Since 27 September 2026, Directive (EU) 2024/825 on empowering consumers for the green transition (EmpCo) applies, together with the Belgian law of 22 July 2026 that transposes it into the Code of Economic Law. Using words like 'eco-friendly', 'green' or 'climate neutral' in customer facing communication can be unlawful in itself, without anyone having to prove that a consumer was misled.
This update aims to provide insight on what is changing with the new EmpCo Directive and is written on the basis of PIVOT Law’s presentation at Flanders District of Creativity’s Lab of 20 October 2026. We also address some of the concerns and questions raised by the audience throughout this post.
Where are we coming from?
Misleading green claims were never allowed. Since 2005, the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive has prohibited claims that mislead consumers, including about a product's environmental impact. In practice, however, every case had to be assessed on its own facts, and vague claims flourished. A 2020 study for the European Commission found that 53.3% of the environmental claims examined were vague, misleading or unfounded, and 40% were unsubstantiated.
The EU's answer is the EmpCo Directive. It was adopted on 28 February 2024 and amends the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive and the Consumer Rights Directive. The new rules apply since 27 September 2026 to everything you communicate to consumers, including about products that were already made or on the shelf (in the words of the European Commission: 'old stock').
The Belgian transposition and its ‘transition PERIOD’
Belgium transposed EmpCo into Book VI of the Code of Economic Law. The transposition law has been in force since 27 September 2026. The new prohibitions sit mainly in article VI.98, 4° (claims about future environmental performance) and article VI.100, 28° to 39° (the new blacklisted practices).
The Belgian legislator added one transitional rule (article 15 of the law). For goods that were produced, packaged or placed on the market before 27 September 2026, the Economic Inspection does not use its powers under article XV.2, §1 of the Code for infringements of those new provisions. That rule lapses six months after entry into force, so on 27 March 2027.
This is a pause in administrative enforcement, not a postponement of the rules. It covers goods only, not services, and the new rules themselves apply in full. The European Commission is clear that EmpCo has no transition period: old stock must comply, for instance by covering claims with a sticker or by adding correct information at the point of sale.
Two kinds of prohibitions: the open norm and the black list
EmpCo works on two levels. Knowing which one applies tells you how much room for argument you have.
The open norm: is the overall picture misleading?
The general prohibition of misleading practices still applies (articles 6 and 7 of the directive, articles VI.97 to VI.99 of the Code of Economic Law). A claim is misleading if it is false, or if it is factually correct but its overall presentation is likely to deceive the average consumer and make them take a decision they would not otherwise have taken. Words, images, colours, icons and placement all count.
EmpCo sharpens this norm in three ways:
Environmental and social (!) characteristics and circularity aspects, such as durability, reparability and recyclability, are now expressly listed as main characteristics of a product.
Claims about future environmental performance ('net zero by 2035') are misleading unless backed by clear, objective, publicly available and verifiable commitments in a detailed and realistic implementation plan, with measurable, time-bound targets and allocated resources, regularly checked by an independent third-party expert whose findings are available to consumers.
Advertising irrelevant benefits is misleading. The legislator's own example: promoting a bottled water as gluten-free.
Under the open norm, context decides. '70% recycled polyester outer fabric' is a specific claim, but placed under a large forest image, the overall impression can still mislead.
The black list: prohibited, full stop
The black list (Annex I to the directive, article VI.100 of the Code of Economic Law) contains practices that are prohibited in all circumstances. No one needs to show that a consumer was actually influenced. EmpCo added twelve practices of which five are especially relevant for fashion and design:
A generic environmental claim without recognised excellent environmental performance relevant to the claim
A claim about the whole product or business when it concerns only one aspect
A claim that a product has a neutral, reduced or positive climate impact based on offsetting
A sustainability label not based on a certification scheme or established by a public authority
Presenting a legal requirement as a distinctive feature of your offer
A few definitions make or break these prohibitions:
A claim is generic when its specification is not given in clear and prominent terms on the same medium (the same ad, packaging or product page). The directive itself lists 'eco-friendly', 'green', 'nature's friend', 'ecological', 'climate friendly' and 'biodegradable' as examples. A QR code leading to a report is useful as evidence, but in my view it does not turn a vague headline into a specific claim.
Recognised excellent environmental performance means compliance with the EU Ecolabel, with an officially recognised EN ISO 14024 type I ecolabel, or top performance under other EU law. A good internal study is not enough.
A certification scheme must be open to all traders on fair terms, have public requirements, and be monitored by a third party independent from both the scheme owner and the brand. According to the Commission, a brand may own its scheme, provided these conditions are met.
Sustainability filters and rankings: article 7(7)
An important concern raised by the audience during the FDC Lab related to sustainability filters and rankings. How to market or push your products with less impact as an overall category without violating the EmpCo Directive?
If you compare products on sustainability, you must explain how. EmpCo added a new article 7(7) to the directive: when a trader provides a service that compares products and informs consumers about their environmental or social characteristics or circularity aspects (durability, reparability, recyclability), the following counts as material information:
the method of comparison;
the products being compared and their suppliers;
the measures in place to keep that information up to date.
Leaving out material information is a misleading omission if it is likely to change the average consumer's decision. According to the European Commission, presenting it in an unclear way can be misleading as well: the method must be explained so that an average consumer can fully understand it.
In practice, this targets the 'sustainable choice' filter, the 'conscious' tab, the eco-score next to a product and the ranking of 'greenest' suppliers. Zalando already felt this before EmpCo: in 2024, following action by European consumer authorities, it committed to remove its sustainability flag and its leaf and tree icons and to give specific information on each product page instead.
What this means if you run a webshop or platform:
Publish your criteria, in plain language, one click away from the filter or score.
Say which products and brands are in the comparison, and which are not.
Say how and how often you update the data, and who checks it.
Make sure the filter label itself does not promise more than the criteria deliver: a filter called 'sustainable' that only checks for one certified material is both an incomplete comparison and, very likely, a generic claim.
Article 7(7) is written for services that compare products. Whether a simple filter in your own webshop is such a service will depend on how it works, but the general rules on misleading information apply to it in any case.
In any case, you can still group products, as long as the label is specific and the criteria are explained. A filter called ‘Recycled materials (min. 50% by weight)’ with a one-click explanation is defensible. A filter called ‘Sustainable’ or ‘Conscious’ is not.
What to do now: five questions before you publish
EmpCo does not ask you to stop talking about sustainability. It asks you to be specific and to be able to prove it. Before a claim goes on a hangtag, a product page, a newsletter or a sponsored post, run it past these five questions:
What exactly are we claiming? A measurable environmental or social characteristic, not an undefined promise.
Does it concern the whole product? If not, name the component, process or lifecycle stage.
Can we prove it today? Reliable evidence that exists before publication and stays up to date. Authorities and courts can ask for it (you are not legally obliged to publish your whole evidence file, but some information must be visible to consumers), and a claim you cannot back up can be treated as inaccurate.
How will the consumer read it? Look at the overall impression: wording, images, labels, colours and placement together.
Who else is saying it? Retailers, agencies, influencers and product feeds repeat your claims, and anyone acting in your name or on your behalf counts as a trader too. Brief them with a list of approved claims and agree on it in your contracts.
Three practical steps follow from this:
Check what you are communicating: hangtags, packaging, product names and collection names, icons, filters, old campaigns that are still online. Brand and collection names are not exempt just because they are registered trademarks.
Fix old stock now, and at the latest before the Economic Inspection’s pause ends on 27 March 2027.
Check your supply chain: if a supplier puts 'organic' or a label on the product and you sell it to consumers, you are the one showing that claim. Ask for the evidence and the certificate's scope, and agree on warranties and corrections in your supplier contracts.
Specific is the new green
The brands that will do best under EmpCo are not the ones that go quiet, but the ones that say precisely what they do and can show it.
Every collection, label and campaign raises its own questions: is this icon a sustainability label, is this filter a comparison service, does this supplier certificate cover what we claim? If you are reviewing your claims, labels or contracts and would like a second pair of eyes, feel free to get in touch.
