketing claims. These are singled out as areas where transitional leniency is less likely to apply.
• Destruction/recall not as first choice for genuine transitional issues. Businesses could potentially point to the CPC principles to resist disproportionate demands.
• Watch the enforcement discretion. The CPC principles are guidance and may be considered by public enforcement on a case-by-case basis. There is no automatic exemption, and priorities may vary between national authorities.
• Remember that courts are not bound by the guidance. The Common Understanding and the EC’s Q&A could guide the enforcement authorities, but they do not bind national courts. Courts may take a stricter view on old stock, particularly in private enforcement, where the transitional leniency reflected in the Common Understanding may not apply.