Greenwashing: what is allowed from 27 September 2026
From 27 September 2026 stricter rules on sustainability claims apply across the European Union. Directive (EU) 2024/825, the EmpCo Directive, adds twelve commercial practices to the blacklist. From that date those practices are misleading in all circumstances, without a supervisory authority having to show that the consumer suffered any harm. There is no transitional period. Anyone whose packaging or website carries the words “environmentally friendly”, “green” or “climate neutral” must review that wording.
The short answer
In the Netherlands, greenwashing is assessed through the rules on unfair commercial practices in Book 6 of the Dutch Civil Code (Burgerlijk Wetboek). A claim is tested along three tracks. If it appears on the blacklist, it is always prohibited. If it does not, the test is whether there is a misleading action or a misleading omission. If neither applies, the open standard of professional diligence remains.
What is new is that from 27 September 2026 the blacklist disposes of many greenwashing cases in a single step; the debate about the average consumer then no longer arises. The essence: a claim is permitted only if you can substantiate it, and a number of claims are no longer permitted at all. The Netherlands Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM) supervises compliance.
The statutory structure in Book 6 of the Civil Code
The regime is set out in articles 6:193a to 6:193j of the Dutch Civil Code and is built up in stages:
- Article 6:193b contains the open standard: a commercial practice is unfair if it is contrary to professional diligence and it materially distorts, or is liable to distort, the economic behaviour of the average consumer.
- Article 6:193c governs the misleading action: false information, or information that misleads or is liable to mislead the consumer. Article 6:193d governs the misleading omission: omitting or hiding material information.
- Article 6:193g contains the blacklist of misleading practices that are prohibited in all circumstances; article 6:193i does the same for aggressive practices.
The EmpCo Directive takes effect in Dutch law through these provisions. The implementation is laid down in the Act of 27 May 2026 (Stb. 2026, 152), following adoption by the House of Representatives on 23 April 2026 and by the Senate on 26 May 2026.
What the EmpCo Directive changes
Article 6:193a gains new definitions: environmental claim, generic environmental claim, sustainability label, certification scheme, recognised excellent environmental performance and sustainability. A generic environmental claim is an environmental claim without specification that is displayed clearly and prominently on the same medium.
Article 6:193c is extended: environmental characteristics, social characteristics and circularity aspects are named expressly, and further grounds of misleading are added for statements about future environmental performance and for emphasising benefits that are not relevant to the consumer.
Article 6:193g gains twelve new items: five concern sustainability communication, the remainder concern early obsolescence and repair.
What is no longer permitted from 27 September 2026
The blacklist names conduct that is always misleading; evidence to the contrary is not possible. The five new prohibitions that bear on sustainability communication are these:
| Practice | Why it goes wrong |
|---|---|
| A generic environmental claim without substantiation | Terms such as green, eco, environmentally friendly, natural and climate friendly are permitted only where there is demonstrable recognised excellent environmental performance relevant to the claim |
| An own label or logo that looks like certification | A sustainability label must rest on a certification scheme or have been established by a public authority |
| Claiming an environmental benefit for the product as a whole | The benefit concerns only one aspect or one component: recyclable packaging does not make the product itself sustainable |
| “Climate neutral” or “carbon offset” on the basis of offsetting greenhouse gas emissions | Offsetting may not count as a neutral, reduced or positive effect of the product on the environment |
| Presenting a legally required feature as your own merit | What the law requires in any event is not a distinguishing characteristic of the offer |
A sixth point follows not from the blacklist but from the tightened standard for misleading actions: future environmental targets may not be presented as results already achieved. A statement of that kind calls for a concrete, phased and independently verified plan.
The remaining new items on the list concern lifespan and repair: concealing that a product has a limited lifespan, wrongly suggesting that something is repairable, and concealing that a software update restricts functions.
What remains permitted
The directive does not prohibit sustainability communication; it prohibits vague sustainability communication. Three things remain permitted:
- A specific, measured claim. “This packaging consists of 80 per cent recycled material” can be verified and is therefore admissible, provided it is correct.
- A recognised label. The EU Ecolabel and other labels based on independent certification may be displayed as before.
- A claim about future performance with a plan behind it. A trader who states that it will be climate neutral in 2035 may do so where that statement rests on a plan with interim targets, allocated resources and independent monitoring on which it reports publicly.
The common thread: the more general the statement, the heavier the burden of proof.
How a claim is assessed
The open standard and the misleading test work with the benchmark of the average consumer: reasonably well informed, circumspect and observant. The concept is European and is set normatively, not established empirically; market research helps, but is not decisive. Where the statement is directed at a specific group, the average member of that group applies; where the group is particularly vulnerable, that is the starting point. With sustainability claims it counts that the consumer has no access to life cycle data: a claim that an expert can still place in context may mislead the average consumer.
The distinction between the two forms of misleading determines how the case is proved.
| Misleading action (6:193c) | Misleading omission (6:193d) | |
|---|---|---|
| Core | What you say is untrue or creates a false impression | What you do not say, although it is material |
| Typical case | “Climate neutral” for a product with substantial emissions | Concealing that a label is the trader’s own scheme |
| Role of context | Overall impression of the statement, including imagery and colour | Limitations of the medium are taken into account |
In both cases the transactional decision requirement applies: the practice must be liable to cause the consumer to take a decision on a contract that he would not otherwise have taken. That requirement does not apply to the blacklist.
The blacklist is exhaustive and applies per se. If a practice appears on it, no assessment of professional diligence, the average consumer or the transactional decision is needed. The open standard continues to exist alongside it and catches cases the list does not name: selective comparisons, an inflated marginal improvement, or the use of imagery that creates a false impression without any text. The list is a floor, not a safe harbour.
Burden of proof and record-keeping
Article 6:193j(1) of the Dutch Civil Code places the burden of proving the material accuracy and completeness of the information provided on the trader: you must be able to substantiate your claim at the moment you make it, not only once it is challenged. Paragraph 2 provides that an unfair commercial practice is unlawful and is in principle attributed to the trader; paragraph 3 renders the contract voidable. Build a file for each claim, therefore: calculations, measurement methods, sources and reference dates.
Enforcement by the ACM
The ACM enforces under the Consumer Protection (Enforcement) Act (Wet handhaving consumentenbescherming). Its toolkit includes:
- an administrative fine of up to EUR 900,000 per breach, or up to ten per cent of annual turnover if that is higher, with doubling of those maxima on repetition within the statutory period;
- an order subject to a penalty payment requiring the statement to be withdrawn or corrected;
- a commitment decision, by which the undertaking binds itself to changes;
- publication of the decision, with the reputational effect that goes with it.
The ACM often takes the commitment route first. In September 2022 it accepted commitments from Decathlon and H&M concerning vague claims such as Ecodesign and Conscious; both undertook to contribute to sustainability causes, of EUR 400,000 and EUR 500,000 respectively. The ACM also applies Guidelines on Sustainability Claims (Leidraad Duurzaamheidsclaims) containing five rules of thumb, issued in 2021 and revised in 2023.
The civil route
Alongside the ACM, the civil courts are open; that second risk is often underestimated. A consumer relies on article 6:193j of the Dutch Civil Code. A competitor can act under article 6:194 of the Dutch Civil Code on misleading advertising between undertakings, or in tort (onrechtmatige daad).
Interest groups use the collective action under article 3:305a of the Dutch Civil Code. The best-known example is the judgment of the Amsterdam District Court of 20 March 2024 in Fossielvrij v KLM (ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2024:1512): vague and general statements about environmental benefits painted too rosy a picture, while sustainable fuel and replanting reduce the adverse effects only to a limited extent.
The Advertising Code Committee
Self-regulation is the third track: since 1 February 2023 the Dutch Advertising Code Foundation (Stichting Reclame Code) has applied the Sustainability Advertising Code (Code voor Duurzaamheidsreclame), which replaced the Environmental Advertising Code and also covers ethical claims, such as animal welfare and working conditions.
The committee cannot impose a fine; it issues a recommendation and publishes it. The threshold is low and the lead time short, and a recommendation carries weight in later proceedings.
Existing stock and other statements
The directive contains no transitional regime: from 27 September 2026 the rules apply to every commercial practice that takes place from that moment. A trader still having packaging printed does better to build the new requirements into it straight away. The rules moreover apply to every commercial statement directed at consumers, not only to the packaging.
How to review your claims now
A practical order of work:
- Take stock of every statement containing an environmental or social claim: packaging, labels, webshop copy, advertisements, sales material, sustainability pages, the newsletter, the annual report, quotations and email signatures.
- Test each claim first against the blacklist and then against the misleading standards.
- Put behind every sustainability word the substantiation you could produce, with its date. No substantiation means: delete the word or make it concrete.
- Check for every logo and label who issued it and on what basis.
- Remove claims that rest on offsetting from your product communication, or make clear that the point is offsetting and not lower emissions from the product itself.
Mind the interaction with your reporting: what you report under the CSRD must be consistent with what you tell the consumer. A contradiction between your ESG reporting and your marketing is hard to explain in proceedings.
Frequently asked questions
Is there a transitional period for existing packaging?
No, the rules apply from 27 September 2026. The ACM did publish an explanatory note on 1 July 2026: where old stock and genuine efforts to comply quickly can be demonstrated, it may take transitional situations into account. That is enforcement policy and not a right on which you can rely.
May I still say “carbon neutral” or mention carbon offsetting?
You may state as a matter of fact that you offset and through which project. What is prohibited is the next step: asserting that the product is therefore climate neutral, carbon neutral or environmentally positive. Claiming neutrality is permitted where you demonstrably cause no emissions, or where you separate clearly what you have reduced from what you have offset.
Does this apply to business-to-business as well?
The regime covers commercial practices directed at consumers. In business relationships, article 6:194 of the Dutch Civil Code and the law of tort apply, which point in materially the same direction. It also works through the chain: a business customer who repeats your claim to consumers will ask you for the substantiation.
What has happened to the Green Claims Directive?
The European Commission has withdrawn that further-reaching proposal, which provided for prior verification of environmental claims. Prior verification is therefore not coming for the time being; the centre of gravity lies with the EmpCo rules.
Need help with your sustainability claims?
Law & More reviews sustainability claims on packaging, on websites and in campaigns, and puts together with you the substantiation file you need when the ACM or a competitor asks for it. Please contact an environmental law attorney for an initial discussion.
Law & More has offices in Eindhoven and Amsterdam and works in Dutch and in English.
