Green Claims: Blanket environmental statements have been prohibited since September 27, 2026

What Changed on September 27, 2026

The basis for this is Directive (EU) 2024/825, commonly referred to as the “EmpCo Directive” (Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition). It amends the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive and adds several environmental offenses to its “blacklist.” Germany implemented this through the Third Act Amending the Act Against Unfair Competition. It was published in the Federal Law Gazette on February 19, 2026 (BGBl. 2026 I No. 43) and has been in effect since September 27, 2026. There is no transition period for existing content. The rules are now set forth in the UWG, primarily in Sections 2 and 5 and in the annex to Section 3(3).

The annex lists actions that are always prohibited with respect to consumers. No case-by-case assessment takes place there. Four new items have been added:

In addition, Section 5(3)(4) of the Unfair Competition Act (UWG) states: Statements about future environmental performance (“climate-neutral by 2030”) are misleading if they are not backed by a detailed, realistic implementation plan with measurable, time-bound goals that is regularly reviewed by an independent external expert.

Important for classification: The annex applies to business transactions with consumers. Those who sell exclusively to businesses are not off the hook. The general prohibition against misleading advertising in Section 5 of the UWG also protects other market participants. The Federal Court of Justice ruled as early as June 27, 2024 (Case No. I ZR 98/23) that an ambiguous term such as “climate-neutral” must be explained within the advertisement itself. The advertisement in question appeared in a trade journal.

This article is not legal advice. It highlights areas on websites where action is typically needed.

Don’t Confuse Them: EmpCo and the “Green Claims Directive”

In many texts, both initiatives are grouped under the term “Green Claims.” They are two different things. The EmpCo Directive has been adopted, implemented, and is in effect. The Green Claims Directive is a separate proposal by the European Commission from March 2023. It is intended to regulate how environmental claims must be substantiated and verified in advance. This proposal has not been adopted; the Commission continues to list it as pending on its dedicated webpage. For your website, what matters today is what is stipulated in the UWG.

What Constitutes a “General Environmental Claim”

The law defines the term “environmental claim” broadly. It refers to any statement or representation—not legally binding—that explicitly or implicitly suggests a product, brand, or company has a positive impact on the environment, no impact at all, or is less harmful than others. Text, images, graphic elements, and symbols are explicitly mentioned, as are brand, company, and product names. A green leaf next to a product photo may therefore be sufficient.

Such a statement is considered “general” if it does not appear on a sustainability label and its specifics are not clearly and prominently stated on the same medium. The recitals of the directive cite terms such as “environmentally friendly,” “green,” “ecological,” or “climate-friendly” as examples. Such claims are permitted only if a recognized outstanding environmental performance can be demonstrated. The law defines these narrowly: the EU Ecolabel, officially recognized ecolabels in accordance with DIN EN ISO 14024 Type I—which includes, for example, the Blue Angel—or the highest levels of environmental performance under other Union law.

For most small and medium-sized enterprises, this means: Vague generalizations must be removed, while specific facts may remain.

Where such statements appear on a website

Most people have already quickly checked the homepage. The remaining sections are often overlooked because no one looks at them in everyday use:

• Headlines and teasers —short, catchy, and therefore almost always vague.
• Page titles and meta descriptions —they appear in search results, which is where the message reaches the most people.
• Footers and recurring elements —a sentence that appears on every page.
• Badges and seals —custom-designed graphics as well as logos from providers whose verification processes you’re not familiar with.
• Alt text, image captions, and file names —these are text too, and search engines read them.
• Old blog posts and press releases —anything that’s still accessible continues to promote your site.
• PDFs —brochures, data sheets, and company presentations in the download section.
• Language versions – “climate-neutral” in the English version won’t stand out in a German search.
• Product descriptions in the online store —often imported from manufacturer data and never proofread.
• Channels outside the website —company profiles, social media descriptions, email signatures.

Our Own Case

We checked our own website before the deadline and found something. On the Domains & Hosting page, it said “Climate-neutral hosting.” We had adopted this phrasing from our hosting provider. It appeared in three places: in a heading, in the meta description, and in the English version of the page.

We can substantiate something else. Our provider is based in Germany and sources all of its electricity from renewable energy. That’s a statement about the source of electricity. Climate neutrality, on the other hand, would be a statement about the overall greenhouse gas footprint. Now it says: “Hosting with electricity from renewable energy sources.” It’s less catchy, but it’s accurate, and it can be verified.

We’ve learned two things from this. First: 100 percent green electricity is not the same as climate neutral. Second: A statement rarely appears in just one place. We would have found the headline right away. We found the search snippet and the translation only because we specifically looked for them.

What’s Still Allowed

What’s prohibited is making sweeping generalizations, not the topic itself. You may continue to discuss environmental aspects as long as the statement is specific, refers to a clearly defined aspect, and you can back it up.

The specification should appear in the same place as the statement, clearly and prominently displayed. An explanation three clicks away on a subpage is not sufficient. When it comes to seals, it’s worth asking whether there’s a system behind them that’s open to all companies, whose requirements are publicly available, and whose compliance is monitored by an independent third party. That’s how the law defines a certification system.

Not every instance of “sustainable” constitutes an environmental claim. We also searched for this word on our website and found several instances where it simply means “long-lasting”—such as in the context of a sustainable improvement in loading time. We left these instances as they were. What matters is how a reader understands the sentence in context. Where there’s any doubt, it’s better to simply write “long-lasting” or “long-term.”

The Seven-Step Review

1. Create a search list. Climate-neutral, CO2-neutral, climate-positive, environmentally friendly, eco-friendly, sustainable, green, eco, ecological, resource-efficient—along with the English equivalents and the terms used in your other language versions.
2. Search within the system, not in the browser. A full-text search through the CMS database also finds meta descriptions, alt text, hidden elements, and translations. The page search in the front end does not find them.
3. Include files. PDFs in the download section, images with embedded text, graphics with logos.
4. Check search results. Use ` site:your-domain.de climate-neutral ` to see what search engines are currently displaying. After a change, it takes a while for the snippet to update.
5. Classify each result. Is it an environmental statement or another meaning? General or specific? Is there supporting documentation?
6. Replace, provide evidence, or delete. File the supporting documentation internally: electricity supply contract, certificate, confirmation from the supplier.
7. Ensure the process is documented. Anyone who writes new text or imports manufacturer data must be familiar with the rule. Otherwise, the wording will reappear in three months.

Who is liable for the supplier’s statement?

Our case illustrates the pattern: The provider advertises using a term, and the customer incorporates it into their own advertising. Under competition law, this then becomes the customer’s own statement. Pursuant to Section 8 of the German Unfair Competition Act (UWG), a claim for removal and injunctive relief may be brought against whoever commits the impermissible commercial act. Fault is not a determining factor here. The fact that the wording comes from the hosting provider, the manufacturer, or a product data feed does not change this. The claim for injunctive relief is directed against the owner of the company even if an employee or a contracted agency posted the text.

This claim may be asserted by competitors, qualified trade associations, qualified consumer associations, and chambers of commerce. In practice, this means a cease-and-desist letter. Whether you can subsequently recover the costs from your supplier depends on your contract and is a matter for your legal counsel.

Therefore, have suppliers provide written proof of environmental claims before you adopt them. And adopt only the portion that is substantiated.

Conclusion

The new rules do not require you to remain silent on environmental issues. They require accuracy. For a company website, this is generally a manageable task: conduct a thorough search once, evaluate each instance, and replace general terms with verifiable facts. Things get complicated where no one looks—in meta descriptions, translations, PDFs, and imported product texts. That’s exactly where we found two out of three instances on our own site.