27 Sep 2026
Date of application
From this day the new rules apply. No general transition or sell-off period is provided for.
INDEPENDENT. RECOGNIZED. SECURE.
Legally sound certification:
Book a free consultationEmpCo · Directive (EU) 2024/825 · German UWG amendment
From 27 September 2026, new rules apply to environmental claims and sustainability labels. Six commercial practices become unlawful per se, with no case-by-case assessment. Every claim towards consumers is affected: on the packaging, in the shop, on social media and at the point of sale.
Sustainability labels · Generic environmental claims · Climate neutrality · Part for the whole · Legal standards · Liability
At a glance
27 Sep 2026
From this day the new rules apply. No general transition or sell-off period is provided for.
6 prohibitions
New provisions in the annex to Section 3(3) UWG. They apply per se, with no case-by-case assessment.
At least 4%
For cross-border infringements, member states must provide maximum fines of at least 4% of annual turnover.
Around 230
That is how many sustainability labels currently exist. Only some of them meet the new requirements.
EmpCo · Directive (EU) 2024/825
On 27 September 2026 the new rules become applicable. No general transition or sell-off period is provided for, and packaging layouts need lead time.
Fundamentals
EmpCo is Directive (EU) 2024/825 on empowering consumers for the green transition. It amends the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive. It had to be transposed by 27 March 2026 and applies from 27 September 2026. In Germany this was done by amending the Act Against Unfair Competition, promulgated on 19 February 2026. The name is misleading. “Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition” sounds like consumer information; in fact EmpCo is competition law. There is no new authority and no approval procedure. The rules are enforced by competitors, consumer associations and qualified entities, so not by a review beforehand, but by a warning letter afterwards. What appears on the blacklist is unfair without any balancing of interests and without a case-by-case assessment. A court no longer asks whether a claim was materially misleading in the specific case; it is enough that the provision is met. Evidence therefore becomes a precondition of communicating at all and is no longer a question of defence in a dispute.
Blacklist
The amendment adds six new provisions to the blacklist in the annex to Section 3(3) UWG. They apply towards consumers without exception.
No. 2a
It is prohibited to display a sustainability label that is neither based on a certification scheme nor established by public authorities. Self-created logos, own labels and graphic sustainability marks without independent verification therefore become impermissible, even where the underlying claim is factually correct. The duty to check sits with the company displaying the label, not with the label owner.
No. 4a
It is prohibited to make a generic environmental claim where the company cannot substantiate the recognised excellent environmental performance behind it. Recital 9 names among others “environmentally friendly”, “eco-friendly”, “green”, “nature’s friend”, “ecological”, “climate friendly”, “carbon friendly”, “energy efficient”, “biodegradable” and “bio-based”. Similar wordings are covered too.
No. 4b
It is prohibited to make an environmental claim about the entire product or the entire business where it actually relates only to a particular aspect. The classic example: a shampoo bottle advertised as “made from recycled material” when only the cap contains recyclate. The same applies to company claims that only hold for a non-representative part of the business.
No. 4c
It is prohibited to make a claim based on the offsetting of greenhouse gas emissions stating that a product has a neutral, reduced or positive impact on the environment. This covers “climate neutral”, “CO2 neutral”, “CO2 positive” or “climate friendly” where they rest on offset payments. Such a claim remains permissible only if the product is genuinely neutral across its entire life cycle.
No. 10a
It is prohibited to present requirements that apply by law to all products in the category on the Union market as a distinctive feature of your own offer. Advertising the absence of a substance that is banned anyway breaches this provision. As PPWR implementation progresses this becomes practically relevant for packaging.
No. 23d
Seven practices around premature obsolescence are prohibited, among them withholding information about detrimental software updates, falsely claiming a certain durability, and presenting goods as repairable when they are not. This provision does not concern the packaging world, but belongs to the overall picture of the amendment.
Definitions
The amendment introduces new legal definitions in Section 2(2) UWG. Knowing the terms lets you work out for yourself which of your claims falls under which provision.
Section 2(2)(5) UWG
The umbrella term. It covers any statement or representation that is not legally required and that states that a product, a brand or a company has a positive or no impact on the environment, is less harmful than others, or that its impact has improved over time. What matters is the breadth: the definition expressly covers images, graphic elements and symbols as well as labels, brand names, company names and product names. A green leaf on the packaging is therefore an environmental claim, without a single word.
Section 2(2)(1) UWG
An environmental claim that is not contained on a sustainability label and whose specification is not given clearly and prominently on the same medium. Two conditions, and both matter in practice: the specification has to appear on the same medium. A QR code leading to a landing page with the explanation does not cure an unspecific claim on the packaging.
Section 2(2)(4) UWG
A voluntary public or private trust mark, quality mark or similar, intended to highlight or promote a product, process or business towards consumers with regard to environmental or social characteristics. Mandatory labelling is excluded. The definition is deliberately broad and applies regardless of whether something is called a “label”. A button in an online shop, a badge on a product page or a recurring graphic element on the packaging can be a sustainability label within the meaning of the law.
Section 2(2)(6) UWG
A third-party verification scheme that certifies that a product, process or business meets certain requirements and that allows the use of a corresponding sustainability label. Which four criteria such a scheme has to meet is set out in the next section.
Requirements
From 27 September 2026, a sustainability label may only be used towards consumers if it was established by public authorities or is based on a certification scheme. Such a scheme must make its conditions, including its requirements, publicly available and meet four criteria.
a
The scheme is open to all traders willing and able to meet its requirements, on transparent, fair and non-discriminatory terms.
b
The requirements are developed by the scheme owner in consultation with relevant experts and stakeholders.
c
The scheme sets out procedures for dealing with non-compliance and provides for withdrawal or suspension of the label.
d
Compliance is monitored under an objective procedure by a third party whose competence and independence are assured.
All four have to be met.
When a criterion is missing
The duty to check sits with the company displaying the label. Anyone using a third-party label that does not meet the requirements is liable themselves. An assurance from the label owner is not enough.
A label is not a safe harbour for impermissible claims. Even a permissible label does not cover an advertising claim that would be misleading in itself. The Commission has made this explicit in its questions and answers on the directive.
In practice
The amendment does not prohibit environmental claims. It prohibits unsubstantiated and unspecific ones. The difference almost always lies in the specification and the evidence.
| Impermissible from 27 Sep 2026 | Permissible if substantiated |
|---|---|
| “Environmentally friendly packaging” | “Packaging with 85% certified post-consumer recyclate” |
| “Sustainably produced” | “At least 95% plastic-free packaging, independently verified” |
| “Climate neutral through offsetting” | Figures on actual emission reductions across the life cycle |
| “Made from recycled material” on the bottle when only the cap contains recyclate | “Cap made from 100% recyclate” |
| Own green leaf logo without a certification scheme | A label from a scheme meeting the four criteria of Section 2(2)(6) UWG |
| “PFAS-free” as a feature where PFAS are banned anyway | “PFAS-free, independently verified under a defined programme”, with the test scope stated |
| “Without microplastics” without evidence | “Product content microplastic-free, verified under the REACH definition” |
| Generic claim on the packaging, explanation only via QR code | Specification clear and prominent on the same medium |
The right-hand column has one thing in common: it names a measurable property and points to evidence. That is exactly what the law requires. Anyone advertising unspecifically today can usually save the claim by specifying and substantiating it, rather than deleting it.
Beyond the blacklist
The blacklist is the most conspicuous part of the amendment, but not the only one. Three further changes apply case by case and are often overlooked.
1
Section 5(2)(1) UWG
The list of material characteristics is extended by “environmental or social characteristics” and by “circularity aspects such as durability, reparability or recyclability”. Deception about the recyclability of packaging thereby becomes misleading about a material feature.
2
Section 5(3)(4) UWG
An environmental claim about future environmental performance counts as misleading if it does not rest on clear, objective, publicly available and verifiable commitments. These have to be set out in a detailed implementation plan with measurable, time-bound targets and be reviewed regularly by an independent expert. “We will be climate neutral by 2030” is misleading without such a plan.
3
Section 5b(3a) UWG
Anyone offering a service comparing products on environmental or social characteristics has to provide information on the comparison method, the products and suppliers compared and how the information is updated. This counts as material information.
Responsibility
Responsible is whoever makes the claim towards consumers, so usually the brand owner or the party placing the product on the market. That holds even where the underlying information comes from a supplier and where the label was issued by a third party.
| Role | Risk | What helps |
|---|---|---|
| Brand owner | Liable for every environmental claim on packaging, website and in advertising | Evidence issued in its own name |
| Retail / private label | Is itself the brand owner for own labels | Certification of your own article, not just the supplier’s material |
| Importer | Places on the market and advertises product properties | Documented evidence from the supply chain |
| Supplier | Not liable towards consumers, but loses orders without evidence | Certification as a sales argument |
| Online retailer | Adopts manufacturer statements in product descriptions | Checking whether adopted claims are substantiated |
The most common gap: the brand owner takes a figure from a supplier’s data sheet and turns it into an advertising claim. A supplier declaration is self-disclosure. It can be the basis of internal documentation, but it does not meet the requirement for a certification scheme and it does not shift liability.
This is exactly where the flustix sub-licence system comes in: an existing certification held by the supplier can be transferred to the brand owner and its specific product under defined conditions. The brand owner receives its own licence number and its own public database entry. The evidence then runs in the name of whoever makes the claim.
Evidence
The criteria in Section 2(2)(6) UWG are a test scheme. It can be applied to any label, including ours. So here is the comparison point by point.
Every certification receives an individual licence number and can be viewed in the public flustix database. That makes not only the existence of the evidence verifiable, but also its current status.
a
The certification programmes are open to every company that meets the requirements. No sector restriction, no membership obligation, no exclusivity agreements. Requirements and conditions are disclosed in full on request.
b
The programmes were developed together with accredited testing laboratories and certification bodies. They rest on recognised standards, among them DIN EN ISO 14021, DIN EN 15343, DIN EN ISO 22095, DIN 6120, DIN EN 13430 and ISO 15270.
c
The licence conditions govern breaches, suspension and withdrawal of the label. Invalid certificates disappear from the public database and unauthorised use is pursued.
d
Laboratory analyses run in laboratories accredited to ISO/IEC 17025, the conformity assessment to ISO/IEC 17065 at accredited certification partners. Across the six-year term, ongoing conformity checks take place.
Label and claim
Every flustix label stands for a nameable, independently verified property. A generic claim becomes a concrete one, and that is exactly the structure the law requires.
LESS PLASTICS Product“at least 99.25% plastic-free” instead of “plastic-free”
LESS PLASTICS Packaging“at least 95% plastic-free packaging” instead of “low in plastic”
Microplastic-free content“product content microplastic-free” instead of “no microplastics”
RECYCLED“xx% recyclate, type PCR/PIR/MIX” instead of “made from recycled material”
RECYCLABLE“recyclable, performance level A/B/C” instead of “recyclable”
PFAS-FREE“PFAS-free under a defined test scope” instead of “chemical-free”
Independence
With flustix, you draw on an international network of accredited certification bodies, testing laboratories and consulting partners. The result: internationally recognised verification with regional contacts, consistent standards and full transparency.
Global conformity assessment
International auditing
Accredited certification
Certification partner Asia
Lab & expert consulting
Accredited test lab
Accredited testing laboratory
Accredited test lab
Our promise
Practice
Six steps you can take without outside help. Step 4 has the longest lead time and should therefore be planned first.
1
Inventory every environmental claim: packaging, label, website, online shop, social media, catalogues, trade fair stands, POS material, data sheets. Images, symbols and brand names count too. Then assign every claim to one of the six provisions; anything falling into none is uncritical.
2
For every mark used, clarify whether it rests on a certification scheme that meets the four criteria. This applies to third-party labels too, because the duty to check sits with you.
3
For every critical claim, either obtain robust evidence or specify the wording so that it is no longer a generic environmental claim.
4
The step with the longest lead time. Prepress, approvals, selling off existing stock and switching production do not happen in a few weeks. No general sell-off period is provided for.
5
Define internally who approves environmental claims, what evidence has to exist for them and where it is documented. Train marketing, sales and procurement accordingly.
6
Every claim about future environmental performance needs a published, externally verified implementation plan. Without that plan, the claim has to go.
Context
EmpCo, the PPWR and the planned Green Claims Directive interlock but run on different timelines. The PPWR determines what a packaging item has to be. EmpCo determines what you may say about it. The Green Claims Directive would additionally govern how explicit environmental claims have to be substantiated and verified in advance. For practice one thing counts above all: all three rest on the same data. Recycled content, recyclability, material composition and substance levels have to be collected anyway. Collect them once, structured and independently verified, and you serve all three. Collect them one after another and you pay three times for the same information. The Green Claims Directive itself moved several times in 2025: the Commission continues to pursue it in its work programme, but no final legal text exists. On this page it therefore appears deliberately as an ongoing initiative, not as applicable law.
12 Aug 2026
PPWR applicable
substances, PFAS, declaration of conformity
27 Sep 2026
EmpCo in the UWG
prohibitions for labels and claims
from 2028
PPWR labelling
harmonised, from this point at the earliest
from 2030
PPWR market access
recyclability and recycled content quotas
open
Green Claims Directive
procedure ongoing, no legal text
Frequently asked
The questions we are asked most often are gathered in our questions section under “Regulations”, where the questions on the PPWR come together as well.
Let’s talk
Kathrin Schaumann goes through your environmental claims with you and works out which of them will hold from 27 September, which need specifying and where independent evidence is required. Without obligation, without preparation on your side and with a clear assessment at the end.
Prefer to write? Send us a message
Kathrin Schaumann
Sales & Certification Development
Program & Partnerships
k.schaumann@flustix.com+49 179 616 27 98
Book a callSimply scan to book a free consultation directly
flustix.com/call-kathrin