5
Claims per review
All five about one product, one about each of five products, or anything in between. You decide in the form whether the next claim belongs to the same product.
INDEPENDENT. RECOGNIZED. SECURE.
Legally sound certification:
Free Claim CheckFree EmpCo Claim Check
The flustix Claim-Check assesses up to five environmental claims against the EmpCo Directive (EU 2024/825) and German unfair competition law and returns a written assessment as a PDF, free of charge. Submit the claims exactly as they appear on packaging, label or website, for one product or several.
For brand owners, packaging manufacturers, retailers and importers.
At a glance
5
All five about one product, one about each of five products, or anything in between. You decide in the form whether the next claim belongs to the same product.
2 to 3
No instant verdict from a machine. A person looks at every claim, assesses it and signs the report.
€0
No cost, no obligation, no subscription. Not even if you decide to take things no further with us.
27 Sep
From that day the new rules on environmental claims and sustainability labels apply. No general transition period is foreseen.
EmpCo · Directive (EU) 2024/825
Packaging artwork takes lead time, and so do catalogues and datasheets. Anyone who first checks in September which claims hold up has no time left to correct them.
How it works
The form takes about ten minutes. You need nothing prepared except the claims themselves.
1
First the product, then the claim word for word, exactly as it appears. Plus where it appears: packaging, label, online shop, website, catalogue.
2
Optional. A photo of the packaging shows us how the claim reads in place. Existing evidence shows us what it rests on. Both help; neither is required.
3
Each claim on its own against the six new prohibitions, the requirements for labels and the substantiation duty. By hand, not by a model, through the independent flustix expert team.
4
A PDF with one page per claim. Within two to three working days, without you having to chase it.
The assessment report
The report is not a traffic light and not a score. For each claim it names what the claim depends on and what would need to happen.
Substantiated, substantiable, not substantiable, or outside our scope. Four states rather than a grade, because “cannot be substantiated” and “has not been substantiated yet” are two different things.
Where a claim does not hold, we say why: a missing piece of evidence, wording that is too generic, or a claim that will simply not be permitted in this form.
Where possible we propose a version that means the same thing and can be substantiated. Not as legal advice, but as a starting point for your own review.
The last page sets out what was assessed against, which version of the rules applied and where the limits of this review lie.
Examples
Three typical cases. The wording on the left comes up regularly; the assessment on the right is how it reads in the report.
| The claim | Our assessment |
|---|---|
| Environmentally friendly packaging | Not substantiable. A generic environmental claim without recognised excellent environmental performance. Suggestion: name the concrete property, for example the verified recycled content. |
| Climate-neutral production | Not substantiable where it rests on offsetting. The German Federal Court of Justice ruled on this on 27 June 2024 (I ZR 98/23), and the new blacklist entry applies on top. |
| An in-house green leaf mark on the front of pack | Not substantiable as a sustainability label as long as no certification scheme sits behind it. Suggestion: remove it or replace it with a verified trustmark. |
These examples are patterns, not an assessment of any particular company.
The scope
Four things you will have in writing within two to three working days.
Further reading
The EmpCo directive does not ban environmental claims. It bans four particular kinds: claims about a whole product that only hold for one part of it. Vague assertions without measurable evidence. In-house labels with no certification scheme behind them. And legal minimums advertised as a special achievement.
In a European Commission study, 53.3 per cent of 150 environmental claims examined contained vague, misleading or unsubstantiated information. Our whitepaper works through the four cases with examples.
Before having claims reviewed, it is worth asking who actually answers for a claim that turns out to be wrong: Who is liable if an environmental claim on packaging is wrong?
Editorial responsibility: Malte Biss, CEO & Founder of flustix
Get started
You need no appointment and no preparation. Tell us what is written on your products and we will come back within two to three working days with the report.
Our documents on this
Our own studies, briefing papers and talks on the subject of this page. Each page sums up the key points; the full document is available there as a download.
Rather talk it through
If your portfolio is larger, or you would like to go through the report together, we will work through your claims with you. Without obligation and without preparation on your side.
Prefer to write? Send us a message
Your flustix team
Sales & Certification Development
Program & Partnerships
k.schaumann@flustix.com+49 179 616 27 98
Free consultationSimply scan to book a free consultation directly
flustix.com/call-kathrin