EUROPEAN
COMMISSION
Brussels, 22.3.2023
COM(2023) 166 final
2023/0085 (COD)
Proposal for a
DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
on substantiation and communication of explicit environmental claims (Green Claims
Directive)
EN EN
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM
1. CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL
In March 2022 the Commission proposed to update Union consumer law to ensure that
consumers are protected and to empower them to contribute actively to the green transition1.
This proposal provides more specific rules (lex specialis) and complements the proposed
changes to the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive2 (lex generalis). Both proposals aim at
tackling a common set of problems by implementing different elements of the same preferred
policy package identified in the Impact Assessment published together with the initiative on
empowering consumers for the green transition3.
1.1. Reasons for and objectives of the proposal
Role of consumers in accelerating the green transition
In the European Green Deal4 the Commission committed to ensure that consumers are
empowered to make better informed choices and play an active role in the ecological
transition. More specifically, the European Green Deal sets out a commitment to tackle false
environmental claims by ensuring that buyers receive reliable, comparable and verifiable
information to enable them to make more sustainable decisions and to reduce the risk of
‘green washing’. The need to address greenwashing was subsequently set as a priority both
under the New Circular Economy Action Plan5 and the New Consumer Agenda6. The recently
adopted Green Deal Industrial Plan7 reiterates the need to allow consumers to make their
choices based on transparent and reliable information on the sustainability, durability and
carbon footprint of the products, and highlights that market transparency is a tool facilitating
uptake of technologically and environmentally superior net zero products.
The European Parliament and the Council have called on the Commission to consider further
action in the area. In December 2020, in its conclusions on making the recovery circular and
green8, the Council noted its appreciation of the Commission’s intention to ensure the
substantiation of environmental claims on the basis of environmental impacts along products’
life cycles. In its resolution on the New Circular Economy Action Plan9, the European
Parliament strongly supported the Commission’s intention to make proposals to regulate the
use of environmental claims through the establishment of solid and harmonised calculation
methods covering the full value chain.
1
European Commission, Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending
Directives 2005/29/EC and 2011/83/EU as regards empowering consumers for the green transition through better
protection against unfair practices and better information, COM(2022) 143 final, available at: https://eur-
lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52022PC0143&from=EN
2
Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-
to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives
97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No
2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (Unfair Commercial Practices Directive), OJ L 149,
11.6.2005, p. 22–39, as amended.
3
SWD(2022) 85 final; EUR-Lex - 52022SC0085 - EN - EUR-Lex (europa.eu)
4
Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the
European Economic and Social Committee of the Regions, The European Green Deal, COM(2019)640.
5
COM(2020)98 final, 11 March 2020.
6
COM(2020)696 final, 13 November 2020.
7
COM(2023)62final, 1 February 2023.
8
Council Conclusions, 14167/20.
9
European Parliament resolution of 10 February 2021 on the New Circular Economy Action Plan (2020/2077(INI))
EN 1 EN
Consumers want to be better informed on the environmental impacts of their consumption and
make better choices. The requests of the Conference on the Future of Europe10 include a call
for more transparency as regards sustainability and environmental footprint of products, in
particular in Proposal 5 on sustainable consumption, packaging and production and Proposal
20 on Defining standards within and outside the EU in environmental policies. The proposal
on environmental claims is the Commission’s reply to this call11.
Completing the EU legislative framework supporting more sustainable consumption will
contribute to reaching the Sustainable Development Goal 12.6 to encourage companies,
especially large and transnational companies, to adopt sustainable practices and to integrate
sustainability information into their reporting cycle’.
Further EU action in this area will also have a positive impact on global value chains
involving production processes in third countries. As a result, it will incentivise third country
companies to contribute to the green transition, in particular the businesses trading within the
EU internal market. Moreover, multilateral cooperation will be fostered with third countries to
ensure a good understanding of the new regulatory framework and its benefits. Additionally,
sustainable development chapters of the EU bilateral and region-to-region trade agreements
can create opportunities for cooperation in line with the overall EU objectives to increase the
sustainability dimension of its trade policy.
Barriers to boosting the potential of green markets in the EU through consumer
empowerment
In spite of consumers’ willingness to contribute to a greener and more circular economy in
their everyday lives12, their active and effective role in this green transition is hampered by
barriers to making environmentally sustainable consumption choices at the point of sale,
notable a lack of trust in the credibility of environmental claims and the proliferation of
misleading commercial practices related to the environmental sustainability of products.
The evidence collected to support the impact assessment3 accompanying the proposal on
empowering consumers for the green transition, which also accompanies the proposal on
environmental claims both through its inception impact assessment 13 and its public
consultation14 together with an additional public consultation carried out in 202015, suggests
that misleading practices, such as greenwashing and lack of transparency ad credibility of
environmental labels, occur at various stages of the consumption journey: during the
advertising stage, the purchasing stage or during the use of the products.
a) Consumers are faced with the practice of making unclear or not well-substantiated
environmental claims (‘greenwashing’)
The proposal on empowering consumers for the green transition defines an environmental
claim as any message or representation, which is not mandatory under Union law or national
law, including text, pictorial, graphic or symbolic representation, in any form, including
labels, brand names, company names or product names, in the context of a commercial
communication, which states or implies that a product or trader has a positive or no impact on
10
Conference on the Future of Europe, Report on the final outcome, May 2022
11
COM(2022)404final
12
European Commission, Behavioural Study on Consumers’ engagement in the circular economy, 2018, p. 10.
13
European Commission, Inception Impact Assessment: Empowering the consumer for the green transition, 2020.
14
A summary of the OPC is available via the European Commission’s ’Have your Say’ website:
https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12467-Empowering-the-consumer-for-the-
green-transition
15
Environmental performance of products & businesses – substantiating claims (europa.eu)
EN 2 EN
the environment or is less damaging to the environment than other products or traders,
respectively, or has improved their impact over time1.
The Commission carried out two inventories of environmental claims: one in 2014 16 and one
in 202017. The studies looked at a sample of 150 environmental claims for a wide range of
products against the principles of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive2 (UCPD):
clarity, unambiguity, accuracy and verifiability. The 2020 study found that a considerable
share of environmental claims (53.3%) provide vague, misleading or unfounded
information about products’ environmental characteristics across the EU and across a wide
range of product categories. The 2020 inventory of environmental claims also analysed the
substantiation of such claims looking at their clarity, accuracy, and the extent to which they
are substantiated with evidence that can be verified. The analysis found that 40% of claims
were unsubstantiated.
These results have also been confirmed by a sweep by the Consumer Protection Cooperation
authorities carried out in November 202018. Out of the 344 sustainability claims assessed,
authorities considered that in over half of the cases (57.5%), the trader did not provide
sufficient elements allowing for judgement of the claim’s accuracy. In many cases,
authorities had difficulties identifying whether the claim covered the whole product or only
one of its components (50%), whether it referred to the company or only certain products
(36%) and which stage of the products lifecycle it covered (75%)19.
Moreover, most stakeholders consulted agreed that greenwashing is a problem, with the
noticeable exception of industry representatives. More than half encountered misleading
claims and expressed less trust in environmental statements and logos managed by companies
or private entities19. In addition, most respondents to the targeted consultations indicated that
consumers lack awareness of the environmental impacts of products because the information
is not provided or not available20.
In general, consumer trust in environmental claims is quite low. During the 2020 open
public consultation15, the general public did not agree with the statement that they trust
environmental statements on products (1.57/ 4.00)21. The level of trust was higher for claims
on traders22, but still low (2.25/4.00).
b) Consumers are faced with the use of sustainability labels that are not always transparent
and credible
Environmental labels are a subset of environmental claims. The labels are in a form of a trust
mark, quality mark or equivalent setting apart and promoting a product/process or business
with reference to its environmental aspects. These labels are sometimes based on certification
schemes (environmental labelling schemes) which certify that a product/process or business
meets the requirements set up by the scheme and monitor compliance.
16
Consumer Market Study on Environmental Claims for Non-Food Products, European Commission 2014.
17
Environmental claims in the EU: Inventory and reliability assessment Final report, European Commission 2020.
Available at https://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/smgp/pdf/2020_Greenclaims_inventory.zip
18
2020 – sweep on misleading sustainability claims, Sweeps (europa.eu)
19
Screening of websites for ‘greenwashing': half of green claims lack evidence, available at:
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_21_269
20
SWD(2022) 85 final, Annex 2, pp. 66
21
Replies given on 1-5 Likert scales. These were converted into points to help consistent presentation and reflect well
the degree of agreement. “Do not know” replies received 0 points, “not interested at all” or “not effective at all
replies” 1 – at the other end of the scale, “very interested” or “always” replies received 4 point.
22
A claim on a trader refers to any claim made by the trader on itself as an organisation as opposed to a claim made
by the trader on one of its products (goods or services).
EN 3 EN
Environmental labels existing on the EU internal market are subject to different levels
of robustness, supervision and transparency, i.e., different governance models.
Additional confusion is expected to be caused by an increasing number of ecolabels covering
different aspects, adopting different operational approaches and being subject to different
levels of scrutiny (e.g. the openness of the process in developing them or the level and
independence of auditing and verification)23.
In the preparatory study to gather evidence on ways to empower consumers to play an active
role in the green transition24, an assessment of 232 active ecolabels in the EU also examined
their verification and certification aspects and concluded that almost half of the labels’
verification was either weak or not carried out. Moreover, consumers are not aware of the
distinction between labels governed by third party certification schemes and those based on
“self-certifications”, i.e. not verified by any third party.
In the consultation for the inception impact assessment24 and during the targeted
consultations, the proliferation of sustainability labels and logos was also identified as an
important and persistent problem across the EU by stakeholders from most stakeholder
groups. Similarly, in the open public consultation, over a quarter (27%) of participants
selected "the proliferation and/or lack of transparency/ understanding/reliability of
sustainability logos/labels on products and services" as a relevant obstacle to empowering
consumers for the green transition15.
This proliferation of labels combined with their varied governance models implies that
producers and retailers can apply a variety of strategies in opting for a specific sustainability
label. Very often, this also translates into companies displaying various labels to vouch for the
sustainability of their products. 34% of businesses identified the "the proliferation and/or
lack of transparency / understanding / reliability of sustainability logos / labels" as an
obstacle15. Indeed, companies that make the effort to adhere to or develop reliable
environmental labelling schemes are disadvantaged compared to companies that use
unreliable environmental labels as consumers often cannot tell the difference. This issue has
been amplified by the rapid emergence of a number of (private/voluntary) labelling schemes
at national / Member State level, making comparability across products increasingly
difficult for consumers.
Feedback from stakeholders shows a particularly strong support for EU action capable of
bringing about a common approach to the provision of sustainability information to
consumers, reinforce the level-playing field for business and to limit the proliferation of
labels and misleading environmental claims on the Single Market14.
Companies that offer truly sustainable products are disadvantaged compared to those
that do not. They also risk unnecessarily high compliance costs as EU countries start to
introduce different national solutions to address the problems described above25.
1.2. Consistency with existing policy provisions in the policy area
The EU initiative to empower consumers for the green transition
23
Preparatory study to gather evidence on ways to empower consumers to play an active role in the green transition,
October 2021. Available at Proposal for a Directive on empowering consumers for the green transition and annex
(europa.eu)
24
European Commission, Inception Impact Assessment: Empowering the consumer for the green transition, 2020-
overview of consultations in Annex 2 of the Impact Assessment, page 69.
25
More on consequences of the problems for consumers market and environment included in Annex 12 of
SWD(2022)85 final
EN 4 EN
The Unfair Commercial Practices Directive regulates misleading practices and misleading
omissions with general provisions that can be applied to environmental claims in business-to-
consumer transactions when they negatively affect consumers’ transactional decisions. It calls
on Member States’ consumer protection authorities to assess these practices case-by-case
following a transactional decision test (case-by-case assessment)26. It also establishes a
blacklist of commercial practices27 that shall in all circumstances be regarded as unfair
without the need for case-by-case assessment. Non-compliance with the requirements of the
directive is pursued by the consumer submitting a claim or a competent authority acting on
own initiative.
The proposal to amend the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive1 tackles in part the
problems listed in Section 1.1 (“greenwashing” and untransparent sustainability labels). It
implements a series of measures on environmental claims resulting from the preferred policy
options, including:
(1) The list of product characteristics about which a trader should not deceive a
consumer in Article 6(1) of Directive 2005/29/EC is amended to include
‘environmental or social impact, ‘durability’ and ‘reparability’.
(2) The list of actions which are to be considered misleading if they cause or are likely
to cause the average consumers to take a transactional decision that they would not
have otherwise taken, in Article 6(2) of Directive 2005/29/EC, is amended to include
‘making an environmental claim related to future environmental performance
without clear, objective and verifiable commitments and targets and an
independent monitoring system.
(3) The list of commercial practices which are considered unfair in all
circumstances, in Annex I of Directive 2005/29/EC, is extended to four practices
associated with greenwashing:
Displaying a sustainability label which is not based on a certification scheme
or not established by public authorities.
Making a generic environmental claim for which the trader is not able to
demonstrate recognised excellent environmental performance relevant to the
claim.
Making an environmental claim about the entire product when it concerns only
a certain aspect of the product.
Presenting requirements imposed by law on all products in the relevant product
category on the Union market as a distinctive feature of the trader’s offer.
The proposal on empowering consumers for the green transition thus addresses a wide range
of practices, products and sales methods in a more generalised way. It provides important
safeguards to protect consumers from misleading environmental claims and unreliable labels.
26
Article 6 and 7 of the Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005
concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council
Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial
Practices Directive’) (OJ L 149, 11.6.2005, p. 22).
27
Annex I of the Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning
unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive
84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and
Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices
Directive’) (OJ L 149, 11.6.2005, p. 22).
EN 5 EN
Other EU acts encouraging sustainable consumption by providing
environmental information
On top of the consumer protection framework, there is an existing EU legislative framework
that deals with the provision of environmental information, sets methodological requirements
on measuring and calculating environmental impacts, such as the EU certification
methodologies for carbon removals developed under the Carbon Removals Certification
Regulation28 (once adopted), or on information and labels on the environmental impacts,
aspects or performance of a product or trader. For instance, The Ecodesign Directive29
establishes a framework for setting mandatory ecodesign requirements for energy-related
products to encourage their energy performance and circular design and foster new business
models. The Commission also adopted a proposal for a new Ecodesign for Sustainable
Products Regulation30 in March 2022 to significantly improve the circularity, energy
performance, environmental impacts and other environmental sustainability aspects for
specific priority product groups. It will enable the setting of performance and information
requirements for almost all categories of physical goods placed on the EU market. Under the
Circular economy action plan and product policy, some other proposals made by the
Commission include information requirements, for example under the proposed Regulations
on marketing of construction products31 and on batteries and waste batteries32.
In addition, there are legal acts concerning labels developed at the EU level, both mandatory
and voluntary, such as the EU Ecolabel. Established in 1992, the EU Ecolabel is the official
voluntary label for environmental excellence of products in the EU demonstrating top
performance. The EU Ecolabel Regulation33 lays down rules for the establishment and
application of this voluntary scheme. Other related EU legislation on labels include the Eco-
Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS)34, the Regulations on the organic farming label35,
the energy labelling36 and the CE marking37.
Completing the set of EU rules on environmental claims
To continue to address the identified problem of greenwashing and unreliable environmental
labels, the current framework could benefit from more specific requirements on unregulated
claims, be it for specific product groups, specific sectors or for specific environmental impacts
or environmental aspects. This proposal on substantiating and communicating
28
COM(2022) 672 final
29
Directive 2009/125/EC of the European parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 establishing a
framework for the setting of ecodesign requirements for energy-related products, L 285/10
30
COM(2022) 142 final
31
Regulation (EU) No 305/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2011 laying down
harmonised conditions for the marketing of construction products and repealing Council Directive 89/106/EEC (OJ
L 88, 4.4.2011, p. 5).
32
COM/2020/798 final.
33
Regulation (EC) No 66/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 on the Eu
Ecolabel (OJ L 27, 30.1.2010, p. 1).
34
Regulation (EC) No 1221/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 on the
voluntary participation by organisations in a Community eco-management and audit scheme (EMAS), repealing
Regulation (EC) No 761/2001 and Commission Decisions 2001/681/EC and 2006/193/EC (OJ L 342, 22.12.2009,
p. 1).
35
Regulation (EU) 2018/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 on organic production
and labelling of organic products and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007, OJ L 150, 14.6.2018, p. 1.
36
Regulation (EU) 2017/1369 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2017 setting a framework for
energy labelling and repealing Directive 2010/30/EU (OJ L 198, 28.7.2017, p. 1).
37
Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 establishing a
framework for the setting of ecodesign requirements for energy-related products (recast) (OJ L 285, 31.10.2009, p.
10).
EN 6 EN
environmental claims complements as lex specialis the existing set of EU rules on
consumer protection. The proposal will allow to implement fully the preferred policy
options identified in the impact assessment, as described in Section 3.2.
The key objectives of the proposal on environmental claims are thus to:
– Increase the level of environmental protection and contribute to accelerating the
green transition towards a circular, clean and climate neutral economy in the EU;
– Protect consumers and companies from greenwashing and enable consumers to
contribute to accelerating the green transition by making informed purchasing
decisions based on credible environmental claims and labels;
– Improve the legal certainty as regards environmental claims and the level playing
fields on the internal market, boost the competitiveness of economic operators that
make efforts to increase the environmental sustainability of their products and
activities, and create cost saving opportunities for such operators that are trading
across borders.
The scope of this proposal, being lex specialis, is aligned with the corresponding lex
generalis. The revised Unfair Commercial Practices Directive covers all voluntary business-
to-consumer commercial practices before, during and after a commercial transaction in
relation to a product. The scope of this proposal covers the substantiation and communication
of voluntary environmental claims.
In the same way, the proposal on empowering consumers for the green transition deals with
sustainability labels which cover environmental or social aspects or both. This proposal is
however limited to environmental labels only, i.e. those covering predominantly
environmental aspects of a product or trader.
As mentioned, the proposal on environmental claims is meant to act as a safety net for all
sectors where environmental claims or labels are unregulated at EU level. It does not
aim to change existing or future sectoral rules. To the contrary, the assessment and
communication requirements set out in other Union legislation will take precedence over the
requirements set out in the proposal, and thus should be used to substantiate and communicate
environmental claims in these specific areas.
1.3. Consistency with other Union policies
The proposal on environmental claims supports the objectives of the European Green Deal
and contributes to resolving the triple crises of climate change, pollution, and biodiversity
loss. It contributes to the fight against greenwashing that was identified as a priority in the
Commission’s new circular economy action plan5 and new consumer agenda6. the proposal
will also reinforce overarching strategies such as the zero pollution action plan38 or the
biodiversity strategy for 203039 and complement strategies targeting specific sectors, such as
the Farm-to-Fork strategy40, or issues, such as the calls for improving water efficiency and
reuse in the EU strategy on adaptation to climate change41.
As described, this proposal for a directive on environmental claims and the proposal
amending the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive jointly establish a coherent policy
framework to help the Union in the green transition by transforming consumption patterns in
38
https://ec.europa.eu/environment/strategy/zero-pollution-action-plan_en
39
COM(2020) 380 final
40
COM/2020/381 final.
41
COM(2021) 82
EN 7 EN
a more sustainable direction. They aim to contribute to a greener internal market by
encouraging the reduction of the environmental footprint of products consumed in the Union.
They will also contribute to reaching the objective of the European Climate Law of balancing
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and removals within the Union at the latest by 2050 by
tackling claims related to GHG emissions reductions and climate neutrality.
2. LEGAL BASIS, SUBSIDIARITY AND PROPORTIONALITY
2.1 Legal basis
This proposal is based on Article 114 of the Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union
(TFEU), which applies to measures that aim to establish or ensure the functioning of the
internal market, while taking as a base a high level of environmental protection.
Different requirements imposed by national legislation or private initiatives regulating
environmental claims create an unnecessary burden for companies when trading cross-
border, as they need to comply with different requirements in each country. This affects
their capacity to operate in and take advantage of the internal market. At the same time,
market participants have difficulties with identifying reliable environmental claims and
making optimal purchasing decisions on the internal market.
The proposal therefore aims to ensure the functioning of the internal market for economic
actors operating in the internal market and consumers relying on environmental claims. The
measures proposed in this Directive will increase the level of environmental protection, while
leading to further harmonisation regarding the regulation of environmental claims, and would
avoid market fragmentation due to diverging national approaches that were introduced or
would be introduced in the absence of rules at EU level.
The internal market dimension of reaching the environmental objective is predominant and
therefore Article 114 remains the appropriate legal basis.
2.2 Subsidiarity (for non-exclusive competence)
Putting in place a common set of rules within the EU internal market is essential to ensuring a
level playing field for economic operators, If Member States act individually, the level of
environmental protection would remain suboptimal and there is a risk that competing different
systems, based on different methods and approaches, would be used.
The proposal on empowering consumers for the green transition does not specify what
the companies should do to properly substantiate their environmental claims. This in
turn can lead to significantly diverging approaches across the EU to substantiate claims. This
would fragment the internal market by distorting the conditions of competition and
necessitating the amendment/modifications of the claims each time internal borders are
crossed. This in turn brings legal uncertainty and raises compliance costs as well as unfair
competition in the Single Market and undermines efficient market functioning.
The EU is well placed to promote further harmonisation of methodological requirements to
assess the environmental impacts of products, services and organisations across the Single
Market, relying on experiences of Member States and private initiatives in this area. The EU
can bring an important added value, and further co-ordination would bring cost savings for
governments and the private sector.
Feedback from stakeholders shows a particularly strong support for EU action capable of
bringing about a common approach to the provision of sustainability information to
consumers and to limit the proliferation of labels and misleading environmental claims. If
Member States were to act individually and without a guiding framework, there is a high risk
EN 8 EN
to end up with many competing different systems leading to a fragmented internal market,
especially for cross-border services (for instance, digital services).
EU action is justified and necessary, because a harmonised and well-functioning internal EU
market with regards to environmental claims would increase the level of environmental
protection and set a level playing field for businesses operating in the EU. The proposal also
alleviates the difficulties faced by national authorities in enforcing the existing principle-
based provisions of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive in such complex areas as
misleading environmental claims. Further EU coordination brings cost savings for both
governments and private actors involved, as well as strengthens leverage on related global
processes, including global value chains.
2.3 Proportionality
The measures in the proposal do not go beyond what is necessary to enable consumers to
make informed purchasing decisions and promoting sustainable consumption, based on
reliable and verified information.
The proportionality of the general criteria for environmental claims used in marketing towards
consumers is ensured by introducing uniform requirements which companies should follow
when making such claims. This proposal does not require any specific assessment method for
the substantiation of any particular environmental claims and relies upon general requirements
that generate reliable information for consumers. The proposal will also provide competent
national bodies with uniform criteria. This will help them assess the fairness of any
environmental claim, providing a high degree of legal certainty and facilitating
enforcement activities. It is also the result of thorough consideration of stakeholder input, in
particular from businesses, including SMEs.
The proportionality of requirements on environmental labels concerns the fairness of their
display in marketing to consumers. There are only a limited number of uniform requirements
to ensure the transparency and credibility of such labels towards users. These uniform
requirements ensure that entities running environmental labels, as well as the companies
applying for those labels, do not face disproportionate costs. At the same time, it will ensure a
high degree of legal certainty for companies. By providing competent national bodies with
uniform criteria to assess the fairness of the use of any environmental label, this measure will
also facilitate enforcement activities and pursue a high level of consumer protection.
2.4 Choice of the instrument
The proposal is a stand-alone legal instrument that would not amend existing legislation. It
sets a framework for the substantiation of voluntary environmental claims. Given that it aims
to ensure consumer protection in an area regulated by Directives, such legal form fits better
the existing Union and national legal framework and the enforcement mechanisms established
by the Member States. It is therefore considered that the most appropriate instrument is a
Directive.
3. RESULTS OF STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATIONS & IMPACT ASSESSMENT,
COMPLIANCE WITH BETTER REGULATION PRINCIPLES & FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS
3.1. Stakeholder consultations
In the preparatory process of this proposal, the Commission consulted stakeholders via:
EN 9 EN
– Several public consultations in the context of the proposal on empowering consumers
for the green transition15,42.
– A public consultation on the product policy framework for the circular economy,
with a section dedicated to potential future policy options based on the
Environmental Footprint methods (from 29 November 2018 to 24 January 2019)43.
Out of the 291 respondents, some indicated that companies should be able to freely
choose how to generate environmental information, provided that they meet
minimum criteria to avoid greenwashing. Respondents also highlighted the need for
flexibility regarding the medium of communication: it should not be mandatory to
use a label or QR code to provide information, as the type of information and level of
detail may depend on the target audience. The respondents also highlighted the need
to offer an SME tool or support from the European Commission for implementation.
– Online targeted consultations that involved key stakeholders related to the
Environmental Footprint methods (from12 November 2018 to 18 December 2018)
with 124 respondents 44.
– An open public consultation on the green claims initiative, between 27 August and 3
December 2020, through which 362 contributions were made16.
Some business associations suggested the use of independent
certification/verification organizations that operate in accordance with
ISO14025.
Large companies highlighted that the EU framework should allow for
flexibility regarding the medium of communication used to make claims.
Environmental NGOs expressed that single environmental scores should, by no
means, be a way to hide trade-offs, and should be avoided.
Consumer NGOs also indicated that environmental claims could be
substantiated by existing tools such as the type 1 ecolabels, Eco Lighthouse,
EMAS and ISO14001.
A few public authorities’ representatives thought it should be possible to
substantiate claims with ‘official’ ecolabels such as the Nordic Swan and EU
Ecolabel. Public administrations slightly prefer independent certification and
verification.
As for citizens, independent certification/verification by accredited
organisations is the preferred option.
A stakeholder workshop with several sessions in November 2020 dedicated to overall
feedback, feedback on communication options, on practical challenges for companies in
substantiating environmental claims, on the reliability of information and on implications for
ecolabels; with on average 200 stakeholders participated per session45. The workshops
confirmed that greenwashing needs to be addressed and that there is the need for a
42
Overview of all consultations carried out in the context of the Impact Assessment can be found in Annex 2 of
COM(2022)85 final
43
https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/1740-Towards-an-EU-Product-Policy-
Framework-contributing-to-the-Circular-Economy_en
44
https://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/smgp/pdf/EF_stakeholdercons19.pdf
45
More information available at https://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/smgp/initiative_on_green_claims.htm
EN 10 EN
harmonised EU-level approach. Several stakeholders indicated the need to continue using the
EU Ecolabel and other reliable type I ecolabels.
3.2 Impact assessment
3.2.1 Problem definition & preferred policy option
This proposal is based on the impact assessment published together with the Commission
proposal for empowering consumers for the green transition46. The Commission’s Regulatory
Scrutiny Board (RSB) first issued a negative opinion with comprehensive comments on 5
February 2021. After a significant revision of the initial draft, the RSB provided a positive
opinion with further comments on 17 September 202147. Annex I of the impact
assessment explains how the RSB comments were addressed.
The impact assessment identifies two problems divided into a number of sub-problems. This
proposal focusses on one the two problems and two of its sub-problems.
Problem 2: Consumers face misleading commercial practices related to the sustainability of
products.
Sub-Problem 2.2: Consumers are faced with unclear or poorly-substantiated environmental
claims (‘greenwashing’) from companies.
Sub-problem 2.3: Consumers are faced with sustainability labels that are not always
transparent or credible48.
A number of policy options were considered for each individual sub-problem. The Unfair
Commercial Practices Directive and its amendment are designed to act as lex generalis. As
such, it was decided that some of the elements of the preferred policy options selected in the
impact assessment to tackle sub-problem 2.2 and sub-problem 2.3 would not be implemented
via the initiative on Empowering consumers for the green transition but via dedicated and
complementary lex specialis, a proposal on environmental claims.
On the basis of a multi-criteria analysis, complemented by a cost-benefit analysis, and a
qualitative assessment of the proportionality of the various options considered, a combination
of two preferred policy options49 were proposed to address these problems:
(1) Prohibition of environmental claims that do not fulfil a minimum set of criteria50 (to
address sub-problem 2.2)
The preferred option would ensure consumers are protected from greenwashing, since a
certain standard will need to be met by those making such claims. It would also facilitate
enforcement by consumer protection authorities.
(2) Prohibition of sustainability labels not meeting minimum transparency and
credibility requirements51 (to address sub-problem 2.3)
The preferred option would ensure consumers are protected from being misled by such labels
and tools.
46
SWD(2022) 85 final
47
SEC(2022) 165
48
This proposal does not focus on digital information tools which are addressed in the proposal on Empowering
consumers for the green transition.
49
SWD(2022) 85 final, Section 7: Preferred Policy Options, pp 59.
50
SWD(2022)85 final, pp. 29-30
51
SWD(2022)85 final, pp. 31-32
EN 11 EN
Furthermore, in the course of the preparation of this initiative, the following additional
measures were identified to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of the EU rules on
environmental claims:
– establishment of a verification mechanism to facilitate the implementation and
enforcement of ensuring that minimum criteria on substantiation of claims are
respected, that a level playing field on the EU market is created, and that companies
operating on the single market have more legal certainty and less burdens;
– use of aggregated scores on environmental impacts to be limited to environmental
claims, including labels, established at EU level only with the aim to ensure
implementation of the lessons learned from the work on a common standardised
method at EU level (see box below);
– the possibility to exclude microenterprises from the requirements on substantiation
and linked rules on communication to avoid disproportionate impacts on the smallest
traders;
– to effectively limit the proliferation of environmental labels and focus efforts on
increasing the take-up of existing public schemes and on developing EU level
labelling requirements for the single market,
– the creation of new private schemes should be approved by Member States
only and if they provide added value, and
– the creation of new public schemes at the national or regional level should be
prohibited. New public schemes should be developed at the EU level only.
Lessons learnt from the work on a standard methodology to substantiate claims on
environmental impacts
When initially preparing for an initiative on green claims, the European Commission launched
work and consultations on the option of using a standard methodology to substantiate
environmental claims. The scope of this work focused on the use of EU product and
organisation environmental footprint methods to substantiate environmental claims.
Depending on product category, these methods52 allow to measure the environmental
performance of a product or organisation throughout the value chain, from the extraction of
raw materials to the end of life. The environmental footprint methods aim to provide robust
and prominent methodologies developed in full transparency with stakeholders and based on
scientific evidence.
In the preparatory work the Commission considered as one of these options to establish an EU
legal framework requiring companies making claims related to the impacts covered by the
environmental footprint methods53 to substantiate them via those methods. However, even if
the environmental footprint methods are helpful to businesses to identify the areas where they
should improve their environmental impact and performance, and can adequately substantiate
certain claims on several product categories, the methods do not yet cover all relevant impact
52
More information on the methods and on the pilot phase during which they were tested can be found here:
https://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/smgp/
53
Climate change, ozone depletion, human toxicity – cancer, human toxicity – non-cancer, particulate matter,
ionizing radiation – human health, photochemical ozone formation – human health, acidification, eutrophication –
terrestrial, eutrophication – freshwater, eutrophication – marine, ecotoxicity – fresh water, land use, water use,
resource use – minerals and metals, resource use – fossils.
EN 12 EN
categories for all product types (e.g. as regards marine fisheries – the sustainability of the
targeted fish stock; as regards food and agricultural products – farm level biodiversity and
nature protection, as well as different farming practices, as regards textiles- microplastics
release) and may therefore give an incomplete picture of the environmental credentials of a
product in the green claims context. In addition, many environmental claims are also made on
environmental aspects (e.g. durability, reusability, reparability, recyclability, recycled content,
use of natural content) for which the environmental footprint methods are not suited to serve
as the only method for substantiation. Addressing the very wide and fast changing area of
environmental claims by means of a single method has its limitations. Prescribing a single
method like the environmental footprint as the standard methodology of substantiation for all
environmental claims would not be appropriate and pose a risk for companies not being able
to communicate on relevant environmental aspects or performance in relation to their
products or activities.
For these reasons and based on the results of the consultation, an internal assessment of the
implications in terms of burden to companies and further exchanges with stakeholders, the
option of using one standard methodology to substantiate environmental claims was not
pursued. Instead, a more flexible approach based on the preferred policy option from the
impact assessment developed for the initiative on empowering consumers for the green
transition was considered appropriate.
3.2.2. Impacts of the preferred policy option
The preferred policy option resulting from the cost-benefit analysis of the impact assessment
has been translated in several provisions both in the proposal on empowering consumers for
the green transition and the proposal on environmental claims. The impacts listed below
concern the preferred policy option as a whole and thus encompass provisions from both
proposals.
The proposal includes measures that are relevant for the Commission's ‘one in one out’
approach to reduce administrative burden and were previously reported and accounted for in
the impact assessment accompanying the proposal on empowering consumers for the green
transition.
Expected impacts of the set scope
The proposal introduces minimum requirements on substantiation and communication of
environmental claims which are subject to third party verification to be delivered prior to the
claim being used in commercial communications. While this measure is expected to eliminate
misleading or false claims and will help to ensure proper enforcement, it will put an additional
cost on traders wishing to make such claims. The impact on smaller enterprises is expected to
be proportionately higher than on larger companies. For this reason, and to ensure that the
smallest companies (e.g. small family farms selling directly to consumers) are not
disproportionately affected by this additional administrative cost, the proposal exempts
microenterprises (fewer than 10 employees and annual turnover does not exceed EUR 2
million54) from the obligations of this proposal as regards substantiation and communication
requirements linked to substantiation assessment. However, in case these smallest companies
nevertheless wish to receive a certificate of conformity of the environmental claim that is
recognised across the Union they should comply with all requirements of this proposal.
54
Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium-
sized enterprises (OJ L 124, 20.5.2003, p. 36).
EN 13 EN
All traders, however, including the smallest companies, remain within the scope of the Unfair
Commercial Practices Directive. This means that its general rules on environmental claims
will still apply, and the consumers affected by unfair commercial practices will still be able to
table complaints to the competent authorities and seek redress in national and EU courts.
Moreover, the proposal also asks of Member States to take the appropriate measures to help
small and medium-sized enterprises apply the requirements of the proposal. With facilitated
access to measures such as financial support and organisational and technical assistance, it is
expected that these companies will be encouraged to be part of the green transition.
Expected impacts of the requirements on substantiation of claims
By forbidding claims that do not meet the minimum criteria, this measure will contribute to
improving the reliability of the information provided to consumers and therefore will have
a positive impact on the decision making of consumers facilitating the choice of products
offering better environmental performance, and thus an increased consumer welfare. With
certain consumers purchasing products that will be trully better for the environment, it is
estimated that the impacts on the environment will be highly positive..
In terms of impacts on businesses, claims that do not meet these minimum criteria will have
to be removed. The removal of the claims will require adjustments to product packages,
flyers, etc., but this will be a one-off adjustment cost55.
In addition, businesses will have to bear the cost of substantiation of claims. This cost will
depend to a large extent on the type of environmental claim the company voluntarily wishes
to make and for how many products. Claims regarding environmental impact of a product
along the life-cycle (e.g. reduction of GHG emissions across the life-cycle and value chain)
will require a significantly higher investment than claims focusing on a specific
environmental aspect (e.g. recycled content in the packaging). Depending on the nature and
complexity of the claim, the related substantiation cost can vary significantly. For example,
substantiation costs for a simple claim, e.g. on materials used in production, are estimated at
EUR 50056. If a company decides, for instance, to make a claim on the environmental
footprint of one of their products and choses to conduct a study using the product
environmental footprint method, it would cost around EUR 8 000 (this can decrease to EUR
4000 in case a product environmental footprint category rules exists). If the chosen claim
concerns, e.g., the footprint of the organisation itself, using the organisation environmental
footrpint methods to substantiate the claim can amount to EUR 54 000 (in case sectoral rules
do not exist)57.
However, it remains a decision of companies to include (or not) environmental claims in their
voluntary commercial communications. This means that the companies can control their
costs by determining the scope of the claim (if any) considering its expected return on
investment. In short, the costs of substantiation are of a voluntary nature to companies as they
55
For the very small share of products in stock just before the approval of the option, it is assumed that the claims
will be removed by the seller (for example, by covering them with a sticker). This will impose some costs in the
first two years of implementation of the option for the small share of products in stock, after which we assume that
all these products have been sold.
56
In-house estimate for a specific claim on an individual impact (e.g. share in % of bio-based (or recycled) content of
a product) for which the evidence is straightforward, i.e. a claim that can be substantiated based on readily available
information/documents on materials used in production.
57
In-house estimate that concerns the validation of a claim on the environmental footprint of the entire organisation.
Average values based on an additional, targeted survey made by DG ENV with inputs from seven of the main
consultants that have been supporting PEFCR/OEFSR developments, cross-checked with other sources from the
literature.
EN 14 EN
are part of one’s marketing strategy and therefore credible estimations of the overall cost for
the Union market are difficult.
When it comes to enforcement costs and other costs, the competent authorities will need to
assess to what extent the specific claim complies with the criteria set out under this option, i.e.
if the company making the claim holds a certificate of conformity delivered by an accredited
verifier. However a number of the interviewed consumer protection authorities indicated that
the option might lead to savings as it will mean that less resources are needed to substantiate
their assessment of “greenwashing”.
Expected impacts of the requirements on communication of claims
It is expected that the rules on communication will result in clearer and more transparent
claims and thus will increase consumer welfare. In terms of costs to businesses, once the
assessment to substantiate the claim is in place, the additional cost of complying with the
communication requirements will be negligible and will mostly be embedded in the cost of
substantiation.
Expected impacts of the requirements on labelling schemes
The introduction of minimum criteria for all environmental labels will increase the
transparency and credibility of labels (and slow down or even reverse the current proliferation
of these labels) and will enhance the quality of consumer decision-making. Consumers will be
assured that the products holding a sustainability label will meet minimum requirement on
transparency and credibility, improving consumer trust and understanding of the labels. These
additional requirements on governance of the labelling schemes are expected to reduce the
number of labels, as schemes that are not robust will be weaned out. It is to be noted that the
conditions for joining environmental labelling schemes for small and medium sized
enterprises are proportionate to the size and turnover of the companies.
The introduction of minimum criteria for assessing the fairness of sustainability labels, as
envisaged under option 2.3.B, is expected to increase consumer welfare. When it comes to
impacts on businesses this measure is expected to contribute to a level-playing field between
products displaying labels as all will have to adhere to the same minimum criteria.
Furthermore, it will also contribute to a level playing field between organisations running
labels.
In addition, this measure is expected to contribute to reducing the barriers to cross-border
trade by avoiding non-harmonised national approaches by the Member States concerned with
the proliferation of labels/logos that are non-transparent or not credible. This will decrease
legal uncertainty and costs to companies as they will have to adhere to similar rules within the
internal market.
Some administrative costs are expected for the entities running and managing the
labels/logos58. They will also have substantive compliance costs resulting from implementing
the necessary changes in their internal processes, including carrying out third party
certifications for each application (if they are not doing it already at the baseline). The costs
incurred by the entities running and managing the labels, as quantified in the impact
assessment, will be passed on to the manufacturers and sellers applying for the label.
As for indirect costs, the costs of applying for labels are expected to increase. On the other
hand, the increased harmonisation might reduce the need to apply for several labels.
58
Details on administrative cost break down in SWD(2022) 85 final, pp. 200
EN 15 EN
Enforcement costs for public administration estimated in the impact assessment are not
expected to be significant since the proposed minimum criteria require all relevant
information to be provided online and the labels require 3rd party verification.
Further measures on labelling, developed additionally to the impact assessment, will provide a
strong support to the achievement of the objective to stop proliferation of environmental
labelling schemes across the EU and improve the functioning of the Internal Market. By
putting a halt on new public schemes, regional and national authorities will be prevented from
developing labels and labelling schemes that will have to be reviewed or abandoned soon
after the introduction of an equivalent label at the EU level. The period between the adoption
of this measure and its implementation will provide time for planning and prevent those
additional costs for public authorities. Developing labels at the EU level for the same product
groups will also ensure a more efficient use of resources than if these were developed at the
national level.
The uncontrolled establishment of new labelling schemes developed by private operators will
also be reduced. Member State authorities will have to validate the development of such
schemes based on their added value. This is expected to contribute to the reduction of the
proliferation of schemes. The administrative cost for public authorities for developing and
implementing the validation procedure is difficult to estimate because there is no certainty as
to the possible number of applications. This measure is expected to incur an administrative
cost for companies in submitting the information accompanying their request to Member
State authorities to develop a private labelling scheme. This administrative cost has not yet
been reported and is relevant for the ‘one in one out’ approach to reduce administrative
burden. However, the costs are not expected to be significant, as the number of such
submissions is expected to be relatively low due to an advance notice of limitations on
establishment of such schemes resulting from the delay between the date this proposal is
made and the date of transposition (expected to be around 4 years).
Limiting the possibility for labels to present a rating or score based on an aggregated indicator
of environmental impacts to only those developed at the EU level aims at reducing consumer
confusion and misinformation as well as overall proliferation of labels. There is a risk that the
nature of an aggregate indicator could be used to dilute negative impacts of certain parameters
of the product with more positive impacts of other parameters and transmit misleading
information to the consumer regarding the actual main impacts of the product. It is essential to
stop potential schemes with aggregate scoring at regional or national scale to ensure
harmonisation in the internal market. Moreover, such labels are usually based on different
methodologies for the same product group, which may result in the same product receiving
different rating depending on the scheme.
Expected impacts of the ex-ante verification
The ex-ante verification carried out by independent accredited bodies will facilitate and
support the enforcement of the proposal’s requirements without putting an excessive strain
on the competent authorities’ resources. The certificate of conformity allows the local
competent authorities to easily check the reliability of a claim on the market. The complaints
against claims for which a valid certificate of conformity exists could be handled quicker
contributing to cost savings of enforcement as compared to business as usual.
Companies making environmental claims would benefit from the process of certification of
claims because the certificate of conformity recognised across the EU would provide legal
certainty and would require only one certification within the EU making the process of
certification cheaper and easier for entities trading within the internal market.
EN 16 EN
As for administrative costs for companies, they would need to submit an ex-ante request to
a ‘verifier’ for a certificate of conformity before making an environmental claim. This
administrative cost will depend on the scope of every voluntary claim made and the expected
quantities of claims, making the overall cost for the Union market difficult to estimate in a
credible manner. For this reason this cost has not yet been reported while it is relevant for the
‘one in one out’ approach to reduce administrative burden.
Expected progress towards relevant sustainable development goals
Regarding SDG 12 ensuring sustainable consumption and production patterns, the
implementation of the preferred policy option in this proposal and in the proposal
empowering consumers for the green transition is expected to lead to an increase in the
purchase of products which do not deceive the consumer as to their environmental impact.
The initiatives are expected to better protect consumers against unfair commercial practices
such as greenwashing or non-transparent voluntary sustainability labels, which are not
compatible with the green transition. As for SDG 13 on climate action, the initiatives are
expected to lead to a saving of 5 – 7 MtCO2e over a period of 15 years59.
3.3. Regulatory fitness and simplification
The proposal is a new initiative aiming to complement the general consumer law directives
and specifically, as lex specialis, the proposal on empowering consumers for the green
transition. The proposal aims directly at reducing regulatory burdens by strengthening the
functioning of the internal market for green products and companies and by setting minimum
criteria on environmental claims. It will reduce the risk of legal fragmentation of the single
market and increase legal certainty. This, in turn, is expected to result in cost savings for
businesses willing to make such claims and for competent authorities responsible for the
enforcement of consumer law. Moreover, the proposal foresees a review clause six years after
entry into force to assess if the directive achieved its objectives, and whether further
harmonisation is needed as regards substantiation and communication of environmental
claims to achieve these objectives in a more efficient manner. The proposal concerns
environmental claims made in both the physical and digital environments and is thus
considered digital-ready.
3.4. Fundamental rights
The proposal is in accordance with Article 38 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights,
according to which the EU must ensure a high level of consumer protection. This will be
ensured by ensuring the reliability, comparability and verifiability of environmental claims
and by addressing greenwashing and the use of unreliable and non-transparent environmental
claims and labels. The proposal will also enhance the right to a high level of environmental
protection and the improvement of the quality of the environment, as enshrined in Article 37
of the Charter. In addition, by fighting greenwashing, the proposal will ensure a level playing
field for businesses when marketing their greenness and therefore guarantees the freedom to
conduct a business in accordance with Union law and national laws and practices.
4. BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS
The initiative involves a budget of a total of approx. EUR 25 million until 2027 (i.e. under the
current MFF).
59
SWD(2022) 85 final
EN 17 EN
As detailed in the Legislative financial statement, the initiative foresees human resources and
administrative expenditure to implement the Directive and prepare delegated and
implementing acts.
It also foresees appropriations which will be fully financed through redeployment within the
LIFE programme envelope. As detailed in the tables included in Section 3 of the Legislative
Financial Statement, this amount covers the acquisition of environmental footprint and other
required datasets to support companies, especially SMEs, in complying with the proposal on
environmental claims. Indeed, public access to this information for SMEs, larger companies,
public agencies and all interested parties will help reduce costs for developing and
strengthening their own methodologies and potentially help decreasing the costs for the users
of the developed methodologies. The access to environmental footprint datasets will also
support the implementation of other EU policies on environmental sustainability and helping
consumers to make the right choices, such as the proposal for Ecodesign for Sustainable
Products Regulation (ESPR). The ESPR introduces the possibility to set mandatory
information requirements, which may also be linked with labelling requirements, and will
result in improved information flows through Digital Product Passports. The EF datasets will
support the calculation and setting of information and performance requirements in delegated
acts linked to the ESPR, e.g. related to carbon and environmental footprint, based on a
harmonised set of high-quality secondary data. Together those data and evidence-based
policies will lead to a better-informed consumer that can trust the environmental information
provided by companies.
5. OTHER ELEMENTS – IMPLEMENTATION PLANS & MONITORING, EVALUATION &
REPORTING ARRANGEMENT
The Commission will submit a report, assessing the achievement of objectives of this
Directive, to the European Parliament and Council no later than six years after its
adoption. Member States are to regularly monitor the application of this Directive based on an
overview of environmental claims that have been notified to the enforcement authorities.
Member States are to supply this information to the Commission on an annual basis. The
European Environment Agency is to publish a bi-annual report with its assessment of the
evolution of environmental claims and labelling schemes in each Member State.
6. DETAILED EXPLANATION OF THE SPECIFIC PROVISIONS OF THE PROPOSAL
6.1. Scope of the proposal
Article 1 sets the scope. The proposal sets minimum requirements on the substantiation and
communication of voluntary environmental claims and environmental labelling in business-
to-consumer commercial practices, without any prejudice to other Union legislation setting
out conditions on environmental claims as regards certain products or sectors (as described in
Section 1.2).
6.2. Requirements on substantiation of environmental claims
Article 3 of the proposal focuses on elements that have not been integrated to the consumer
protection legislation, notably as regards the substantiation of claims, and in some instances
provides additional clarifications. The proposal requires that the substantiation of explicit
environmental claims shall be based on an assessment that meets the selected minimum
criteria to prevent claims from being misleading, namely that the underpinning assessment:
– relies on recognised scientific evidence and state of the art technical knowledge;
EN 18 EN
– demonstrates the significance of impacts, aspects and performance from a life-cycle
perspective;
– takes into account all significant aspects and impacts to assess the performance;
– demonstrates whether the claim is accurate for the whole product or only for parts of
it (for the whole life cycle or only for certain stages, for all the trader’s activities or
only a part of them);
– demonstrates that the claim is not equivalent to requirements imposed by law;
– provides information on whether the product performs environmentally significantly
better than what is common practice;
– identifies whether a positive achievement leads to significant worsening of another
impact;
– requires greenhouse gas offsets to be reported in a transparent manner;
– includes accurate primary or secondary information.
Microenterprises (fewer than 10 employees and with an annual turnover not exceeding EUR 2
million60) are exempted from the requirements of this article unless they wish to receive a
certificate of conformity of the environmental claim in which case they will have to comply
with these requirements.
In addition, Article 4 sets out further requirements for comparative claims (i.e. claims that
state or imply that a product or trader has less or more environmental impacts or performs
better or worse regarding environmental aspects than other products or traders). These
requirements are:
the use of equivalent information for the assessment of environmental impacts,
aspects or performance of compared products;
the use of data generated or sourced in an equivalent manner for the products or
traders that are subject to comparisons;
the coverage of stages along the value chain is equivalent for the products and traders
compared while ensuring that the most significant stages are taken into account for
products and traders compared;
the coverage of environmental impacts, aspects or performances is equivalent for the
products and traders compared and ensures that those most significant are taken into
account for all products and traders compared;
the assumptions used for the comparison are set consistent for the products and
traders compared.
for comparative claims on improvement of impacts (compared to earlier version of
product) include explaining the impact of improvement on other aspects and impacts
and stating the baseline year.
Different types of claims will require different levels of substantiation. The proposal does not
prescribe a single method and does not require conducting a full life-cycle analysis for each
type of a claim. The assessment used to substantiate explicit environmental claims need to
consider the life-cycle of the product or of the overall activities of the trader in order to
60
OJ L 124, 20.5.2003, p. 36
EN 19 EN
identify the relevant impacts which are subject to the claims, and to enable the trader to avoid
omissions of any relevant aspects. This is also necessary to check if the benefits claimed
result in a transfer of impacts to other stages of the life cycle or to significant increase of other
environmental impacts.
For the assessment to be considered robust, it should include primary, company-specific data,
for relevant aspects contributing significantly to the environmental performance of the
product or trader referred to in the claim. Consumer protection authorities in some countries
are starting to question product specific environmental claims if no primary data has been
used in the substantiation. The right balance should be found between ensuring relevant and
robust information for substantiating claims and the efforts needed to gather primary
information considering the accessibility of primary information. The requirement to include
primary information should consider how much influence the trader making the claim has
over the respective process, and if primary information is available. The requirement should
also consider if the processes are run by the trader making the claim and, in the case, where
they are not, if the trader has access to primary information on the process. Moreover, if the
process is not run by the trader making the claim and if primary information is not available,
the use of secondary information should be permitted, even for processes that contribute
significantly to the environmental performance of the product or trader. In any case, both
primary and secondary, i.e., average data, should show a high level of quality and accuracy.
It is deemed appropriate to address climate-related claims based on offsets in a more
transparent manner. Therefore, the proposal requires, for climate-related claims, to report
separately from greenhouse gas emissions any greenhouse gas emissions offsets used by the
traders, as additional environmental information, which is also the approach followed by the
product environmental footprint/organisation environmental footprint methods. In addition,
this information should also specify whether these offsets relate to emission reductions or
removals and ensure that the offsets relied upon are of high integrity and accounted for
correctly to coherently and transparently reflect the claimed impact on climate.
Microenterprises are exempted from the requirements of this article unless they wish to
receive a certificate of conformity of the environmental claim in which case they will have to
comply with these requirements.
The Commission should be empowered to adopt delegated acts to complement the
requirements on substantiation for certain types of claims. These delegated acts should in
principle follow the results of monitoring of evolution of environmental claims on the market
to allow prioritising claims that are prone to misleading consumers. However, for some types
of claims it may be necessary for the Commission to act prior to that.
6.3. Requirements on communication of environmental claims
The provisions of Article 5 respond to the problem of lack of reliable information on
product’s environmental characteristics61 for those traders who make an environmental claim.
These requirements also support the aim of ensuring that environmental claims are made on
products or traders that offer environmental benefits as compared to common practice.
Notably, the proposal sets out that, when communicated, all claims:
61
SWD(2022) 85 final, p.50: “In relation to sub-problem 1.1 (lack of reliable information on product’s environmental
characteristics at the point of sale), all options have been discarded at an early stage as their added value could not
be demonstrated, and the measures taken under the Green Claims Initiative and the Sustainable Products Initiative
are expected to reduce this sub-problem significantly.”
EN 20 EN
shall only cover environmental impacts, aspects or performance that are assessed in
accordance with the substantiation requirements laid down in this proposal and are
identified as significant for the respective product or trader;
where relevant for the claim made, shall include information on how consumers may
appropriately use the product to decrease environmental impacts;
shall be accompanied by information on the substantiation (including information on
product or activities of trader; aspects, impacts or performance covered by the claim;
other recognised international standards, where relevant; underlying studies and
calculations; how improvements that are subject to the claim are achieved; the
certificate of conformity and coordinates of the verifier).
Microenterprises are exempted from the requirements of this article as regards provision of
information on substantiation unless they wish to receive a certificate of conformity of the
environmental claim in which case they will have to comply with these requirements.
The Commission should be empowered to adopt delegated acts to complement the
requirements on communication for certain types of claims in case this is necessary to
complement the supplementary rules on substantiation adopted under Article 3. Furthermore,
Article 6 states that comparative claims on the improvement of an environmental impact of a
product as compared to another product of the same trader, or that the trader no longer sells to
consumers, shall be based on evidence that improvement is significant and achieved in the last
five years.
6.4. Provisions on environmental labels and labelling schemes
These requirements should be seen as complementary to the requirements on displaying a
sustainability label set out in the proposal on empowering consumers for the green transition
and the Commission guidance on interpretation and application of the Unfair Commercial
Practices Directive62.
On top of requirements on substantiation and communication applicable to all types of claims,
this proposal builds on the requirements of the proposal on empowering consumers63 banning
labels based on self-certification64, and provides additional safeguards to improve the quality
of ecolabelling schemes by requiring the following transparency and credibility requirements
(as per policy option from the impact assessment).
Article 7 ensures labels fulfil the requirements already set out in previous articles and subject
labels to the verification in accordance with Article 11.
The proliferation of environmental labels and the ensuing consumer confusion, market
fragmentation and increased burden from complying with requirements in different Member
States necessitate ambitious measures that benefit both consumers and businesses. Therefore,
in the course of the decision making process it was considered appropriate that the proposal
on environmental claims foresees additional provisions to target proliferation of labels,
beyond those assessed in the impact assessment accompanying this proposal and the proposal
Empowering consumers for the green transition, notably the prohibition of labels presenting a
62
Commission Notice – Guidance on the interpretation and application of Directive 2005/29/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market
(OJ C 526, 29.12.2021, p. 1).
63
COM(2022) 143 final, Annex to the Proposal for a Directive of the European parliament and of the Council
amending Directives 2005/29/EC and 2011/83/EU as regards empowering consumers for the green transition
through better protection against unfair practices and better information.
64
i.e. not based on a certification scheme, or not established by public authorities
EN 21 EN
rating or score based on an aggregated indicator representing cumulative environmental
impacts unless these are established at the EU level.
Article 8 further details requirements for environmental labelling schemes. These
requirements are relatively similar to the governance criteria of a number of well-known and
reputable public and private sustainability labelling schemes, and include as follows:
requirements on transparency and accessibility of information on ownership,
decision-making body and objectives,
the criteria underlying the award of labels are developed by experts and reviewed by
stakeholders;
the existence of complaint and resolution mechanism;
procedures for dealing with non-compliance and possibility of withdrawal or
suspension of labelling in case of persistent and flagrant non-compliance.
For the same reasons listed above on the proliferation of environmental labels and the ensuing
consumer confusion, Article 8 also introduces additional provisions to target the proliferation
of labelling schemes, notably:
prohibition of establishment of new national or regional publicly owned schemes ;
a validation procedure for new schemes established by private operators from the EU
and third countries that should be assessed by national authorities and validated only
if they demonstrate added value in terms of their environmental ambition, their
coverage of environmental impacts, of product category group or sector and their
ability to support the green transition of SMEs as compared to the existing Union,
national or regional schemes.
New public schemes from third countries wishing to operate on the Union market have to
meet the requirements of this proposal and shall be subject to prior notification and approval
by the Commission with the aim of ensuring that these schemes provide added value in terms
of environmental ambition, coverage of environmental impacts, product groups or sectors.
Article 9 sets the requirements for the review of environmental claims by traders.
6.5. Ex-ante verification of environmental claims and labelling schemes
Article 10 details how the substantiation and communication of environmental claims and
labels will have to be 3rd party verified and certified to comply with the requirements of the
Directive before the claim is used in a commercial communication. An officially accredited
body (the ‘verifier’) will carry out this ex-ante verification of claims submitted by the
company wishing to use it. This measure will ensure every claim that the consumer will be
exposed to had been verified to be reliable and trustworthy. The proposal also defines detailed
requirements for ‘verifiers’ to fulfil in order to be accredited by the Member States.
Once the ‘verifier’ has carried out the verification of the submitted claim, it will decide to
issue (or not) a certificate of conformity. This certificate will be recognised across the EU,
shared between Member States via the Internal Market Information System65 and will allow
companies to use the claim in a commercial communication to consumers across the internal
market. The certificate of conformity of claims will provide businesses with certainty that
65
Established by Regulation (EU) No 1024/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012
on administrative cooperation through the Internal Market Information System and repealing Commission Decision
2008/49/EC (OJ L 316, 14.11.2012, p. 1–11)
EN 22 EN
their certified claim will not be challenged by the competent authorities in another Member
State. This procedure will also apply to the verification of labelling schemes in terms of their
compliance with the governance provisions. The Commission will be empowered to adopt an
implementing act specifying the format of certificate of conformity of claims.
Article 11 sets out that the ‘verifier’ must be an officially accredited 66 independent body, with
no conflicts of interest to ensure independence of judgment and hold the highest degree of
professional integrity. They must have the required expertise, equipment, and infrastructure to
carry out the verifications as well as enough suitable personnel that observe professional
secrecy.
6.6. Small and medium sized enterprises
Given the context of programmes from which small and medium sized enterprises can benefit,
Article 12 ensures such initiatives are taken into account and the appropriate measures are
taken to help them including financial support, access to finance, specialised management and
staff training as well as organisational and technical assistance.
6.7. Enforcement of provisions
Article 13 foresees that each Member State will designate one or more appropriate competent
authority as responsible to enforce the provisions set out in the proposal. As the consumer
protection mechanisms vary between each Member State, it is more pertinent to let them
designate the most efficient competent authority to carry out the enforcement including
inspections, sanctions and judicial pursuits. In this way, the proposal leaves the possibility to
Member States to choose the existing mechanisms under consumer protection law.
If more than one competent authority is designated on their territory, Member States will need
to clarify the duties of each and establish the appropriate communication and coordination
mechanisms, once again with the aim of efficiency.
Article 14 delineates the powers of the competent authorities to investigate and enforce the
requirements. They include the power to access relevant information related to an
infringement, to require access to relevant information to establish if there has been an
infringement, to start investigations or proceedings, to require traders to adopt remedies and
take action to end an infringement, to adopt injunctive relief where appropriate and to impose
penalties.
Article 15 sets out that the competent authorities are also bestowed with the responsibility of
monitoring the compliance of the proposal on the internal market. They are expected to
perform regular checks of claims and labelling schemes (based on publicly available reports)
as well as evaluating claims and labelling schemes that present a risk of infringement. Article
16 details the complaint handling mechanisms and requirements for access to justice.
When it comes to addressing infringements, Article 17 defines a series of obligations for
Member States to respect when defining their penalty regime. The penalty must depend on the
nature, gravity, extent and duration of the infringement, its character (i.e. intentional or
negligent), the financial strength of the responsible party, the economic benefits derived from
the infringement as well as any previous infringements or other aggravating factors. The
penalties already imposed in other Member States for the same infringement shall also be
considered.
66
In line with Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 July 2008 setting out
the requirements for accreditation and market surveillance relating to the marketing of products and repealing
Regulation (EEC) No 339/93 (OJ L 218, 13.8.2008, p. 30)
EN 23 EN
Article 18 sets out the exercise of the delegation. The Committee procedure is set out in
Article 19.
Article 20 sets out the monitoring requirements which is to be based on an overview of faulty
environmental claims and labels provided by the Member States. The EEA shall publish on a
bi-annual basis a report assessing the evolution of environmental claims in each Member State
and the Union as a whole. An evaluation of the Directive is also foreseen in the provisions.
EN 24 EN
2023/0085 (COD)
Proposal for a
DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
on substantiation and communication of explicit environmental claims (Green Claims
Directive)
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular
Article 114 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,
After transmission of the draft legislative act to the national parliaments,
Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee
Having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions1,
Acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure,
Whereas:
(1) Claiming to be “green” and sustainable has become a competitiveness factor, with
green products registering greater growth than standard products. If goods and services
offered and purchased on the internal market are not as environmentally friendly as
presented, this would mislead the consumers, hamper the green transition and prevent
the reduction of negative environmental impacts. The potential of green markets is not
fully realised. Different requirements imposed by national legislation or private
initiatives regulating environmental claims create a burden for companies in cross-
border trade, as they need to comply with different requirements in each Member
State. This affects their capacity to operate in and take advantage of the internal
market. At the same time, market participants have difficulties with identifying
reliable environmental claims and making optimal purchasing decisions on the internal
market. With a proliferation of different labels and calculation methods on the market,
it is difficult for consumers, businesses, investors and stakeholders to establish if
claims are trustworthy.
(2) If environmental claims are not reliable, comparable and verifiable, consumers and
other market actors cannot fully leverage their purchasing decisions to reward better
environmental performance. Similarly, the lack of reliable, comparable and verifiable
information hinders incentives for optimising environmental performance, which
would typically go hand in hand with efficiency gains and cost savings for companies
along the supply chain as well. These consequences are exacerbated by the lack of a
common reference across the internal market and the ensuing confusion.
(3) For users of environmental information (consumers, businesses, investors, public
administrations, NGOs) included in environmental claims, the lack of reliability,
1
OJ C , , p. .
EN 25 EN
comparability and verifiability leads to an issue of trust in environmental information
and confusion in interpreting heterogeneous, contradictory messages. This is
detrimental to consumers and other market actors, as they may choose a product or a
business transaction over other alternatives based on misleading information.
(4) It is therefore necessary to harmonise further the regulation of environmental claims.
Such harmonisation will strengthen the market for more sustainable products and
traders by avoiding market fragmentation due to diverging national approaches. It will
also set a benchmark that can drive the global transition to a just, climate-neutral,
resource-efficient and circular economy2.
(5) Detailed Union rules on substantiation of explicit environmental claims, applicable to
companies operating on the Union market in business to consumer communication,
will contribute to the green transition towards a circular, climate-neutral and clean
economy in the Union by enabling consumers to take informed purchasing decisions,
and will help create a level-playing field for market operators making such claims.
(6) A regulatory framework for environmental claims is one of the actions proposed by
the Commission to implement the European Green Deal3, which recognises that
reliable, comparable and verifiable information plays an important part in enabling
buyers to make more sustainable decisions and reduces the risk of ‘greenwashing’, and
includes commitments to step up regulatory and non-regulatory efforts to tackle false
environmental claims. Together with other applicable Union regulatory frameworks,
including the proposal for a Directive on empowering consumers for the green
transition4, amending Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council5 that this proposal aims at complementing, they establish a clear regime for
environmental claims, including environmental labels.
(7) This Directive is part of a set of interrelated initiatives to establish a strong and
coherent product policy framework that will make environmentally sustainable
products and business models the norm, and not the exception, and to transform
consumption patterns so that no waste is produced in the first place. The Directive is
complemented, amongst others, by interventions on the circular design of products, on
fostering new business models and setting minimum requirements to prevent that
environmentally harmful products are placed on the EU market through the proposal
for an Eco-design for Sustainable Products Regulation6.
2
Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: A new Circular Economy Action
Plan For a cleaner and more competitive Europe, COM/2020/98 final
3
Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: The European Green Deal,
COM/2019/640 final
4
Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directives
2005/29/EC and 2011/83/EU as regards empowering consumers for the green transition through better
protection against unfair practices and better information, COM(2022) 143 final
5
Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair
business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive
84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (Unfair
Commercial Practices Directive) (OJ L 149, 11.6.2005, p. 22).
6
Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for
setting ecodesign requirements for sustainable products and repealing Directive 2009/125/EC,
COM(2022) 132 final
EN 26 EN
(8) The specific needs of individual economic sectors should be recognised and this
Directive should therefore apply to voluntary explicit environmental claims and
environmental labelling schemes that are not regulated by any other Union act as
regards their substantiation or communication, or verification. This Directive should
therefore not apply to explicit environmental claims for which the Union legislation
lays down specific rules, including on methodological frameworks, assessment or
accounting rules related to measuring and calculating environmental impacts,
environmental aspects or environmental performance of products or traders, or
providing mandatory and non-mandatory information to consumers on the
environmental performance of products and traders or sustainability information
involving messages or representations that may be either mandatory or voluntary
pursuant to the Union rules.
(9) Within the context of the European Green Deal, the Farm to Fork Strategy and the
Biodiversity Strategy, and in accordance with the target of achieving 25% of EU
agricultural land under organic farming by 2030 and a significant increase in organic
aquaculture and with the Action Plan on the Development of Organic Production
(COM(2021) 141), organic farming and organic production need to be developed
further. As regards Regulation (EU) 2018/848 of the European Parliament and of the
Council7, this Directive should not apply to environmental claims on organically
certified products substantiated on the basis of that Regulation, related, for instance, to
the use of pesticides, fertilisers and anti-microbials or, for instance, to positive impacts
of organic farming on biodiversity, soil or water8. It also has a positive impact on
biodiversity, it creates jobs and attracts young farmers. Consumers recognise its value.
In accordance with Regulation (EU) 2018/848, the terms “bio” and “eco” and their
derivatives, whether alone or in combination, are only to be used in the Union for
products, their ingredients or feed materials that fall under the scope of that Regulation
where they have been produced in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2018/848. For
instance, in order to call the cotton “eco”, it has to be certified as organic, as it falls
within the scope of Regulation (EU) 2018/848. On the contrary, if the dishwasher
detergent is called “eco”, this does not fall within the scope of Regulation (EU)
2018/848, and is instead regulated by the provisions of Directive 2005/29/EC.
(10) In addition, this Directive shall not apply to sustainability information involving
messages or representations that may be either mandatory or voluntary pursuant to the
Union or national rules for financial services, such as rules relating to banking, credit,
insurance and re-insurance, occupational or personal pensions, securities, investment
funds, investment firms, payment, portfolio management and investment advice,
including the services listed in Annex I to Directive 2013/369 of the European
Parliament and of the Council, as well as settlement and clearing activities and
advisory, intermediation and other auxiliary financial services, includnig standards or
certification schemes relating to such financial services.
7
Regulation (EU) 2018/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 on organic
production and labelling of organic products and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 (OJ
L 150, 14.6.2018, p. 1).
8
https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2023-01/agri-market-brief-20-organic-farming-eu_en_1.pdf
9
Directive 2013/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on access to the
activity of credit institutions and the prudential supervision of credit institutions and investment firms,
amending Directive 2002/87/EC and repealing Directives 2006/48/EC and 2006/49/EC (OJ L 176,
27.6.2013, p. 338).
EN 27 EN
(11) Furthermore, this Directive should not apply to environmental information reported by
undertakings that apply European sustainability reporting standards on a mandatory or
voluntary basis in accordance with Directive 2013/34/EU10 and sustainability
information reported on a voluntary basis by undertakings defined in articles 3(1), 3(2) or
3(3) of this Directive where that information is reported in accordance with standards
referred to in Articles 29b or 29c of Directive 2013/34/EU or in accordance with other
international, European or national sustainability reporting standards or guidelines.
(12) Offers to purchase goods or receive services conditional on the fulfilment of
environmental criteria defined by the seller or service provider or offers where
consumers receive more favourable contractual terms or prices upon the fulfilment of
such criteria, for example the so-called green loans, green home insurance or financial
service products with similar rewards for environmental actions or behaviour should
not be subject to the rules of this Directive.
(13) In case future Union legislation lays down rules on environmental claims,
environmental labels, or on the assessment or communication of environmental
impacts, environmental aspects or environmental performance of certain products or
traders in specific sectors, for example the announced “Count Emissions EU”, the
forthcoming Commission proposal on a legislative framework for a Union sustainable
food system, the Eco-design for Sustainable Products Regulation11 or Regulation (EU)
No 1007/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council12, those rules should be
applied to the explicit environmental claims in question instead of the rules set out in
this Directive.
(14) The proposal for a Directive on empowering consumers for the green transition which
amends Directive 2005/29/EC, sets out a number of specific requirements on
environmental claims and prohibits generic environmental claims which are not based
on recognised excellent environmental performance relevant to the claim. Examples of
such generic environmental claims are ‘eco-friendly’, ‘eco’, ‘green’, ‘nature’s friend’,
‘ecological’ and ‘environmentally correct’. This Directive should complement the
requirements set out in that proposal by addressing specific aspects and requirements
for explicit environmental claims as regards their substantiation, communication and
verification. The requirements set out in this Directive should apply to specific aspects
of explicit environmental claims and will prevail over the requirements set out in
Directive 2005/29/EC with regard to those aspects in case of conflict, pursuant to
Article 3(4) of that Directive.
(15) In order to ensure that consumers are provided with reliable, comparable and verifiable
information which enables them to make more environmentally sustainable decisions
and to reduce the risk of ‘greenwashing, it is necessary to establish requirements for
substantiation of explicit environmental claims. Such substantiation should take into
account internationally recognised scientific approaches to identifying and measuring
10
Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual
financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of
undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and
repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC (OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, p. 19).
11
COM(2022) 132 final
12
Regulation (EU) No 1007/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 September 2011
on textile fibre names and related labelling and marking of the fibre composition of textile products and
repealing Council Directive 73/44/EEC and Directives 96/73/EC and 2008/121/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 272, 18.10.2011, p. 1).
EN 28 EN
environmental impacts, environmental aspects and environmental performance of
products or traders, and it should result in reliable, transparent, comparable and
verifiable information to the consumer.
(16) The assessment made to substantiate explicit environmental claims needs to consider
the life-cycle of the product or of the overall activities of the trader and should not
omit any relevant environmental aspects or environmental impacts. The benefits
claimed should not result in an unjustified transfer of negative impacts to other stages
of the life cycle of a product or trader, or to the creation or increase of other negative
environmental impacts.
(17) The assessment substantiating the explicit environmental claim should make it
possible to identify the environmental impacts and environmental aspects for the
product or trader that jointly contribute significantly to the overall environmental
performance of the product or trader (‘relevant environmental impacts’ and ‘relevant
environmental aspects’). Indications for the relevance of the environmental impacts
and environmental aspects can stem from assessments taking into account the life-
cycle, including from the studies based on Environmental Footprint (EF) methods,
provided that these are complete on the impacts relevant to the product category and
do not omit any important environmental impacts. For example, in the Commission
Recommendation on the use of Environmental Footprint methods13 the most relevant
impact categories identified should together contribute to at least 80% of the single
overall score. These indications for the relevance of the environmental impacts or
environmental aspects can also result from the criteria set in various ecolabels type I,
as for instance the EU Ecolabel, or in Union criteria for green public procurement,
from requirements set by the Taxonomy Regulation14, from product specific rules
adopted under the Regulation …./…. of the European Parliament and of the Council
establishing a framework for setting ecodesign requirements for sustainable products 15
or from other relevant Union rules.
(18) In line with Directive 2005/29/EC as amended by the proposal for a Directive on
empowering consumers for the green transition, the trader should not present
requirements imposed by law on products within a given product category as a
distinctive feature of the trader’s offer or advertise benefits for consumers that are
considered as common practice in the relevant market. The information used to
substantiate explicit environmental claims should therefore make it possible to identify
the product’s or trader’s environmental performance in comparison to the common
practice for products in the respective product group, such as food, or in the respective
sector. This is necessary to underpin the assessment whether the explicit
environmental claims can be made with regard to a given product or trader in line with
the function of an environmental claim, which is to demonstrate that a product or
trader has a positive impact or no impact on the environment, or that a product or a
trader is less damaging to the environment than other products or traders. The common
practice could be equivalent to the minimum legal requirements that are applicable to
13
Commission Recommendation (EU) 2021/2279 of 15 December 2021 on the use of the Environmental
Footprint methods to measure and communicate the life cycle environmental performance of products
and organisations, OJ L 471, 30.12.2021, p. 1.
14
Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2020 on the
establishment of a framework to facilitate sustainable investment, and amending Regulation (EU)
2019/2088 (OJ L 198, 22.6.2020, p. 13).
15
[…]
EN 29 EN
the specific environmental aspect or environmental performance, for example as
regards product composition, mandatory recycled content or end-of-life treatment.
However, in case majority of products within the product group or majority of traders
within the sector perform better than those legal requirements, the minimum legal
requirements should not be considered as common practice.
(19) It would be misleading to consumers if an explicit environmental claim pointed to the
benefits in terms of environmental impacts or environmental aspects while omitting
that the achievement of those benefits leads to negative trade-offs on other
environmental impacts or environmental aspects. To this end the information used to
substantiate explicit environmental claims should ensure that the interlinkages
between the relevant environmental impacts and between environmental aspects and
environmental impacts can be identified along with potential trade-offs. The
assessment used to substantiate explicit environmental claims should identify if
improvements on environmental impacts or environmental aspects lead to the kind of
trade-offs that significantly worsen the performance as regards other environmental
impacts or environmental aspects, for example if savings in water consumption lead to
a notable increase in greenhouse gas emissions, or in the same environmental impact
in another life-cycle stage of the product, for example CO2 savings in the stage of
manufacturing leading to a notable increase of CO2 emissions in the use phase. For
example, a claim on positive impacts from efficient use of resources in intensive
agricultural practices may mislead consumers due to trade-offs linked to impacts on
biodiversity, ecosystems or animal welfare. An environmental claim on textiles
containing plastic polymer from recycled PET bottles may also mislead consumers as
to the environmental benefit of that aspect if the use of this recycled polymer competes
with the closed-loop recycling system for food contact materials which is considered
more beneficial from the perspective of circularity.
(20) In order for the environmental claim to be considered robust, it should reflect as
accurately as possible the environmental performance of the specific product or trader.
The information used to substantiate explicit environmental claims therefore needs to
include primary, company-specific data for relevant aspects contributing significantly
to the environmental performance of the product or trader referred to in the claim. It is
necessary to strike the right balance between ensuring relevant and robust information
for substantiating environmental claims and the efforts needed to gather primary
information. The requirement to use primary information should be considered in the
light of the influence the trader making the claim has over the respective process and
of the availability of primary information. If the process is not run by the trader
making the claim and primary information is not available, accurate secondary
information should be able to be used even for processes that contribute significantly
to the environmental performance of the product or trader. This is especially relevant
to not disadvantage SMEs and to keep the efforts needed to acquire primary data at a
proportionate level. Moreover, the relevant environmental aspects are different for
each type of environmental claim. For instance, for claims on recycled or bio-based
content, the composition of the product should be covered by primary data. For claims
on being environmentally less polluting in a certain life cycle stage, information on
emissions and environmental impacts related to that life cycle stage should include
primary data as well. Both primary data and secondary data, i.e. average data, should
show a high level of quality and accuracy.
(21) Climate-related claims have been shown to be particularly prone to being unclear and
ambiguous and to mislead consumers. This relates notably to environmental claims
EN 30 EN
that products or entities are “climate neutral”, “carbon neutral”, “100% CO2
compensated”, or will be “net-zero” by a given year, or similar. Such statements are
often based on “offsetting” of greenhouse gas emissions through “carbon credits”
generated outside the company’s value chain, for example from forestry or renewable
energy projects. The methodologies underpinning offsets vary widely and are not
always transparent, accurate, or consistent. This leads to significant risks of
overestimations and double counting of avoided or reduced emissions, due to a lack of
additionality, permanence, ambitious and dynamic crediting baselines that depart from
business as usual, and accurate accounting. These factors result in offset credits of low
environmental integrity and credibility that mislead consumers when they are relied
upon in explicit environmental claims. Offsetting can also deter traders from emissions
reductions in their own operations and value chains. In order to adequately contribute
to global climate change mitigation targets, traders should prioritise effective
reductions of emissions across their own operations and value chains instead of relying
on offsets. Any resulting residual emissions will vary by sector-specific pathway in
line with the global climate targets and will have to be addressed through removals
enhancements. When offsets are used nonetheless, it is deemed appropriate to address
climate-related claims, including claims on future environmental performance, based
on offsets in a transparent manner. Therefore, the substantiation of climate-related
claims should consider any greenhouse gas emissions offsets used by the traders
separately from the trader’s or the product’s greenhouse gas emissions. In addition,
this information should also specify the share of total emissions that are addressed
through offsetting, whether these offsets relate to emission reductions or removals
enhancement, and the methodology applied. The climate-related claims that include
the use of offsets have to be substantiated by methodologies that ensure the integrity
and correct accounting of these offsets and thus reflect coherently and transparently
the resulting impact on the climate.
(22) Traders are more and more interested in making environmental claims related to future
environmental performance of a product or trader, including by joining initiatives that
are promoting practices which could be conducive to a reduced environmental impact
or to more circularity. These claims should be substantiated in line with the rules
applicable to all explicit environmental claims.
(23) The information used to substantiate explicit environmental claims should be science
based, and any lack of consideration of certain environmental impacts or
environmental aspects should be carefully considered.
(24) The EF methods can support the substantiation of explicit environmental claims on
specific life-cycle environmental impacts that the methods cover, provided that these
are complete on the impacts relevant to the product category and do not omit any
important environmental impacts. The methods cover 16 environmental impacts,
including climate change, and impacts related to water, air, soil, resources, land use
and toxicity.
(25) The fact that a significant environmental impact of a product is not covered by any of
the 16 impact categories of the EF methods should not justify the lack of consideration
of such impacts. An economic actor making an explicit environmental claim on such
product group should have an obligation of diligence to find evidence substantiating
such claim. For instance, an economic actor making an explicit environmental claim
about a fishery product as defined in Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 1379/2013 of
EN 31 EN
the European Parliament and of the Council16 should have an obligation of diligence to
find evidence substantiating the sustainability of the targeted fish stock. Stock
assessments by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea and similar
stock assessment bodies can be used for that purpose.
(26) Furthermore, there is not yet a reliable methodology for the assessment of life-cycle
environmental impacts related to the release of microplastics. However, in case such
release contributes to significant environmental impacts that are not subject to a claim,
the trader making the claim on another aspect should not be allowed to ignore it, but
should take into account available information and update the assessment once widely
recognised scientific evidence becomes available.
(27) Consumers can also be misled by explicit environmental claims that state or imply that
a product or trader has less or more environmental impacts or a better or worse
environmental performance than other products or traders (‘comparative
environmental claims’). Without prejudice to the application, where appropriate, of
Directive 2006/114/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council17, in order to
allow the consumers access to reliable information, it is necessary to ensure that
comparative environmental claims can be compared in an adequate manner. For
instance, choosing indicators on the same environmental aspects but using a different
formula for quantification of such indicators makes comparisons impossible, and
therefore there is a risk of misleading consumers. In case two traders make an
environmental claim on climate change, where one considered only direct
environmental impacts, whilst the other considered both direct and indirect
environmental impacts, these results are not comparable. Also, a decision to make the
comparison only at certain stages of a products life cycle can lead to misleading
claims, if not made transparent. A comparative environmental claim needs to ensure
that also for products with very different raw materials, uses and process chains, like
bio-based plastics and fossil-based plastics, the most relevant stages of the life-cycle
are taken into account for all products. For example, agriculture or forestry is relevant
for bio-based plastics while raw oil extraction is relevant for fossil-based plastics and
the question whether a relevant share of the product ends up in landfill is highly
relevant to plastics that biodegrade well under landfill conditions but maybe less
relevant for plastics that do not biodegrade under such conditions.
(28) When setting up the requirements for substantiation and communication of explicit
environmental claims, including by delegated acts adopted by the Commission, the
difficulties that traders may encounter in gathering information from actors throughout
their value chain or on the product’s overall life-cycle, especially for services or where
there is insufficient scientific evidence, should be taken into account. This is important
for example for services such as electronic communications services, for which it can
be difficult to define the scope and system boundaries, e.g. where the life-cycle starts
and where it finishes and even more where supply chains are complex and not stable,
e.g. in cases where many equipment or components are manufactured by a multitude
16
Regulation (EU) No 1379/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on
the common organisation of the markets in fishery and aquaculture products, amending Council
Regulations (EC) No 1184/2006 and (EC) No 1224/2009 and repealing Council Regulation (EC)
No 104/2000 (OJ L 354, 28.12.2013, p. 1).
17
Directive 2006/114/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006
concerning misleading and comparative advertising (OJ L 376, 27.12.2006, p. 21).
EN 32 EN
of enterprises outside the EU, and thus sustainability related information might not be
easily accessible to EU traders concerned.
(29) For some sectors or for certain products or traders, significant environmental impacts
or environmental aspects could be suspected but there might not yet be a recognised
scientific method to fully assess those environmental impacts and environmental
aspects. For such cases and while efforts are made to develop methods and gather
evidence to enable the assessment of the respective environmental impact or
environmental aspect for those sectors, traders or products, traders should be able to
promote their sustainability efforts through publication of company sustainability
reporting, factual reporting on the company’s performance metrics and work to reduce
energy consumption, including on their websites. This flexibility would maintain and
promote the incentives of those sectors or traders to continue their efforts to develop
common environmental assessments pursuant to this Directive while providing for the
necessary time to complete such work.
(30) While unfair commercial practices, including misleading environmental claims, are
prohibited for all traders pursuant to Directive 2005/29/EC18, an administrative burden
linked to substantiation and verification of environmental claims on the smallest
companies could be disproportionate and should be avoided. To this end,
microenterprises should be exempted from the requirements on substantiation of
Article 3 and 4 unless these enterprises wish to obtain a certificate of conformity of
explicit environmental claims that will be recognised by the competent authorities
across the Union.
(31) In order to meet both the needs of traders regarding dynamic marketing strategies and
the needs of consumers regarding more detailed, and more accurate, environmental
information, the Commission may adopt delegated acts to supplement the provisions
on substantiation of explicit environmental claims by further specifying the criteria for
such substantiation with regard to certain claims (e.g. climate-related claims, including
claims about offsets, “climate neutrality” or similar, recyclability and recycled
content). The Commission should be empowered to further establish rules for
measuring and calculating the environmental impacts, environmental aspects and
environmental performance, by determining which activities, processes, materials,
emissions or use of a product or trader contribute significantly or cannot contribute to
the relevant environmental impacts and environmental aspects; by determining for
which environmental aspects and environmental impacts primary information should
be used; and by determining the criteria to assess the accuracy of primary and
secondary information. While in most cases the Commission would consider the need
for adopting these rules only after having the results of the monitoring of the evolution
of environmental claims on the Union market, for some types of claims it may be
necessary for the Commission to adopt supplementary rules before the results of this
monitoring are available. For example, in case of climate-related claims it may be
necessary to adopt such supplementary acts in order to operationalise the provisions on
substantiation of claims based on offsets.
18
Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair
business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive
84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (Unfair
Commercial Practices Directive) (OJ L 149, 11.6.2005, p. 22) as amended.
EN 33 EN
(32) The Commission Recommendation (EU) 2021/2279 contains guidance on how to
measure the life cycle environmental performance of specific products or
organisations and how to develop Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules
(PEFCRs) and Organisation Environmental Footprint Sectorial Rules (OEFSRs) that
allow comparison of products to a benchmark. Such category rules for specific
products or traders can be used to support the substantiation of claims in line with the
requirements of this Directive. Therefore, the Commission should be empowered to
adopt delegated acts to establish product group or sector specific rules where this may
have added value. However, in case the Product Environmental Footprint method does
not yet cover an impact category, which is relevant for a product group, the adoption
of PEFCR may take place only once these new relevant environmental impact
categories have been added. For example, as regards marine fisheries, the PEFCR
should for example reflect the fisheries-specific environmental impact categories, in
particular the sustainability of the targeted stock. Concerning space, the PEFCR
should reflect defence and space-specific environmental impact categories, including
the orbital space use. As regards food and agricultural products, biodiversity and
nature protection, as well as farming practices, including positive externalities of
extensive farming and animal welfare, should, for example, also be integrated before
the adoption of PEFCR could be considered. As regards textiles, the PEFCR should
for example reflect the microplastics release, before the adoption of PEFCR could be
considered.
(33) Since Directive 2005/29/EC already applies to misleading environmental claims, it
enables the national courts and administrative authorities to stop and prohibit such
claims. For example, in order to comply with Directive 2005/29/EC, environmental
claims should relate only to aspects that are significant in terms of the product’s or
trader’s environmental impact. Environmental claims should also be clear and
unambiguous regarding which aspects of the product or trader they refer to and should
not omit or hide important information about the environmental performance of the
product or trader that consumers need in order to make informed choices. The
wording, imagery and overall product presentation, including the layout, choice of
colours, images, pictures, sounds, symbols or labels, included in the environmental
claim should provide a truthful and accurate representation of the scale of the
environmental benefit achieved, and should not overstate the environmental benefit
achieved.
(34) Where the explicit environmental claim concerns a final product and relevant
environmental impacts or environmental aspects of such product occur at the use
phase and consumers can influence such environmental impacts or environmental
aspects via appropriate behaviour, such as, for example, correct waste sorting or
impacts of use patterns on product’s longevity, the claim should also include
information explaining to consumers how their behaviour can positively contribute to
the protection of the environment.
(35) In order to facilitate consumers’ choices of more sustainable products and to
incentivise efforts of traders to lower their environmental impacts, when the claim
communicated relates to future environmental performance, it should as a priority be
based on improvements inside trader’s own operations and value chains rather than
relying on offsetting of greenhouse has emissions or other environmental impacts.
(36) Consumers should have easy access to the information on the product or the trader that
is the subject of the explicit environmental claim and regarding information
substantiating that claim. This information should also consider needs of older
EN 34 EN
consumers. For that purpose, traders should either provide this information in a
physical form or provide a weblink, QR code or equivalent leading to a website where
more detailed information on the substantiation of the explicit environmental claim is
made available in at least one of the official languages of the Member State where the
claim is made. In order to facilitate the enforcement of this Directive, the weblink, QR
code or equivalent should also ensure easy access to the certificate of conformity
regarding the substantiation of the explicit environmental claim and the contact
information of the verifier who drew up that certificate.
(37) In order to avoid potential disproportionate impacts on the microenterprises, the
smallest companies should be exempted from the requirements of Article 5 linked to
information on the substantiation of explicit environmental claims unless these
enterprises wish to obtain a certificate of conformity of explicit environmental claim
that will be recognised by the competent authorities across the Union.
(38) When the Commission adopts delegated acts to supplement the provisions on
substantiation of explicit environmental claims it may be necessary to also supplement
the provisions on communication of such claims. For example, in case specific life-
cycle-based rules on substantiation of explicit environmental claims for certain
products group or sector are established, it may be necessary to add supplementary
rules on presentation of environmental impacts assessed based on these rules by
requiring that three main environmental impacts are presented next to the aggregated
indicator of overall environmental performance. To this end the Commission should
be empowered to adopt delegated acts to supplement the provisions on communication
of explicit environmental claims.
(39) Currently, more than 200 environmental labels are used on the Union market. They
present important differences in how they operate as regards for example the
transparency and comprehensiveness of the standards or methods used, the frequency
of revisions, or the level of auditing or verification. These differences have an impact
on how reliable the information communicated on the environmental labels is. While
claims based on the EU Ecolabel or its national equivalents follow a solid scientific
basis, have a transparent development of criteria, require testing and third-party
verification and foresee regular monitoring, evidence suggests that many
environmental labels currently on the EU market are misleading. In particular, many
environmental labels lack sufficient verification procedures. Therefore, explicit
environmental claims made on environmental labels should be based on a certification
scheme.
(40) In cases where an environmental label involves a commercial communication to
consumers that suggests or creates the impression that a product has a positive or no
impact on the environment, or is less damaging to the environment than competing
products without the label, that environmental label also constitutes an explicit
environmental claim. The content of such environmental label is therefore subject to
the requirements on substantiation and communication of explicit environmental
claims.
(41) The environmental labels often aim at providing consumers with an aggregated
scoring presenting a cumulative environmental impact of products or traders to allow
for direct comparisons between products or traders. Such aggregated scoring however
presents risks of misleading consumers as the aggregated indicator may dilute negative
environmental impacts of certain aspects of the product with more positive
environmental impacts of other aspects of the product. In addition, when developed by
EN 35 EN
different operators, such labels usually differ in terms of specific methodology
underlying the aggregated score such as the environmental impacts considered or the
weighting attributed to these environmental impacts. This may result in the same
product receiving different score or rating depending on the scheme. This concern
arises in relation to schemes established in the Union and in third countries. This is
contributing to the fragmentation of the internal market, risks putting smaller
companies at a disadvantage, and is likely to further mislead consumers and
undermine their trust in environmental labels. In order to avoid this risk and ensure
better harmonisation within the single market, the explicit environmental claims,
including environmental labels, based on an aggregated score representing a
cumulative environmental impact of products or traders should not be deemed to be
sufficiently substantiated, unless those aggregated scores stem from Union rules,
including the delegated acts that the Commission is empowered to adopt under this
Directive, resulting in Union-wide harmonised schemes for all products or per specific
product group based on a single methodology to ensure coherence and comparability.
(42) In accordance with the proposal for a Directive on empowering consumers for the
green transition, which amends Directive 2005/29/EC, displaying a sustainability label
which is not based on a certification scheme or not established by public authorities
constitutes an unfair commercial practice in all circumstances. This means that the
‘self-certified’ sustainability labels, where no third-party verification and regular
monitoring takes place as regards compliance with the underlying requirements of the
sustainability label are prohibited.
(43) In order to combat misleading explicit environmental claims communicated in the
form of environmental labels and increase consumer trust in environmental labels, this
Directive should establish governance criteria that all environmental labelling schemes
are to comply with, complementing thus the requirements set in the said proposal
amending Directive 2005/29/EC.
(44) In order to avoid further proliferation of national or regional officially recognised EN
ISO 14024 type I environmental labelling (‘ecolabelling’) schemes, and other
environmental labelling schemes, and to ensure more harmonisation in the internal
market, new national or regional environmental labelling schemes should be
developed only under the Union law. Nevertheless, Member States can request the
Commission to consider developing public labelling schemes at the Union level for
product groups or sectors where such labels do not yet exist in Union law and where
harmonisation would bring added value to achieve the sustainability and internal
market objectives in an efficient manner.
(45) In order not to create unnecessary barriers to international trade and to ensure equal
treatment with the public schemes established in the Union, the public authorities
outside of the Union setting up new labelling schemes should be allowed to request
approval from the Commission for use of the label on the Union market. This approval
should be conditional on the scheme’s contribution to reaching the objectives of this
Directive and provided that the schemes demonstrate added value in terms of
environmental ambition, coverage of environmental impacts, product group or sector
and meet all the requirements of this Directive.
(46) Environmental labelling schemes established by private operators, if too many and
overlapping in terms of scope, may create confusion in consumers or undermine their
trust in environmental labels. Therefore, Member States should only allow that new
environmental labelling schemes are established by private operators provided that
EN 36 EN
they offer significant added value as compared to the existing national or regional
schemes in terms of environmental ambition of the criteria to award the label,
coverage of relevant environmental impacts, and completeness of the underlying
assessment. Member States should set up a procedure for the approval of new
environmental labelling schemes based on a certificate of conformity drawn up by the
independent verifier. This should apply to schemes established in the Union and
outside of the Union.
(47) In order to provide legal certainty and facilitate enforcement of the provisions on new
national and regional officially recognised environmental labelling schemes and new
private labelling schemes, the Commission should publish a list of such schemes that
may either continue to apply on the Union market or enter the Union market.
(48) In order to ensure a harmonised approach by the Member States to the assessment and
approval of environmental labelling schemes developed by private operators, and to
establish an approval procedure by the Commission for proposed schemes established
by public authorities outside of the Union, implementing powers should be conferred
on the Commission to adopt common rules specifying detailed requirements for
approval of such environmental labelling schemes, the format and content of
supporting documents and rules of procedure to approve such schemes. Those powers
should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European
Parliament and of the Council19.
(49) It is essential that explicit environmental claims reflect correctly the environmental
performance and environmental impacts covered by the claim, and consider the latest
scientific evidence. Member States should therefore ensure that the trader making the
claim reviews and updates the substantiation and communication of the claims at least
every 5 years to ensure compliance with the requirements of this Directive
(50) To ensure that explicit environmental claims are reliable, it is necessary that Member
States set up procedure for verifying that the substantiation and communication of
explicit environmental claims, including environmental labels, or the environmental
labelling schemes, comply with the requirements set out in this Directive.
(51) In order to allow the competent authorities to control more efficiently the
implementation of the provisions of this Directive and to prevent as much as possible
unsubstantiated explicit environmental claims, including environmental labels, from
appearing on the market, verifiers complying with the harmonised requirements set up
by the Directive should check that both the information used for the substantiation and
communication of explicit environmental claims meet the requirements of this
Directive. In order to avoid misleading consumers, the verification should in any case
take place before the environmental claims are made public or environmental labels
are displayed. The verifier can, if appropriate, indicate several ways of communicating
the explicit environmental claim that comply with the requirements of this Directive to
avoid the need for continuous re-certification in case the way of communication is
slightly modified without affecting the compliance with the requirements of this
Directive. To facilitate the traders compliance with the rules on substantiation and
communication of explicit environmental claims, including the environmental labels,
the verification should take into account the nature and content of the claim or the
19
Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011
laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of
the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).
EN 37 EN
environmental label, including whether they appear to be unfair in the light of
Directive 2005/29/EC.
(52) In order to provide traders with legal certainty across the internal market as regards
compliance of the explicit environmental claims with the requirements of this
Directive, the certificate of conformity should be recognised by the competent
authorities across the Union. Microenterprises should be allowed to request such
certificate if they wish to certify their claims in line with the requirements of this
Directive and benefit from the certificate’s recognition across the Union. The
certificate of conformity should however not prejudge the assessment of the
environmental claim by the public authorities or courts which enforce Directive
2005/29/EC.
(53) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the provisions on verification of explicit
environmental claims and environmental labelling schemes and to facilitate the
enforcement of the provisions on verification of this Directive, implementing powers
should be conferred on the Commission to adopt a common form for certificates of
conformity and the technical means for issuing such certificates. Those powers should
be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European
Parliament and of the Council20.
(54) Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) should be able to benefit from the
opportunities provided by the market for more sustainable products but they could face
proportionately higher costs and difficulties with some of the requirements on
substantiation and verification of explicit environmental claims. The Member States
should provide adequate information and raise awareness of the ways to comply with
the requirements of this Directive, ensure targeted and specialised training, and
provide specific assistance and support, including financial, to SMEs wishing to make
explicit environmental claims on their products or as regards their activities. Member
States actions should be taken in respect of applicable State aid rules.
(55) In order to ensure a level-playing field on the Union market, where claims about the
environmental performance of a product or a trader are based on reliable, comparable
and verifiable information, it is necessary to establish common rules on enforcement
and compliance.
(56) In order to ensure that the objectives of this Directive are achieved and the
requirements are enforced effectively, Member States should designate their own
competent authorities responsible for the application and enforcement of this
Directive. However, in view of the close complementarity of Articles 5 and 6 of this
Directive with the provisions of Directive 2005/29/EC, Member States should also be
allowed to designate for their enforcement the same competent authorities as those
responsible for the enforcement of Directive 2005/29/EC. For the sake of consistency,
when Member States make that choice, they should be able to rely on the means and
powers of enforcement that they have established in accordance with Article 11 of
Directive 2005/29/EC, in derogation from the rules on enforcement laid down in this
Directive. In cases where there is more than one designated competent authority in
their territory and to ensure effective exercise of the duties of the competent
20
Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011
laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of
the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).
EN 38 EN
authorities, Member State should ensure a close cooperation between all designated
competent authorities.
(57) Without prejudice to the powers already conferred by Regulation (EU) 2017/239421 to
consumer protection authorities, competent authorities should have a minimum set of
investigation and enforcement powers in order to ensure compliance with this
Directive, to cooperate with each other more quickly and more efficiently, and to deter
market actors from infringing this Directive. Those powers should be sufficient to
tackle the enforcement challenges of e-commerce and the digital environment
effectively and to prevent non-compliant market actors from exploiting gaps in the
enforcement system by relocating to Member States whose competent authorities may
be less equipped to tackle unlawful practices.
(58) Competent authorities should be able to use all facts and circumstances of the case as
evidence for the purpose of their investigation.
(59) In order to prevent the occurrence of misleading and unsubstantiated explicit
environmental claims on the Union market, competent authorities should carry out
regular checks of explicit environmental claims made, and the environmental labelling
schemes applied, to verify that the requirements laid down in this Directive are
fulfilled.
(60) When competent authorities detect an infringement of requirements of this Directive
they should carry out an evaluation and based on its results notify the trader about the
infringement detected and require that corrective actions are taken by the trader. To
minimise the misleading effect on consumers of the non-compliant explicit
environmental claim or non-compliant environmental labelling scheme, the trader
should be required by the competent authorities to take an effective and rapid action to
remediate that infringement. The corrective action required should be proportionate to
the infringement detected and its expected harmful effects on the consumers.
(61) Where an infringement is not restricted to their national territory, and the explicit
environmental claim has been advanced between traders, competent authorities should
inform the other Member States of the results of evaluation they have carried out and
of any action that they have required the trader responsible to take.
(62) Competent authorities should also carry out checks of explicit environmental claims
on the Union market when in possession of and based on relevant information,
including substantiated concerns submitted by third parties. Third parties submitting a
concern should be able to demonstrate a sufficient interest or maintain the impairment
of a right.
(63) In order to ensure that traders are effectively dissuaded from non-compliance with the
requirements of this Directive, Member States should lay down rules on penalties
applicable to infringements of this Directive and ensure that those rules are
implemented. The penalties provided for should be effective, proportionate and
dissuasive. To facilitate a more consistent application of penalties, it is necessary to
establish common non-exhaustive criteria for determining the types and levels of
penalties to be imposed in case of infringements. That criteria should include, inter
21
Regulation (EU) 2017/2394 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2017 on
cooperation between national authorities responsible for the enforcement of consumer protection laws
and repealing Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 (OJ L 345, 27.12.2017, p. 1).
EN 39 EN
alia, the nature and gravity of the infringement as well as the economic benefits
derived from the infringement in order to ensure that those responsible are deprived of
those benefits.
(64) When setting penalties and measures for infringements, the Member States should
foresee that, based on the gravity of the infringement, the level of fines should
effectively deprive the non-compliant trader from the economic benefit derived from
using the misleading or unsubstantiated explicit environmental claim or non-compliant
environmental labelling scheme, including in cases of repeated infringements. The
measures for infringements foreseen by the Member States should therefore also
include confiscation of the relevant product from the trader or revenues gained from
the transactions affected by this infringement or a temporary exclusions or
prohibitions from placing products or making available services on the Union market.
The gravity of the infringement should be the leading criterion for the measures taken
by the enforcement authorities. The maximum amount of fines should be dissuasive
and set at least at the level of 4% of the trader’s total annual turnover in the Member
State or Member States concerned in case of widespread infringements with a Union
dimension that are subject to coordinated investigation and enforcement measures in
accordance with Regulation (EU) 2017/239422.
(65) When adopting delegated acts pursuant to Article 290 TFEU, it is of particular
importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its
preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted
in accordance with the principles laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 13
April 2016 on Better Law-Making23. In particular, to ensure equal participation in the
preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council receive all
documents at the same time as Member States’ experts, and their experts
systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the
preparation of delegated acts.
(66) In order to assess the performance of the legislation against the objectives that it
pursues, the Commission should carry out an evaluation of this Directive and present a
report on the main findings to the European Parliament and the Council. In order to
inform an evaluation of this Directive, Member States should regularly collect
information on the application of this Directive and provide it to the Commission on
an annual basis.
(67) Where based on the results of the monitoring and evaluation of this Directive the
Commission finds it appropriate to propose a review of this Directive, the feasibility
and appropriateness of further provisions on mandating the use of common method for
substantiation of explicit environmental claims, the extension of prohibition of
environmental claims for products containing hazardous substances except where their
use is considered essential for the society, or further harmonisation as regards
requirements on the substantiation of specific environmental claims on environmental
aspects or environmental impacts should also be considered.
(68) The use of the most harmful substances should ultimately be phased-out in the Union
to avoid and prevent significant harm to human health and the environment, in
22
Regulation (EU) 2017/2394 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2017 on
cooperation between national authorities responsible for the enforcement of consumer protection laws
and repealing Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 (OJ L 345, 27.12.2017, p. 1).
23
OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1.
EN 40 EN
particular their use in consumer products. Regulation (EC) 1272/2008 of the European
Parliament and of the Council24 prohibits the labelling of mixtures and substances that
contain hazardous chemicals as ‘non-toxic’, ‘non-harmful’, ‘non-polluting’,
‘ecological’ or any other statements indicating that the substance or mixture is not
hazardous or statements that are inconsistent with the classification of that substance
or mixture. Member States are required to ensure that such obligation is fulfilled. As
committed in the Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability the Commission will define
criteria for essential uses to guide its application across relevant Union legislation. .
(69) Since the objectives of this Directive, namely to improve the functioning of the
internal market for economic actors operating in the internal market and consumers
relying on environmental claims, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member
States, but can rather, by reason of its scale and effects, be better achieved at Union
level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity
as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the
principle of proportionality as set out in that Article, this Directive does not go beyond
what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives.
(70) In accordance with the Joint Political Declaration of 28 September 2011 of Member
States and the Commission on explanatory documents25, Member States have
undertaken to accompany, in justified cases, the notification of their transposition
measures with one or more documents explaining the relationship between the
components of a directive and the corresponding parts of national transposition
instruments. With regard to this Directive, the legislator considers the transmission of
such documents to be justified.
(71) The Annex to Regulation (EU) 1024/2012 of the European Parliament and of the
Council26 should be amended to include a reference to this Directive so as to facilitate
the administrative cooperation between the competent authorities through the Internal
Market Information System.
(72) The Annex to Regulation (EU) 2017/2394 of the European Parliament and of the
Council27 should be amended to include a reference to this Directive so as to facilitate
cross-border cooperation on enforcement of this Directive.
(73) Annex I of Directive (EU) 2020/1828 of the European Parliament and of the Council28
should be amended to include a reference to this Directive so as to ensure that the
collective interests of consumers laid down in this Directive are protected.
24
Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on
classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures, amending and repealing Directives
67/548/EEC and 1999/45/EC, and amending Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (OJ L 353, 31.12.2008, p.
1).
25
OJ C 369, 17.12.2011, p. 14.
26
Regulation (EU) No 1024/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on
administrative cooperation through the Internal Market Information System and repealing Commission
Decision 2008/49/EC ( ‘the IMI Regulation’ ) (OJ L 316, 14.11.2012, p. 1).
27
OJ L 345, 27.12.2017, p. 1
28
Directive (EU) 2020/1828 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2020 on
representative actions for the protection of the collective interests of consumers and repealing Directive
2009/22/EC (OJ L 409, 4.12.2020, p. 1).
EN 41 EN
HAVE ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:
Article 1
Scope
1. This Directive applies to explicit environmental claims made by traders about
products or traders in business-to-consumer commercial practices.
2. This Directive does not apply to environmental labelling schemes or to explicit
environmental claims regulated by or substantiated by rules established in:
(a) Regulation (EC) No 66/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council29,
(b) Regulation (EU) 2018/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council30,
(c) Regulation (EU) 2017/1369 of the European Parliament and of the Council31;
(d) Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council32,
(e) Regulation (EU) No 305/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council33
(f) Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 of the European Parliament and of the
Council34;
(g) Regulation (EC) No 1221/2009 of the European Parliament and of the
Council35;
(h) Directive 1999/94/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council36;
(i) Regulation (EU) No 305/2011 of the European Parliament and of the
Council37;
29
Regulation (EC) No 66/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 on
the EU Ecolabel (OJ L 27, 30.1.2010, p. 1).
30
Regulation (EU) 2018/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 on organic
production and labelling of organic products and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 (OJ
L 150, 14.6.2018, p. 1).
31
Regulation (EU) 2017/1369 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2017 setting a
framework for energy labelling and repealing Directive 2010/30/EU (OJ L 198, 28.7.2017, p. 1).
32
Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 establishing
a framework for the setting of ecodesign requirements for energy-related products (recast) (OJ L 285,
31.10.2009, p. 10).
33
Regulation (EU) No 305/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2011 laying
down harmonised conditions for the marketing of construction products and repealing Council
Directive 89/106/EEC (OJ L 88, 4.4.2011, p. 5).
34
Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 July 2008 setting out
the requirements for accreditation and market surveillance relating to the marketing of products and
repealing Regulation (EEC) No 339/93 (OJ L 218, 13.8.2008, p. 30).
35
Regulation (EC) No 1221/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009
on the voluntary participation by organisations in a Community eco-management and audit scheme
(EMAS), repealing Regulation (EC) No 761/2001 and Commission Decisions 2001/681/EC and
2006/193/EC (OJ L 342, 22.12.2009, p. 1).
36
Directive 1999/94/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 1999 relating to
the availability of consumer information on fuel economy and CO2 emissions in respect of the
marketing of new passenger cars (OJ L 12, 18.1.2000, p. 16).
37
Regulation (EU) No 305/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2011 laying
down harmonised conditions for the marketing of construction products and repealing Council
Directive 89/106/EEC (OJ L 88, 4.4.2011, p. 5).
EN 42 EN
(j) Directive 2006/66/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council38;
(k) Directive 94/62/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council39;
(l) Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council40
(m) Regulation (EU) … /… of the European Parliament and of the Council41;
(n) Directive 2012/27/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council42;
(o) Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council43 and
other Union, national or international rules, standards or guidelines for
financial services, financial instruments, and financial products;
(p) other existing or future Union rules setting out the conditions under which
certain explicit environmental claims about certain products or traders may be
or are to be made or Union rules laying down requirements on the assessment
or communication of environmental impacts, environmental aspects or
environmental performance of certain products or traders or conditions for
environmental labelling schemes.
Article 2
Definitions
For the purposes of this Directive, the following definitions shall apply:
(1) ‘environmental claim’ means environmental claim as defined in Article 2, point (o), of
Directive 2005/29/EC;
(2) ‘explicit environmental claim’ means an environmental claim that is in textual form or
contained in an environmental label;
(3) ‘trader’ means trader as defined in Article 2, point (b), of Directive 2005/29/EC;
(4) ‘product’ means product as defined in Article 2, point (c), of Directive 2005/29/EC;
(5) ‘consumer’ means consumer as defined in Article 2, point (a), of Directive
2005/29/EC;
38
Directive 2006/66/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 September 2006 on batteries
and accumulators and waste batteries and accumulators and repealing Directive 91/157/EEC (OJ L 266,
26.9.2006, p. 1).
39
Directive 94/62/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 1994 on packaging
and packaging waste (OJ L 365, 31.12.1994, p. 10).
40
Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2020 on the
establishment of a framework to facilitate sustainable investment, and amending Regulation (EU)
2019/2088 (OJ L 198, 22.6.2020, p. 13).
41
Regulation (EU) … /… of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Union
certification framework for carbon removals (OJ L …).
42
Directive 2012/27/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on energy
efficiency, amending Directives 2009/125/EC and 2010/30/EU and repealing Directives 2004/8/EC and
2006/32/EC (OJ L 315, 14.11.2012, p. 1).
43
Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual
financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of
undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and
repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC (OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, p. 19).
EN 43 EN
(6) ‘business-to-consumer commercial practices’ means business-to-consumer
commercial practices as defined in Article 2, point (d), of Directive 2005/29/EC;
(7) ‘sustainability label’ means sustainability label as defined in Article 2, point (r), of
Directive 2005/29/EC;
(8) ‘environmental label’ means a sustainability label covering only or predominantly
environmental aspects of a product, a process or a trader;
(9) ‘product group’ means a set of products that serve similar purposes or are similar in
terms of use or have similar functional properties;
(10) ‘certification scheme’ means a certification scheme as defined in Article 2, point (s),
of Directive 2005/29/EC;
(11) ‘verification’ means the conformity assessment process carried out by a verifier to
verify whether the substantiation and communication of the explicit environmental
claims are in compliance with the requirements set out in this Directive or whether
environmental labelling schemes comply with this Directive;
(12) ‘value chain’ means all activities and processes that are part of the life cycle of a
product or activity of a trader, including remanufacturing;
(13) ‘life cycle’ means the consecutive and interlinked stages of a product’s life, consisting
of raw material acquisition or generation from natural resources, pre-processing,
manufacturing, storage, distribution, installation, use, maintenance, repair, upgrading,
refurbishment as well as re-use, and end-of-life;
(14) ‘primary information’ means information that is directly measured or collected by the
trader from one or more facilities that are representative for the activities of the trader;
(15) ‘secondary information’ means information that is based on other sources than
primary information including literature studies, engineering studies and patents.
(16) ‘public’ means one or more natural or legal persons and their associations, traders or
groups;
(17) ‘environmental performance’ means the performance of a certain product or product
group or trader or sector related to the environmental aspects or environmental
impacts of that product or product group or the activities of that trader or sector;
(18) ‘environmental aspect’ means an element of a trader’s or sector’s activities or of
products or product groups that interact or can interact with the environment.
(19) ‘environmental impact’ means any change to the environment, whether positive or
negative, that wholly or partially results from a trader’s or sector’s activities or from a
product or product group during its life cycle.
Article 3
Substantiation of explicit environmental claims
1. Member States shall ensure that traders carry out an assessment to substantiate
explicit environmental claims. This assessment shall:
(a) specify if the claim is related to the whole product, part of a product or certain
aspects of a product, or to all activities of a trader or a certain part or aspect of
these activities, as relevant to the claim;
EN 44 EN
(b) rely on widely recognised scientific evidence, use accurate information and
take into account relevant international standards;
(c) demonstrate that environmental impacts, environmental aspects or
environmental performance that are subject to the claim are significant from a
life-cycle perspective;
(d) where a claim is made on environmental performance, take into account all
environmental aspects or environmental impacts which are significant to
assessing the environmental performance;
(e) demonstrate that the claim is not equivalent to requirements imposed by law
on products within the product group, or traders within the sector;
(f) provide information whether the product or trader which is subject to the
claim performs significantly better regarding environmental impacts,
environmental aspects or environmental performance which is subject to the
claim than what is common practice for products in the relevant product
group or traders in the relevant sector;
(g) identify whether improving environmental impacts, environmental aspects or
environmental performance subject to the claim leads to significant harm in
relation to environmental impacts on climate change, resource consumption
and circularity, sustainable use and protection of water and marine resources,
pollution, biodiversity, animal welfare and ecosystems;
(h) separate any greenhouse gas emissions offsets used from greenhouse gas
emissions as additional environmental information, specify whether those
offsets relate to emission reductions or removals, and describe how the offsets
relied upon are of high integrity and accounted for correctly to reflect the
claimed impact on climate;
(i) include primary information available to the trader for environmental
impacts, environmental aspects or environmental performance, which are
subject to the claim;
(j) include relevant secondary information for environmental impacts,
environmental aspects, or environmental performance which is representative
of the specific value chain of the product or the trader on which a claim is
made, in cases where no primary information is available.
2. Where it is demonstrated that significant environmental impacts that are not subject
to the claim exist but there is no widely recognised scientific evidence to perform the
assessment referred to in point (c) of paragraph 1, the trader making the claim on
another aspect shall take account of available information and, if necessary, update
the assessment in accordance with paragraph 1 once widely recognised scientific
evidence is available.
3. The requirements set out in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall not apply to traders that are
microenterprises within the meaning of Commission Recommendation
2003/361/EC44 unless they request the verification with the aim of receiving the
certificate of conformity in accordance with Article 10.
44
Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro,
small and medium-sized enterprises (OJ L 124, 20.5.2003, p. 36).
EN 45 EN
4. When the regular monitoring of the evolution of environmental claims referred to in
Article 20 reveals differences in the application of the requirements laid down in
paragraph 1 for specific claims and such differences create obstacles for the
functioning of the internal market, or where the Commission identifies that the
absence of requirements for specific claims leads to widespread misleading of
consumers, the Commission may adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 18
to supplement the requirements for substantiation of explicit environmental claims
laid down in paragraph 1 by:
(a) determining the rules for assessing the environmental aspects, environmental
impacts and environmental performance, including by determining the
activities, processes, materials, emissions or use of a product, which contribute
significantly or cannot contribute to the relevant environmental impacts,
environmental aspects or environmental performance;
(b) determining for which environmental aspects or environmental impacts
primary information shall be provided and determining criteria based on which
the accuracy of the primary information and secondary information can be
assessed; or
(c) establishing specific life-cycle-based rules on substantiation of explicit
environmental claims for certain product groups and sectors.
5. When specifying further the requirements for substantiation of explicit
environmental claims in accordance with previous paragraph, the Commission shall
take into account scientific or other available technical information, including
relevant international standards, and where relevant consider the following:
(a) the specificities of the sectors and products that require a specific
methodological approach;
(b) the potential contribution of specific product groups or sectors to achieving
Union climate and environmental objectives;
(d) any relevant information derived from Union legislation;
(e) ease of access to information and data for the assessment and use of this
information and data by small and medium-sized enterprises (‘SMEs’).
Article 4
Substantiation of comparative explicit environmental claims
1. The substantiation of explicit environmental claims that state or imply that a product
or trader has less environmental impacts or a better environmental performance than
other products or traders (‘comparative environmental claims’) shall, in addition to
the requirements set out in Article 3, comply with the following requirements:
(a) the information and data used for assessing the environmental impacts,
environmental aspects or environmental performance of the products or traders
against which the comparison is made, are equivalent to the information and
data used for assessing the environmental impacts, environmental aspects or
environmental performance of the product or trader which is subject to the
claim;
EN 46 EN
(b) the data used for assessing the environmental impacts, environmental aspects
or environmental performance of the products or traders is generated or
sourced in an equivalent manner as the data used for assessing the
environmental impacts, environmental aspects or environmental performance
of the products or traders against which the comparison is made;
(c) the coverage of the stages along the value chain is equivalent for the products
and traders compared and ensures that the most significant stages are taken into
account for all products and traders;
(d) the coverage of environmental impacts, environmental aspects or
environmental performances is equivalent for the products and traders
compared and ensures that the most significant environmental impacts,
environmental aspects or environmental performances are taken into account
for all products and traders;
(e) assumptions used for the comparison are set in an equivalent manner for the
products and traders compared.
2. Where a comparative environmental claim relates to an improvement in terms of
environmental impacts, environmental aspects or environmental performance of a
product that is subject to the claim compared to environmental impacts,
environmental aspects or environmental performance of another product from the
same trader, from a competing trader that is no longer active on the market or from a
trader that no longer sells to consumers, the substantiation of the claim shall explain
how that improvement affects other relevant environmental impacts, environmental
aspects or environmental performance of the product subject to the claim and shall
clearly state the baseline year for the comparison.
3. The requirements laid down in this Article shall not apply to traders that are
microenterprises within the meaning of Commission Recommendation
2003/361/EC45 unless they request the verification with the aim of receiving the
certificate of conformity in accordance with Article 10.
Article 5
Communication of explicit environmental claims
1. Member States shall ensure that a trader is required to communicate an explicit
environmental claim in accordance with the requirements set out in this Article.
2. Explicit environmental claims may only cover environmental impacts, environmental
aspects or environmental performance that are substantiated in accordance with the
requirements laid down in Articles 3, 4 and 5 and that are identified as significant for
the product or trader concerned in accordance with Article 3 paragraph (1) point (c)
or (d).
3. Where the explicit environmental claim is related to a final product, and the use
phase is among the most relevant life-cycle stages of that product, the claim shall
include information on how the consumer should use the product in order to achieve
45
Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro,
small and medium-sized enterprises (OJ L 124, 20.5.2003, p. 36).
EN 47 EN
the expected environmental performance of that product. That information shall be
made available together with the claim.
4. Where the explicit environmental claim is related to future environmental
performance of a product or trader it shall include a time-bound commitment for
improvements inside own operations and value chains.
5. Explicit environmental claims on the cumulative environmental impacts of a product
or trader based on an aggregated indicator of environmental impacts can be made
only on the basis of rules to calculate such aggregated indicator that are established
in the Union law.
6. Information on the product or the trader that is the subject of the explicit
environmental claim and on the substantiation shall be made available together with
the claim in a physical form or in the form of a weblink, QR code or equivalent.
That information shall include at least the following:
(a) environmental aspects, environmental impacts or environmental performance
covered by the claim;
(b) the relevant Union or the relevant international standards, where appropriate;
(c) the underlying studies or calculations used to assess, measure and monitor the
environmental impacts, environmental aspects or environmental performance
covered by the claim, without omitting the results of such studies or
calculations and, explanations of their scope, assumptions and limitations,
unless the information is a trade secret in line with Article 2 paragraph 1 of
Directive (EU) 2016/94346;
(d) a brief explanation how the improvements that are subject to the claim are
achieved;
(e) the certificate of conformity referred to in Article 10 regarding the
substantiation of the claim and the contact information of the verifier that drew
up the certificate of conformity;
(f) for climate-related explicit environmental claims that rely on greenhouse gas
emission offsets, information to which extent they rely on offsets and whether
these relate to emissions reductions or removals;
(g) a summary of the assessment including the elements listed in this paragraph
that is clear and understandable to the consumers targeted by the claim and that
is provided in at least one of the official languages of the Member State where
the claim is made.
7. The requirements set out in paragraphs 2, 3 and 6 shall not apply to traders that are
microenterprises within the meaning of Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC
unless they request the verification with the aim of receiving the certificate of
conformity in accordance with Article 10.
8. Where the substantiation of certain environmental impacts, environmental aspects or
environmental performance is subject to the rules established in delegated acts
46
Directive (EU) 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on the
protection of undisclosed know-how and business information (trade secrets) against their unlawful
acquisition, use and disclosure (OJ L 157, 15.6.2016, p. 1).
EN 48 EN
referred to in Article 3, paragraph 4(a) and paragraph 4(c), the Commission may
adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 18 to supplement the requirements
for communication of explicit environmental claims set out in Article 5 by specifying
further the information that can be or shall be communicated regarding such
environmental impacts, environmental aspects or environmental performance, so as
to make sure that the consumers are not misled.
Article 6
Communication of comparative environmental claims
Comparative environmental claims shall not relate to an improvement of the environmental
impacts, environmental aspects or environmental performance of the product that is the
subject of the claim compared to the environmental impacts, environmental aspects or
environmental performance of another product from the same trader or from a competing
trader that is no longer active on the market or from a trader that no longer sells to consumers,
unless they are based on evidence proving that the improvement is significant and achieved in
the last five years.
Article 7
Environmental labels
1. Member States shall ensure that environmental labels fulfil the requirements set out
in Articles 3 to 6 and are subject to verification in accordance with Article 10.
2. Only environmental labels awarded under environmental labelling schemes
established under Union law may present a rating or score of a product or trader
based on an aggregated indicator of environmental impacts of a product or trader.
Article 8
Requirements for environmental labelling schemes
1. Environmental labelling scheme means a certification scheme which certifies that a
product, a process or a trader complies with the requirements for an environmental
label.
2. The environmental labelling schemes shall comply with the following requirements:
(a) information about the ownership and the decision-making bodies of the
environmental labelling scheme is transparent, accessible free of charge, easy
to understand and sufficiently detailed;
(b) information about the objectives of the environmental labelling scheme and the
requirements and procedures to monitor compliance of the environmental
labelling scheme are transparent, accessible free of charge, easy to understand
and sufficiently detailed;
(c) the conditions for joining the environmental labelling schemes are
proportionate to the size and turnover of the companies in order not to exclude
small and medium enterprises;
EN 49 EN
(d) the requirements for the environmental labelling scheme have been developed
by experts that can ensure their scientific robustness and have been submitted
for consultation to a heterogeneous group of stakeholders that has reviewed
them and ensured their relevance from a societal perspective;
(e) the environmental labelling scheme has a complaint and dispute resolution
mechanism in place;
(f) the environmental labelling scheme sets out procedures for dealing with non-
compliance and foresees the withdrawal or suspension of the environmental
label in case of persistent and flagrant non-compliance with the requirements
of the scheme.
3. From [OP: Please insert the date = the date of transposition of this Directive] no new
national or regional environmental labelling schemes shall be established by public
authorities of the Member States. However, national or regional environmental
labelling schemes established prior to that date may continue to award the
environmental labels on the Union market, provided they meet the requirements of
this Directive.
From the date referred to in the first subparagraph, environmental labelling schemes
may only be established under Union law.
4. From [OP: Please insert the date = the date of transposition of this Directive] any
new environmental labelling schemes established by public authorities in third
countries awarding environmental labels to be used on the Union market, shall be
subject to approval by the Commission prior to entering the Union market with the
aim of ensuring that these labels provide added value in terms of their environmental
ambition including notably their coverage of environmental impacts, environmental
aspects or environmental performance, or of a certain product group or sector, as
compared to the existing Union, national or regional schemes referred to in
paragraph 3, and meet the requirements of this Directive. Environmental labelling
schemes established by public authorities in third countries prior to that date may
continue to award the environmental labels which are to be used on the Union
market, provided they meet the requirements of this Directive.
5. Member States shall ensure that environmental labelling schemes established by
private operators after [OP: Please insert the date = the date of transposition of this
Directive] are only approved if those schemes provide added value in terms of their
environmental ambition, including notably their extent of coverage of environmental
impacts, environmental aspects or environmental performance, or of a certain
product group or sector and their ability to support the green transition of SMEs, as
compared to the existing Union, national or regional schemes referred to in
paragraph 3, and meet the requirements of this Directive.
This procedure for approval of new environmental labelling schemes shall apply to
schemes established by private operators in the Union and in third countries.
Member States shall notify the Commission when new private schemes are
approved.
6. In order to receive the approvals referred to in paragraphs 4 and 5, the operators of
new environmental labelling schemes shall provide supporting documents setting out
the following:
(a) the rationale underlying the development of the scheme
EN 50 EN
(b) the proposed scope of the scheme,
(c) the evidence the scheme will provide added value as set out in in paragraph 4
for environmental labelling schemes established by public authorities in third
countries, or in paragraph 5 for environmental labelling schemes established by
private operators;
(d) a proposal for draft criteria and the methodology used to develop and award the
environmental label and the expected impacts on the market;
(e) a detailed description of the ownership and the decision-making bodies of the
environmental labelling scheme.
The documents referred to in the first subparagraph shall be submitted to the
Commission in case of schemes referred to in paragraph 4 or to the Member States’
authorities in case of schemes referred to in paragraph 5, together with the certificate
of conformity for environmental labelling schemes drawn up in accordance with
Article 10.
7. The Commission shall publish and keep-up-to date a list of officially recognised
environmental labels that are allowed to be used on the Union market after [OP:
Please insert the date = the date of transposition of this Directive] pursuant to
paragraphs 3, 4 and 5.
8. In order to ensure a uniform application across the Union, the Commission shall
adopt implementing acts to:
(a) provide detailed requirements for approval of environmental labelling schemes
pursuant to the criteria referred to in paragraphs 4 and 5;
(b) specify further the format and content of supporting documents referred to in
paragraph 6;
(c) provide detailed rules on the procedure for the approval referred to in
paragraph 4.
Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination
procedure referred to in Article 19.
Article 9
Review of the substantiation of explicit environmental claims
Member States shall ensure that the information used for substantiation of explicit
environmental claims is reviewed and updated by traders when there are circumstances that
may affect the accuracy of a claim, and no later than 5 years from the date when the
information referred to in Article 5(6) is provided. In the review, the trader shall revise the
used underlying information to ensure that the requirements of Articles 3 and 4 are fully
complied with.
The updated explicit environmental claim shall be subject to verification in accordance with
Article 10.
EN 51 EN
Article 10
Verification and certification of the substantiation and communication of environmental
claims and environmental labelling schemes
1. Member States shall set up procedures for verifying the substantiation and
communication of explicit environmental claims against the requirements set out in
Articles 3 to 7.
2. Member States shall set up procedures for verifying the compliance of environmental
labelling schemes with the requirements set out in Article 8.
3. The verification and certification requirements shall apply to traders that are
microenterprises within the meaning of Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC
only if they so request.
4. The verification shall be undertaken by a verifier fulfilling the requirements set out in
Article 11, in accordance with the procedures referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2,
before the environmental claim is made public or the environmental label is
displayed by a trader.
5. For the purposes of the verification the verifier shall take into account the nature and
content of the explicit environmental claim or the environmental label.
6. Upon completion of the verification, the verifier shall draw up, where appropriate, a
certificate of conformity certifying that the explicit environmental claim or the
environmental label complies with the requirements set out in this Directive.
7. The certificate of conformity shall be recognised by the competent authorities
responsible for the application and enforcement of this Directive. Member States
shall notify the list of certificates of conformity via the Internal Market Information
System established by Regulation (EU) No 1024/2012.
8. The certificate of conformity shall not prejudge the assessment of the environmental
claim by national authorities or courts in accordance with Directive 2005/29/EC.
9. The Commission shall adopt implementing acts to set out details regarding the form
of the certificate of conformity referred to in paragraph 5 and the technical means for
issuing such certificate of conformity. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in
accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 19.
Article 11
Verifier
1. The verifier shall be a third-party conformity assessment body accredited in
accordance with Regulation (EC) No 765/200847.
2. The accreditation shall, in particular, include the evaluation of compliance with the
requirements in paragraph 3.
3. The verifier shall comply with the following requirements:
47
Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 July 2008 setting out
the requirements for accreditation and market surveillance relating to the marketing of products and
repealing Regulation (EEC) No 339/93 (OJ L 218, 13.8.2008, p. 30).
EN 52 EN
(a) the verifier shall be independent of the product bearing, or the trader associated
to, the environmental claim;
(b) the verifier, its top-level management and the personnel responsible for
carrying out the verification tasks shall not engage in any activity that may
conflict with their independence of judgement or integrity in relation to the
verification activities;
(c) the verifier and its personnel shall carry out the verification activities with the
highest degree of professional integrity and the requisite technical competence
and shall be free from all pressures and inducements, particularly financial,
which might influence their judgement or the results of their verification
activities,
(d) the verifier shall have the expertise, equipment and infrastructure required to
perform the verification activities in relation to which it has been accredited;
(e) the verifier shall have a sufficient number of suitably qualified and experienced
personnel responsible for carrying out the verification tasks;
(f) the personnel of a verifier shall observe professional secrecy with regard to all
information obtained in carrying out the verification tasks;
(g) where a verifier subcontracts specific tasks connected with verification or has
recourse to a subsidiary, it shall take full responsibility for the tasks performed
by subcontractors or subsidiaries and shall assess and monitor the
qualifications of the subcontractor or the subsidiary and the work carried out by
them.
Article 12
Small and medium sized enterprises
Member States shall take appropriate measures to help small and medium sized enterprises
apply the requirements set out in this Directive. Those measures shall at least include
guidelines or similar mechanisms to raise awareness of ways to comply with the requirements
on explicit environmental claims. In addition, without prejudice to applicable state aid rules,
such measures may include:
(a) financial support;
(b) access to finance;
(c) specialised management and staff training;
(d) organisational and technical assistance.
Article 13
Designation of competent authorities and coordination mechanism
1. Member States shall designate one or more competent authorities as responsible for
the application and enforcement of this Directive.
2. For the purpose of the enforcement of Articles 5 and 6, Member States may
designate the national authorities or courts responsible for the enforcement of
Directive 2005/29/EC. In that case, Member States may derogate from Articles 14 to
EN 53 EN
17 of this Directive and apply the enforcement rules adopted in accordance with
Articles 11 to 13 of Directive 2005/29/EC.
3. Where there is more than one competent authority in their territory, Member States
shall ensure that the respective duties of those authorities are clearly defined and that
appropriate communication and coordination mechanisms are established.
4. Member States shall notify the Commission and other Member States without delay
of the identity of the competent authorities in their Member State and the areas of
competence of those authorities.
Article 14
Powers of the competent authorities
1. Member States shall confer on their competent authorities the powers of inspection
and enforcement necessary to ensure compliance with this Directive.
2. The powers conferred on competent authorities under paragraph 1 shall include at
least the following:
(a) the power of access to any relevant documents, data or information related to
an infringement of this Directive, in any form or format and irrespective of
their storage medium, or the place where they are stored, and the power to take
or obtain copies thereof;
(b) the power to require any natural or legal person to provide any relevant
information, data or documents, in any form or format and irrespective of their
storage medium or the place where they are stored, for the purposes of
establishing whether an infringement of this Directive has occurred or is
occurring and the details of such infringement;
(c) the power to start investigations or proceedings on their own initiative to bring
about the cessation or prohibition of infringements of this Directive;
(d) the power to require traders to adopt adequate and effective remedies and take
appropriate action to bring an infringement of this Directive to an end;
(e) the power to adopt, where appropriate, injunctive relief with regard to
infringements of this Directive;
(f) the power to impose penalties for infringements of this Directive in accordance
with Article 17.
3. Competent authorities may use any information, document, finding, statement or
intelligence as evidence for the purpose of their investigations, irrespective of the
format in which or medium on which they are stored.
Article 15
Compliance monitoring measures
1. Competent authorities of the Member States designated in accordance with Article
13 shall undertake regular checks of the explicit environmental claims made and the
environmental labelling schemes applied, on the Union market. The reports detailing
the result of those checks shall be made available to the public online.
EN 54 EN
2. Where the competent authorities of a Member State detect an infringement of an
obligation set out in this Directive, they shall carry out an evaluation covering all
relevant requirements laid down in this Directive.
3. Where, further to the evaluation referred to in the first subparagraph, the competent
authorities find that the substantiation and communication of the explicit
environmental claim or the environmental labelling scheme does not comply with the
requirements laid down in this Directive, they shall notify the trader making the
claim about the non-compliance and require that trader to take all appropriate
corrective action within 30 days to bring the explicit environmental claim or the
environmental labelling scheme into compliance with this Directive or to cease the
use of and references to the non-compliant explicit environmental claim. Such action
shall be as effective and rapid as possible, while complying with the principle of
proportionality and the right to be heard.
Article 16
Complaint-handling and access to justice
1. Natural or legal persons or organisations regarded under Union or national law as
having a legitimate interest shall be entitled to submit substantiated complaints to
competent authorities when they deem, on the basis of objective circumstances, that
a trader is failing to comply with the provisions of this Directive.
2. For the purposes of the first subparagraph, non-governmental entities or
organisations promoting human health, environmental or consumer protection and
meeting any requirements under national law shall be deemed to have sufficient
interest.
3. Competent authorities shall assess the substantiated complaint referred to in
paragraph 1 and, where necessary, take the necessary steps, including inspections
and hearings of the person or organisation, with a view to verify those complaints. If
confirmed, the competent authorities shall take the necessary actions in accordance
with Article 15.
4. Competent authorities shall, as soon as possible and in any case in accordance with
the relevant provisions of national law, inform the person or organisation referred to
in paragraph 1 that submitted the complaint of its decision to accede to or refuse the
request for action put forward in the complaint and shall provide the reasons for it.
5. Member States shall ensure that a person or organisation referred to in paragraph 1
submitting a substantiated complaint shall have access to a court or other
independent and impartial public body competent to review the procedural and
substantive legality of the decisions, acts or failure to act of the competent authority
under this Directive, without prejudice to any provisions of national law which
require that administrative review procedures be exhausted prior to recourse to
judicial proceedings. Those judicial review procedures shall be fair, equitable, timely
and free of charge or not prohibitively expensive, and shall provide adequate and
effective remedies, including injunctive relief where necessary.
6. Member States shall ensure that practical information is made available to the public
on access to the administrative and judicial review procedures referred to in this
Article.
EN 55 EN
Article 17
Penalties
1. Without prejudice to the obligations of Member States under Directive
2008/99/EC4048, Member States shall lay down the rules on penalties applicable to
infringements of national provisions adopted pursuant to this Directive and shall take
all measures necessary to ensure that they are implemented. The penalties provided
for shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive.
2. When determining the type and level of penalties to be imposed in case of
infringements, the competent authorities of the Member States shall give due regard
to the following:
(a) the nature, gravity, extent and duration of the infringement;
(b) the intentional or negligent character of the infringement and any action taken
by the trader to mitigate or remedy the damage suffered by consumers, where
applicable;
(c) the financial strength of the natural or legal person held responsible, as
indicated for example by the total turnover of the legal person held responsible
or the annual income of the natural person held responsible;
(d) the economic benefits derived from the infringement by those responsible;
(e) any previous infringements by the natural or legal person held responsible;
(f) any other aggravating or mitigating factor applicable to the circumstances of
the case;
(g) penalties imposed on the trader for the same infringement in other Member
States in cross-border cases where information about such penalties is available
through the mechanism established by Regulation (EU) 2017/2394, where
applicable.
3. Member States shall provide that penalties and measures for infringements of this
Directive shall include:
(a) fines which effectively deprive those responsible of the economic benefits
derived from their infringements, and increasing the level of such fines for
repeated infringements;
(b) confiscation of revenues gained by the trader from a transaction with the
relevant products concerned;
(c) temporary exclusion for a maximum period of 12 months from public
procurement processes and from access to public funding, including tendering
procedures, grants and concessions.
For the purposes of point (a), Member States shall ensure that when penalties are to be
imposed in accordance with Article 21 of Regulation (EU) 2017/239449, the maximum
amount of such fines being at least at 4 % of the trader’s annual turnover in the Member State
or Member States concerned.
48
Directive 2008/99/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on the
protection of the environment through criminal law (OJ L 328, 6.12.2008, p. 28).
49
OJ L 345, 27.12.2017, p. 1.
EN 56 EN
Article 18
Exercise of the delegation
1. The power to adopt delegated acts is conferred on the Commission subject to the
conditions laid down in this Article.
2. The power to adopt delegated acts as referred to in Article 3(4) and Article 5(8) shall
be conferred on the Commission for a period of five years from [OP please insert the
date = the date of transposition of this Directive]. The Commission shall draw up a
report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end
of the five-year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods
of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such
extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
3. The delegation of power referred to in Article 3(4) and Article 5(8) may be revoked
at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision to revoke shall
put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take
effect the day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the
European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of
any delegated acts already in force.
4. Before adopting a delegated act, the Commission shall consult experts designated by
each Member State in accordance with the principles laid down in the
Interinstitutional Agreement of 13 April 2016 on Better Law-Making.
5. As soon as it adopts a delegated act, the Commission shall notify it simultaneously to
the European Parliament and to the Council. A delegated act adopted pursuant to
Article 3(4) and Article 5(8) shall enter into force only if no objection has been
expressed either by the European Parliament or by the Council within a period of
[two months] of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council
or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have
both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be
extended by [two months] at the initiative of the European Parliament or of the
Council.
Article 19
Committee procedure
1. The Commission shall be assisted by a committee. That committee shall be a
committee within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011.
2. Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article 5(4), third subparagraph, of
Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 shall apply.
Article 20
Monitoring
1. Member States shall regularly monitor the application of this Directive based on:
EN 57 EN
(a) an overview of the types of explicit environmental claims and of environmental
labelling schemes which have been subject to substantiated complaints in
accordance with Article 16;
(b) an overview of explicit environmental claims and of environmental labelling
schemes with regard to which competent authorities have required the trader to
take corrective action, in accordance with Article 15, or have imposed penalties
in accordance with Article 17.
2. The information referred to in paragraph 1 shall specify the explicit environmental
claim or environmental labelling scheme, the nature of the alleged infringement, the
nature and duration of the corrective action and, if applicable, the penalty imposed.
3. Member States shall provide the information referred to in paragraph 1 to the
Commission on an annual basis.
4. Based on the information collected pursuant to paragraph 3 and the information
made available by the Member States pursuant to Article 15(1), and, if necessary,
additional consultations with competent authorities, the European Environmental
Agency shall publish, every two years, a report containing an assessment of the
evolution of explicit environmental claims and environmental labelling schemes in
each Member State and for the Union as a whole. The report shall enable a
differentiation according to the size of the trader making the claim and according to
the quality of the substantiation.
Article 21
Evaluation and review
1. By [OP please insert the date = 5 years after the date of transposition of this
Directive], the Commission shall carry out an evaluation of this Directive in light of
the objectives that it pursues and present a report on the main findings to the
European Parliament and the Council.
2. The report referred to in paragraph 1 shall assess whether this Directive has achieved
its objective, in particular with regard to:
(a) ensuring that explicit environmental claims made about the environmental
performance of a product or trader are based on reliable, comparable and
verifiable information;
(b) ensuring that environment labelling schemes are based on certification schemes
and meet the relevant requirements set out in Article 8;
(c) ensuring that new private environmental labelling schemes concerning
products or traders already covered by existing schemes are approved by the
Member States only if they provide added value as compared to the existing
schemes;
(d) setting out the rules for communicating explicit environmental claims on the
Union market, and avoiding duplication of costs when communicating such
claims;
(e) strengthening the functioning of the internal market.
EN 58 EN
3. Where the Commission finds it appropriate, the report referred to in paragraph 1
shall be accompanied by a legislative proposal for amendment of the relevant
provisions of this Directive, including considering further provisions on:
(a) unlocking opportunities for the circular, bio and green economy by assessing
the appropriateness and feasibility of mandating the use of common, and where
relevant life-cycle based, method for substantiation of environmental claims;
(b) facilitating transition towards toxic free environment by considering
introducing a prohibition of environmental claims for products containing
hazardous substances except where their use is considered essential for the
society in line with the criteria to be developed by the Commission;
(c) further harmonisation as regards requirements on the substantiation of specific
environmental claims on environmental aspects or impacts such as durability,
reusability, reparability, recyclability, recycled content, use of natural content,
including fibers, environmental performance or sustainability, bio-based
elements, biodegradability, biodiversity, waste prevention and reduction.
Article 22
Amendment to Regulation (EU) 1024/2012
In the Annex to Regulation (EU) 1024/2012, the following point is added:
‘X. [OP: Please insert the next consecutive number] Directive (EU) … of the European
Parliament and of the Council of … on substantiation and communication of explicit
environmental claims (OJ L …, date, page: Articles 13(3) and 15)’.
Article 23
Amendments to Regulation (EU) 2017/2394
In the Annex to Regulation (EU) 2017/2394, the following point is added:
’X. [OP: Please insert the next consecutive number] Directive (EU) … of the European
Parliament and of the Council of … on substantiation and communication of explicit
environmental claims (OJ L …, date, page).’
Article 24
Amendment to Directive (EU) 2020/1828
In Annex I to Directive (EU) 2020/1828, the following point is added:
‘(X) [OP: Please insert the next consecutive number] Directive (EU) … of the European
Parliament and of the Council of … on substantiation and communication of explicit
environmental claims (OJ L …, date, page)’.
EN 59 EN
Article 25
Transposition
1. Member States shall adopt and publish by [OP please insert the date = 18 months
after the date of entry into force of this Directive] the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive. They shall
immediately communicate the text of those measures to the Commission.
They shall apply those measures from [OP please insert the date = 24 months after
the date of entry into force of this Directive].
When Member States adopt those measures, they shall contain a reference to this
Directive or be accompanied by such a reference on the occasion of their official
publication. Member States shall determine how such reference is to be made.
2. Member States shall communicate to the Commission the text of the main measures
of national law which they adopt in the field covered by this Directive.
Article 26
Entry into force
This Directive shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in
the Official Journal of the European Union.
Article 27
Addressees
This Directive is addressed to the Member States.
Done at Brussels,
For the European Parliament For the Council
The President The President
EN 60 EN
LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL STATEMENT
1. FRAMEWORK OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE
1.1. Title of the proposal/initiative
Green Claims: proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the
Council on substantiation and communication of explicit environmental claims
1.2. Policy area(s) concerned
09 - Environment & Climate Action116
1.3. The proposal/initiative relates to:
a new action
a new action following a pilot project/preparatory action 117
the extension of an existing action
a merger or redirection of one or more actions towards another/a new action
1.4. Objective(s)
1.4.1. General objective(s)
The objective of this initiative is to increase the level of environmental protection
and contribute to accelerating the green transition towards a circular, clean and
climate neutral economy in the EU, protect consumers and companies from
greenwashing and enable consumers to contribute to accelerating the green transition
by making informed purchasing decisions based on credible environmental claims
and labels, improve the legal certainty as regards environmental claims and the level
playing fields on the internal market, boost the competitiveness of economic
operators that make efforts to increase the environmental sustainability of their
products and activities, and create cost saving opportunities for such operators that
are trading across borders.
It complements the proposed changes to the proposed Unfair Commercial Practices.
1.4.2. Specific objective(s)
Establish EU rules on voluntary green claims, applicable to traders operating in the
European Union (with the exception of microenterprises for some provisions) on the
substantiation, communication and verification of environmental
claims/environmental labelling schemes.
1.4.3. Expected result(s) and impact
By reaching the specific objectives, more market operators would be able to integrate
reliable environmental information into their decision-making (e.g. purchasing
decisions, choice of suppliers or co-operation with suppliers and business partners,
product design, procurement choices).
116
For the Green Claims, the legal basis of the initiative is the Single Market but budgetary resources come
from 09 – Environment and Climate Action.
117
As referred to in Article 58(2)(a) or (b) of the Financial Regulation.
EN 61 EN
Consumers would be able to trust the environmental claims on the products they buy,
enabling them to integrate environmental considerations more systematically in their
purchasing decisions.
This would trigger more demand for greener products and solutions, driving growth
in green markets. It would unlock opportunities in the supply chain for more
efficiency and better environmental performance. This would then contribute to the
general objective of unlocking opportunities for the circular and green economy.
Establishing an EU approach to environmental claims would address the general
objective of strengthening the functioning of the internal market, specifically of
green markets.
A common EU approach answering the objective of reliability, comparability and
verifiability would make it easier for enforcers to check claims, further enhancing
their effect. This would further strengthen drivers for better environmental
performance of products and traders, contributing to European Green Deal
objectives.
1.4.4. Indicators of performance
Specify the indicators for monitoring progress and achievements.
1. Environmental claims on products and companies are reliable, comparable
and verifiable: increasing share of reliable environmental claims, and
correspondingly decreasing share of misleading environmental claims monitored
through:
o Number of environmental claims that respect (or not) the requirements of the green
claims initiative;
o Effective implementation of the green claims initiative;
o Share of national authorities that consider that the Directive has made it easier to
address greenwashing.
2. Users of information trust environmental information: increasing trust of users
of information (consumers, businesses, investors, public administrations and NGOs)
in environmental claims monitored through:
o Level of consumer trust in environmental claims;
o Level of consumer trust in sustainability labels;
o Level of trust of other users of information (businesses, investors, public
administrations, NGOs) in environmental claims in scope.
3. Environmental performance of products and organisations improves: positive
evolution of benchmark values in Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules
(PEFCRs) and Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) and Organization
Environmental Footprint (OEF) profile results showing a trend that products and
organisations are becoming greener; decreasing consumption footprint of EU (as per
the consumption footprint indicator developed by JRC), covering all 16
environmental impacts of the Environmental Footprint methods. This will be
monitored by the following indicators:
o Evolution of benchmark values in PEFCRs;
o Evolution of EF profile results on PEF and OEF over time;
EN 62 EN
o Evolution of consumption footprint in the EU.
4. Obstacles on green markets are reduced: obstacles related to complying with
multiple methods and to provide environmental information are reduced. This will be
monitored by the following indicators:
o Perception of businesses on the internal market of green products.
1.5. Grounds for the proposal/initiative
1.5.1. Requirement(s) to be met in the short or long term including a detailed timeline for
roll-out of the implementation of the initiative
Short-term requirements
The Member States will have two years to transpose the Directive. This proposal is
closely linked with the review of Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, proposed
by the Commission in March 2022, and it is expected that the two Directives may be
transposed jointly.
In addition to the transposition of the rules on substantiation and communication of
environmental claims, the Member States will have to set up a procedure for
verifying the substantiation of environmental claims on products/traders put on the
market, , and ecolabelling schemes, designate competent authorities and a
coordination mechanism.
The proposal foresees that voluntary environmental claims have to be substantiated
based on an assessment that meets specific requirements set out in Article 3. In cases
where the Commission adopts delegated acts establishing life-cycle based rules for
specific product groups or sectors, the economic operators will be able to substantiate
specific claims on environmental impacts on their basis.
In support of the implementation of this Directive, and shortly after its entry into
force, the Commission will adopt an implementing act to provide details regarding
the form of certificate to be issued by the verifier of environmental claims as per
Article 12.
On-going requirements
The competent authorities will be obliged to undertake regular checks of the
environmental claims used on the EU market.
The Member States will be obliged to regularly monitor the application of the
Directive based on an overview of environmental claims which have been notified to
enforcement authorities; an overview of environmental claims with regard to whom
enforcement authorities have required the organisation responsible to take corrective
action, and, if applicable, have taken enforcement measures. Member States will
supply this information to the Commission on an annual basis.
Five years after the date of entry into force of this Directive, the Commission shall
carry out an evaluation of this Directive in light of the objectives that it pursues and
present a report on the main findings and where appropriate a legislative proposal for
amendment of the relevant provisions of this Directive.
The Commission will be empowered to adopt delegated acts according to Article
3(4) on further specifying the requirements for the substantiation of explicit
environmental claims. This will be an ongoing process to develop further
substantiation methods.
EN 63 EN
The Commission will also be empowered to adopt delegated and implementing acts
to supplement the requirements for environmental labelling schemes in line with
Article 8(8) and (9).
1.5.2. Added value of Union involvement (it may result from different factors, e.g.
coordination gains, legal certainty, greater effectiveness or complementarities). For
the purposes of this point 'added value of Union involvement' is the value resulting
from Union intervention, which is additional to the value that would have been
otherwise created by Member States alone.
It is essential to ensure a level playing field for economic operators in terms of
requirements to be met when making an environmental claim, including the
requirements on the information and data to be used, by putting in place a common
set of rules within the EU internal market.
Based on the status quo, and if Member States were to act individually, there is a
high risk to end up with many competing different systems, based on different and
uncomparable methods and approaches, leading to a fragmented internal market,
especially for cross-border products traded on the internal market, increasing the risk
of having uneven awareness and information levels on the environmental
performance of products and organisations across EU, and additional costs for
companies trading cross-border (especially if they have to use different methods or
comply with different labelling schemes).
In the absence of EU-level action, the market operators will continue to be faced with
misleading information on environmental aspects, while obstacles on the internal
market would impede businesses to operate in equivalent conditions. In addition,
certain aspects, like the development of methods to underpin specific claims and the
establishment of related databases (if needed) cannot be achieved at national level,
given their scope in terms of coverage of products, sectors or geographical regions.
There is a clear added value in setting common requirements at EU level, because a
harmonised and well-functioning internal EU market would set a level playing field
for businesses operating in the EU.
It is expected that following the action at EU level Member States will be prevented
from introducing unilaterally specific measures and the Directive will to reduce the
risk of legal fragmentation of the single market and will bring cost savings for
governments and the private sector.
1.5.3. Lessons learned from similar experiences in the past
The initiative complements the proposed changes to the proposed Unfair
Commercial Practices Directive (UCPD) made by the European Commission to the
European Parliament and to the Council. It builds on the lessons learned on the
implementation of the UCPD and the need for specific rules on the substantiation of
explicit green claims, on communication and verification. It also draws the lessons
on the proliferation of ecolabelling schemes. Other lessons learned are related to the
development of the EU Ecolabel, EMAS, and the development of the environmental
footprint methods.
EN 64 EN
1.5.4. Compatibility with the Multiannual Financial Framework and possible synergies
with other appropriate instruments
The initiatives fall under the umbrella of the European Green Deal, which guides the
EU's recovery strategy. The Green Deal recognises the advantages of investing in our
competitive sustainability by building a fairer, greener and more digital Europe.
The initiative is financed under Heading 3 (Natural Resources and the Environment),
Title 9 (Environment and Climate Action) of the Multiannual Financial Framework.
As detailed below, the implementation will require additional human resources,
spending under the LIFE programme and some supporting expenditure in the EEA.
The corresponding increase of the EEA subsidy will be offset from the EU
programme for the environment and climate action (LIFE).
Other policy areas could provide support to businesses for implementing the
requirements for substantiating and communicating environmental claims, e.g. as
laid down in delegated acts according to Art 3, in particular EU funding provided on
innovation and investments to businesses, in particular to SMEs. The European
Regional Development Fund, through smart specialisation, LIFE and Horizon
Europe complements private innovation funding and support the whole innovation
cycle with the aim to bring solutions to the market. The Digital Europe Programme
launched in 2022 the Concerted Action CIRPASS with the objective to open up
possibilities for innovative workflows, especially to further the circularity of the flow
of tangible goods, but also for consumer information by defining a cross-sectoral
product data model for the digital product passport with demonstrated usefulness for
the Circular Economy.
The Innovation Fund is one of the world’s largest funding programmes for the
demonstration of innovative low-carbon technologies and solutions. It will provide
around EUR 10 billion of support over 2020-2030, aiming to bring to the market
industrial solutions to decarbonise Europe and support its transition to climate
neutrality.
1.5.5. Assessment of the different available financing options, including scope for
redeployment
Several options were assessed, including coverage by ENV services only with a mix
of procuring services for datasets, to exploring cooperation with other services and
agencies. The best option retained combines procuring services for datasets by DG
ENV and a contribution to the EEA to seek expertise from their staff.
EN 65 EN
1.6. Duration and financial impact of the proposal/initiative
limited duration
– in effect from [DD/MM]YYYY to [DD/MM]YYYY
– Financial impact from YYYY to YYYY for commitment appropriations and
from YYYY to YYYY for payment appropriations.
unlimited duration
– Implementation with a start-up period from 2024 to 2027,
– followed by full-scale operation.
1.7. Management mode(s) planned118
Direct management by the Commission
– by its departments, including by its staff in the Union delegations;
– by the executive agencies
Shared management with the Member States
Indirect management by entrusting budget implementation tasks to:
– third countries or the bodies they have designated;
– international organisations and their agencies (to be specified);
– the EIB and the European Investment Fund;
– bodies referred to in Articles 70 and 71 of the Financial Regulation;
– public law bodies;
– bodies governed by private law with a public service mission to the extent that
they are provided with adequate financial guarantees;
– bodies governed by the private law of a Member State that are entrusted with
the implementation of a public-private partnership and that are provided with
adequate financial guarantees;
– persons entrusted with the implementation of specific actions in the CFSP
pursuant to Title V of the TEU, and identified in the relevant basic act.
118
Details of budget implementation methods and references to the Financial Regulation may be found on
the BUDGpedia site: https://myintracomm.ec.europa.eu/corp/budget/financial-rules/budget-
implementation/Pages/implementation-methods.aspx
EN 66 EN
2. MANAGEMENT MEASURES
2.1. Monitoring and reporting rules
Specify frequency and conditions.
The initiatives involve procurement, administrative arrangement with the JRC,
increase of the contribution to the EEA and impact on the COM HR. Standard rules
for this type of expenditure apply.
2.2. Management and control system(s)
2.2.1. Justification of the management mode(s), the funding implementation mechanism(s),
the payment modalities and the control strategy proposed
N/A – cf. above.
2.2.2. Information concerning the risks identified and the internal control system(s) set up
to mitigate them
N/A – cf. above.
2.2.3. Estimation and justification of the cost-effectiveness of the controls (ratio of "control
costs ÷ value of the related funds managed"), and assessment of the expected levels
of risk of error (at payment & at closure)
N/A – cf. above.
2.3. Measures to prevent fraud and irregularities
Specify existing or envisaged prevention and protection measures, e.g. from the Anti-Fraud Strategy.
N/A – cf. above.
EN 67 EN
3. ESTIMATED FINANCIAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE
3.1. Heading(s) of the multiannual financial framework and expenditure budget
line(s) affected
Existing budget lines
In order of multiannual financial framework headings and budget lines.
Type of
Budget line expenditure
Contribution
Heading of from
multiannual candidate
from
financial Number countries fromother
Diff./Non- EFTA other assigned
framework and third
diff.119 countries revenue
120 potential countries
candidates
121
09 02 02 Circular Economy and
3 quality of life Diff. YES NO YES NO
09 10 02 European Environment
3 Agency Diff. YES YES NO NO
20 01 02 01 – Remuneration and Non-
7 allowances
NO NO NO NO
diff.
20 02 01 03 – National civil servants Non-
7 temporarily assigned to the institution
NO NO NO NO
diff.
20 02 06 02 – Meetings, expert groups Non-
7 NO NO NO NO
diff.
New budget lines requested
N/A
119
Diff. = Differentiated appropriations / Non-diff. = Non-differentiated appropriations.
120
EFTA: European Free Trade Association.
121
Candidate countries and, where applicable, potential candidates from the Western Balkans.
EN 68 EN
3.2. Estimated financial impact of the proposal on appropriations
3.2.1. Summary of estimated impact on operational appropriations
– The proposal/initiative does not require the use of operational appropriations
– The proposal/initiative requires the use of operational appropriations, as explained below:
EUR million (to three decimal places)
Heading of multiannual financial
3 Natural resources and environment
framework
2027
DG: ENV 2024 2025 2026 and TOTAL
beyond
Operational appropriations
09 02 02 Circular Economy and quality of Commitments (1) 2,540 6,964 5,264 5,214 19,982
life Payments (2) 2,540 6,964 5,264 5,214 19,982
Commitments =(1)
2,540 6,964 5,264 5,214 19,982
TOTAL appropriations
for DG ENV Payments =(2)
2,540 6,964 5,264 5,214 19,982
The amount reported above will be needed to finance the following actions:
The acquisition of the secondary Environmental Footprint (EF) datasets providing key average data on resource consumption and
emissions for key processes that can be used by many companies to assess their value chains , the acquisition and development of data
to fill possible data gaps, the development costs of an IT platform for the EF database as well as the maintenance of the database for the
period 2026-2027 (EUR 10,095 million). The access to EF datasets will support companies, especially SMEs, in complying with the
Green Claims Directive in a more cost efficient and less burdensome manner. The easy access to high quality data related to the
environmental perfromance of products will be a key enabler for all companies, but especially for SMEs, to substantiate their
environmental claims in a robust manner unrelated to the question if delegated acts based on Art 3 of this proposal on environmental
claims are in place or not. The access to EF datasets will also support the implementation of other EU policies on environmental
EN 69 EN
sustainability and helping consumers to make the right choices, such as the proposal for Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation
(ESPR) 122. The ESPR introduces the possibility to set mandatory information requirements, which may also be linked with labelling
requirements, and it will result in improved information flows through Digital Product Passports. The EF datasets will support the
calculation and setting of information and performance requirements e.g. related to carbon and environmental footprint, as foreseen by
the ESPR proposal, based on a harmonised set of high-quality secondary data.
The procurement of studies and surveys regarding the use of methods used for substantiation by stakeholders and the evaluation of the
Directive on Green Claims (EUR 0,150 million)
JRC will play a key role in supporting the Commission with some of the technical work required. The Administrative Arrangement is
expected to represent a cost around EUR 1,700 millions
Administrative and technical support for the preparation of delegated acts according to Art 3(4) on further specifying the requirements
for the substantiation of explicit environmental claims setting life-cycle based rules for specific product groups or sectors, will be also an
important expenditure. This budget line accounts for the preparation of 6 such delegated acts (EUR 6,827 million)
Flanking measures to help SMEs to adapt to this directive, including the development of calculation tools based on the requirements
described in delegated acts according to Art 3(4) (EUR 1,210 million).
Agency: EEA 2025 2026 2027 TOTAL
Commitments (1a) 0,180 0,367 0,375 0,922
Title 1: Staff expenditure
Payments (2a) 0,180 0,367 0,375 0,922
Commitments (1b)
Title 2: Infrastructure
Payments (2b)
Commitments (1c) 0,095 0,065 0,065 0,225
Title 3: Operational expenditure
Payments (2c) 0,095 0,065 0,065 0,225
TOTAL appropriations Commitments =1a+1b +1c
0,275 0,432 0,440 1,147
122
Available at https://environment.ec.europa.eu/publications/proposal-ecodesign-sustainable-products-regulation_en
EN 70 EN
for agency EEA Payments =2a+2b +2c
0,275 0,432 0,440 1,147
EEA costs include costs for 2 additional FTE (1 TA and 1 CA), as well as operational expenditure, for the purpose of the monitoring of the
environmental claims put on the EU market following the implementation of the directive as per Article 20(4). The Agency will be tasked with a
detailed analysis of information reported by the Member States as per Article 20(1) – (3) and publish reports every two years with the assessment
of the evolution of green claims across the EU. This estimate includes most evidence for the biannual reports to be compiled by the Member
States and reported to the European level via questionnaires. EEA will propose these questionnaires in agreement with DG ENV and enable them
by means of a standard electronic tool. The information reported by the Member States will be a combination of statistics around claims in their
national markets and qualitative description of the nature of false claims and corrective actions implemented. The tasks of these staff will be of
permanent nature to report from countries and produce the analytical report every two years as well as supporting tasks that are necessary in the
background (administration, communication, IT development, business support, etc.).
□ TOTAL operational appropriations 2024 2025 2026 2027 TOTAL
Commitments (4) 2,540 7,239 5,696 5,654 21,129
Payments (5) 2,540 7,239 5,696 5,654 21,129
TOTAL appropriations
under HEADING 1 to 3 Commitments =4 2,540 7,239 5,696 5,654 21,129
of the multiannual financial framework
Heading of multiannual financial
7 ‘Administrative expenditure’
framework
This section should be filled in using the 'budget data of an administrative nature' to be firstly introduced in the Annex to the Legislative
Financial Statement (Annex V to the internal rules), which is uploaded to DECIDE for interservice consultation purposes.
EUR million (to three decimal places)
2027 and
2024 2025 2026 TOTAL
beyond
EN 71 EN
DG: ENV
□ Human resources 0,606 0,606 0,606 0,606 2,424
□ Other administrative expenditure 0,180 0,180 0,180 0,180 0,720
TOTAL DG ENV Appropriations 0,786 0,786 0,786 0,786 3,144
Current staff in DG ENV comprises 2 FTE officials (AD) dealing with policy-related matters and 2 FTE officials (AD) dealing with
methodological issues. This staff will continue to be essential in the future and is expected to deal with the following tasks:
Activities related to the green claim initiative such as policy coordination, green claim initiative’s work plan (including a partial
coverage of development of further requirements related to specific claims), team coordination, monitoring, stakeholder relation. These
activities need the resources of 2 FTE officials.
Futher development of the EF and other methods for substantiating green claims in line with Art 3: running expert groups, management
of the transition phase PEFCRs/OEFSRs (including additional task of EC adoption if parts incorporatted in delegated acts according to
Art 3(4) on further specifying the requirements for the substantiation of explicit environmental claim in the future). These activities need
the resources of 1 FTE official.
Managing secondary EF data: management of contracts, data checks, building database, etc. These activities need the resources of 1
FTE official.
In general Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) related tasks (e.g. method and data development) and task related to method and data development for
substatiating green claims requires specialised technical/scientific knowledge with scientific PhD-level education and years of experience in the
field. Attracting such staff with contract agent conditions is not possible. Therefore, these tasks should be covered via official posts, which, if no
specialised staff is available in-house, should be opened to temporary agent posts.
Therefore DG ENV requests additional staff (3 AD and 1 END as per the distribution of the positions below) who will:
prepare approximately 6-7 delegated acts according to Art 3(4) on further specifying the requirements for the substantiation of explicit
environmental claims to regulate specific claims, e.g. on repairability, recyclability, durability or establishing specific life-cycle-based
rules for certain product groups and sectors;
prepare implementing acts setting out relevant procedures for approval of new private labelling schemes by the national authorties and
the format of certificate of conformity of claims and labelling schemes;
EN 72 EN
prepare delegated acts further specifying the criteria for approval of environmental labelling schemes referred to in Article 8 in order to
ensure a uniform application across the Union;
evaluate notified environmental labelling schemes established by public authorities in third countries aiming to operate on the Union
market and prepare repsective approval decisions by the Commission with the aim of ensuring that these schemes provide added value
in terms of their environmental ambition, their coverage of environmental impacts, environmental aspects or environmental
performance, or of a certain product group or sector, and meet the requirements of this Directive;
supervise preparatory, review studies and other studies in preparation of delegated acts;
develop and manage the EF database relevant for this and other policies such as ESPR, Batteries regulation or taxonomy;
In addition, there are 2 expert groups involved in this policy and the budget should cover three meetings/year per each expert group.
TOTAL appropriations
(Total commitments =
under HEADING 7 0,786 0,786 0,786 0,786 3,144
Total payments)
of the multiannual financial framework
EUR million (to three decimal places)
2027 and
2024 2025 2026 TOTAL
beyond
TOTAL appropriations Commitments 3,326 8,025 6,482 6,440 24,273
under HEADINGS 1 to 7
3,326 8,025 6,482 6,440 24,273
of the multiannual financial framework Payments
3.2.2. Estimated output funded with operational appropriations
Commitment appropriations in EUR million (to three decimal places)
Indicate Year Year Year Year Enter as many years as necessary to show the TOTAL
EN 73 EN
objectives and N N+1 N+2 N+3 duration of the impact (see point 1.6)
outputs
OUTPUTS
Type Avera
Total Total
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
123 ge Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost
No cost
cost
SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE No 1124…
- Output
- Output
- Output
Subtotal for specific objective No 1
SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE No 2 ...
- Output
Subtotal for specific objective No 2
TOTALS
123
Outputs are products and services to be supplied (e.g.: number of student exchanges financed, number of km of roads built, etc.).
124
As described in point 1.4.2. ‘Specific objective(s)…’
EN 74 EN
3.2.3. Estimated impact on the EEA and COM administrative appropriations
3.2.3.1. Estimated impact on EEA human resources
The proposal/initiative does not require the use of appropriations of an
administrative nature
The proposal/initiative requires the use of appropriations of an administrative
nature, as explained below:
EUR million (to three decimal places)
2025 2026 2027 TOTAL
Temporary agents (AD
Grades) 0,117 0,240 0,244 0,602
Temporary agents
(AST grades)
Contract staff 0,063 0,128 0,130 0,320
Seconded National
Experts
TOTAL 0,180 0,367 0,375 0,922
Staff requirements (FTE):
2025 2026 2027 TOTAL
Temporary agents (AD
1 1 1
Grades)
Temporary agents
(AST grades)
Contract staff 1 1 1
Seconded National
Experts
TOTAL 2 2 2
EN 75 EN
3.2.3.2. Estimated requirements on administrative appropriations in the Commission
3.2.3.3. Summary of estimated impact on administrative appropriations
The proposal/initiative does not require the use of appropriations of an
administrative nature
The proposal/initiative requires the use of appropriations of an
administrative nature, as explained below:
EUR million (to three decimal places)
2027 and
2024 2025 2026 TOTAL
beyond
HEADING 7
of the multiannual
financial framework
Human resources
0,606 0,606 0,606 0,606 2,424
Other administrative
expenditure 0,180 0,180 0,180 0,180 0,720
Subtotal HEADING 7
of the multiannual
financial framework 0,786 0,786 0,786 0,786 3,144
125
Outside HEADING 7
of the multiannual
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
financial framework
Human resources
Other expenditure
of an administrative
nature
Subtotal
outside HEADING 7
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
of the multiannual
financial framework
TOTAL
0,786 0,786 0,786 0,786 3,144
The appropriations required for human resources and other expenditure of an administrative nature will be met by
appropriations from the DG that are already assigned to management of the action and/or have been redeployed within the
DG, together if necessary with any additional allocation which may be granted to the managing DG under the annual
allocation procedure and in the light of budgetary constraints.
3.2.3.4. Estimated requirements of human resources
– The proposal/initiative does not require the use of human resources.
125
Technical and/or administrative assistance and expenditure in support of the implementation of EU programmes
and/or actions (former ‘BA’ lines), indirect research, direct research.
EN 76 EN
– The proposal/initiative requires the use of human resources, as explained
below:
Estimate to be expressed in full time equivalent units
2027
2024 2025 2026 and
beyond
20 01 02 01 (Headquarters and Commission’s
Representation Offices) 3 3 3 3
20 01 02 03 (Delegations)
01 01 01 01 (Indirect research)
01 01 01 11 (Direct research)
Other budget lines (specify)
20 02 01 (AC, END, INT from the ‘global envelope’) 1 1 1 1
20 02 03 (AC, AL, END, INT and JPD in the
delegations)
XX 01 xx yy zz - at Headquarters
126
- in Delegations
01 01 01 02 (AC, END, INT - Indirect research)
01 01 01 12 (AC, END, INT - Direct research)
Other budget lines (specify)
TOTAL 4 4 4 4
Description of tasks to be carried out:
Officials and temporary staff Cf. explanation provided for H7 in section 3.2.1.
External staff Cf. explanation provided for H7 in section 3.2.1.
126
Sub-ceiling for external staff covered by operational appropriations (former ‘BA’ lines).
EN 77 EN
3.2.4. Compatibility with the current multiannual financial framework
The proposal/initiative:
– can be fully financed through redeployment within the relevant heading of the
Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF).
The LIFE envelope (budget lines 09.02.02) will be used to offset the increase
of the EEA subsidy.
– requires use of the unallocated margin under the relevant heading of the MFF
and/or use of the special instruments as defined in the MFF Regulation.
– requires a revision of the MFF.
3.2.5. Third-party contributions
The proposal/initiative:
– does not provide for co-financing by third parties
– provides for the co-financing by third parties estimated below:
Appropriations in EUR million (to three decimal places)
Enter as many years as necessary
Year Year Year Year
to show the duration of the Total
N127 N+1 N+2 N+3
impact (see point 1.6)
Specify the co-financing
body
TOTAL appropriations
co-financed
127
Year N is the year in which implementation of the proposal/initiative starts. Please replace "N" by the
expected first year of implementation (for instance: 2021). The same for the following years.
EN 78 EN
3.3. Estimated impact on revenue
– The proposal/initiative has no financial impact on revenue.
– The proposal/initiative has the following financial impact:
on own resources
on other revenue
please indicate, if the revenue is assigned to expenditure lines
EUR million (to three decimal places)
Appropriations Impact of the proposal/initiative128
available for
Budget revenue line:
the current Year Year Year Year Enter as many years as necessary to show
financial year N N+1 N+2 N+3 the duration of the impact (see point 1.6)
Article ………….
For assigned revenue, specify the budget expenditure line(s) affected.
Other remarks (e.g. method/formula used for calculating the impact on revenue or any other
information).
128
As regards traditional own resources (customs duties, sugar levies), the amounts indicated must be net
amounts, i.e. gross amounts after deduction of 20 % for collection costs.
EN 79 EN
Resolutsiooni liik: Riigikantselei resolutsioon
Viide: Keskkonnaministeerium / / ; Riigikantselei / / 2-5/23-00661
Resolutsiooni teema: Roheväidete direktiiv
Adressaat: Keskkonnaministeerium
Ülesanne: Tulenevalt Riigikogu kodu- ja töökorra seaduse § 152` lg 1 p 2 ning Vabariigi
Valitsuse reglemendi § 3 lg 4 palun valmistada ette Vabariigi Valitsuse seisukoha ja otsuse
eelnõu järgneva algatuse kohta, kaasates seejuures olulisi huvigruppe ja osapooli:
- Ettepanek: EUROOPA PARLAMENDI JA NÕUKOGU DIREKTIIV selgesõnaliste
keskkonnaalaste väidete põhjendamise ja edastamise kohta (Roheväidete direktiiv), COM(2023)
166.
EISi toimiku nr: 23-0137
Tähtaeg: 28.08.2023
Adressaat: Justiitsministeerium, Maaeluministeerium, Majandus- ja
Kommunikatsiooniministeerium, Rahandusministeerium, Sotsiaalministeerium
Ülesanne: Palun esitada oma sisend Keskkonnaministeeriumile seisukohtade kujundamiseks
antud eelnõu kohta (eelnõude infosüsteemi (EIS) kaudu).
Tähtaeg: 31.05.2023
Lisainfo: Eelnõu on kavas arutada valitsuse 07.09.2023 istungil ja Vabariigi Valitsuse
reglemendi § 6 lg 6 kohaselt sellele eelneval nädalal (30.08.2023) EL koordinatsioonikogus.
Esialgsed materjalid EL koordinatsioonikoguks palume esitada hiljemalt 28.08.2023.
Kinnitaja: Katrin Juhandi, Euroopa Liidu asjade direktori asetäitja
Kinnitamise kuupäev: 26.04.2023
Resolutsiooni koostaja: Elen Nurme
[email protected], 693 5201
Ettepanek: EUROOPA PARLAMENDI JA NÕUKOGU DIREKTIIV selgesõnaliste
keskkonnaalaste väidete põhjendamise ja edastamise kohta (Roheväidete direktiiv)
Nimetus
Proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
ANDMED on substantiation and communication of explicit environmental claims (Green Claims
ALGATUSE
KOHTA
Directive)
ELTL art 338 lg1
(tavamenetlus,
Eelnõu nr COM (2023) 166 Esitamise kuupäev: 22.03.2023 Menetluskord EL-is:
kvalifitseeritud häälte
enamus)
RKKTS § 1521 lg 1
1. p1
- algatuse/teatise reguleerimisala nõuab seaduse või Riigikogu otsuse vastuvõtmist, muutmist või kehtetuks tunnistamist
RKKTS § 1521 lg 1
2. p2
- algatuse/ vastuvõtmisega või teatises toodud meetmete rakendamisega kaasneb oluline majanduslik , sotsiaalne või muu mõju
SEISUKOHA
VALITSUSSE 3. RKKTS § 1521 lg 2 - Euroopa Liidu asjade komisjoni või väliskomisjoni nõue
TOOMISE ALUS - algatuse/teatise reguleerimisala nõuab VV pädevusse kuuluva otsuse vastuvõtmist (määruse vastuvõtmine, muutmine,
4. VVS § 201 lg 1
tühistamine)
- seisukoha võtmist algatuse/teatise osas peab oluliseks peaminister või minister (on poliitiliselt oluline või tundlik (Eestis või EL-
5. VVS § 201 lg 2
is))
30.08.23 KOK;
VALITSUSELE EL menetluse
Kuupäev 07.09.23 VV
ESITAMINE ajakava
istungile
Kaasata kõiki algatusse
puutuvaid huvigruppe ja
RAM, MKM, JUM, esindusorganisatsioone:
SISERIIKLIK Vastutav Kaasatud SOM, MEM; Sotsiaalpartnerid, Eesti Kaubandus- ja
MENETLUS min KEM ministeeriumid (sisendi andmise huvigrupid Tööstuskoda, Kaupmeeste
tähtaeg 31.05) Liit, Tarbijakaitse ja
Tehnilise Järelevalve Amet,
Tarbijate Liit.
EELNÕU ÜLEVAADE
KOKKUVÕTE
EELNÕU SISUST
JA Komisjoni 2020. aasta uuringus1 on osutatud, et 53,3% kontrollitud keskkonnaalastest väidetest ELis leiti
EESMÄRKIDEST
olevat ebamäärased, eksitavad või alusetud ning 40% olid põhjendamatud. See, et ettevõtjatele ei ole
kehtestatud ühtseid eeskirju vabatahtlike roheväidete kohta, annab võimalusi rohepesuks ja loob ELi
turul ebavõrdsed tingimused tõeliselt keskkonnahoidlike ettevõtete kahjuks.
22.03.2023 esitas Euroopa Komisjon ettepaneku ühtsete kriteeriumide kehtestamiseks, et võidelda
rohepesu ja eksitavate keskkonnaväidete vastu (nn roheväidete direktiiv). Ettepanek hõlmab kõiki
vabatahtlikke väiteid toote, teenuse või kaupleja enda keskkonnamõju, -aspektide või -toime kohta.
Ettepaneku kohaselt peavad ettevõtjad, kes otsustavad esitada roheväiteid oma toodete või teenuste
keskkonnahoidlikkuse kohta, järgima selliste väidete põhjendamiseks ja esitamiseks kehtestatud
miinimumnorme. Enne kui ettevõtjad tohivad roheväiteid tarbijatele esitada, peavad väited olema
sõltumatult kontrollitud ja teaduslikult tõendatud. Ettevõtjad peavad teadusliku analüüsi käigus kindlaks
tegema oma toote tegelikud keskkonnamõjud ning neid mõjusid võrdlema, et saada neist täielik ja täpne
ülevaade.
Ettepanek hõlmab ka keskkonnamärgiseid. Praegu on kasutusel vähemalt 230 erinevat märgistust ning
see tekitab tarbijates segadust ja usaldamatust. Ettepaneku kohaselt piiratakse keskkonnamärgiste, sh
nii avalike kui ka eramärgiste, lisandumist. Välja jäetakse väited, mis on hõlmatud kehtivate ELi
eeskirjadega (ELi ökomärgis või mahetoidu logo), sest selliste väidete usaldusväärsus on juba tagatud
kehtivate õigusaktidega. Samal põhjusel jäetakse välja nõuded, mis on hõlmatud ELi tulevaste
õigusnormidega. Keskkonnamärgiseid käsitlevates üksikasjalikes eeskirjades on kokkuvõtvalt nõutud, et
märgise kasutamine peab olema usaldusväärne, läbipaistev, sõltumatult kontrollitud ja korrapäraselt läbi
vaadatud.
Ettepanekuga tagatakse tarbijatele suurem selgus ja kindlustunne, et rohelisena reklaamitud tooted on
ka tegelikult keskkonnahoidlikud, ning pakutakse täpsemat teavet, et tarbija võiks valida
keskkonnasõbralikke tooteid ja teenuseid. Kasu saavad ka ettevõtjad, sest neid, kes pingutavad oma
toodete keskkonnakestlikkuse parandamise nimel, on tarbijatel lihtsam leida ja tunnustada ning
ettevõtjad saavad oma toodete müüki hoogustada, selle asemel et seista silmitsi ebaausa konkurentsiga.
Ettepanek aitab luua võrdsed tingimused, mis tuginevad teabele toodete keskkonnamõju kohta.
1
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52022SC0085
1/2 Muudetud: 26.04.2023
VÕIMALIKUD Mõjud ettevõtjatele ja tarbijatele. Täpsustada seisukohtade kujundamise käigus.
SOTS-MAJ.
MÕJUD
VÕIMALIKUD Direktiivi on vaja üle võtta riigisisesesse õigusesse.
ÕIGUSLIKUD
MUUDATUSED
MÕJU Tõenäolised mõjud riigieelarvele. Täpsustada seisukohtade kujundamise käigus
EELARVELE
KOMMENTAARID
SEISUKOHAD
EESTI
SEISUKOHT
TEISTE RIIKIDE
SEISUKOHAD
KOMMENTAARID
2/2 Muudetud: 26.04.2023
Eelnõude infosüsteemis (EIS) on antud täitmiseks ülesanne.
Eelnõu toimik: 12.14.1/23-0137 - COM(2023) 166 Proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on substantiation and communication of explicit environmental claims (Green Claims Directive)
Arvamuse andmine eelnõu kohta Keskkonnaministeeriumile vastavalt Riigikantselei 26.04.2023 resolutsioonile.
Osapooled: Majandus- ja Kommunikatsiooniministeerium; Justiitsministeerium; Maaeluministeerium; Rahandusministeerium; Sotsiaalministeerium
Tähtaeg: 31.05.2023 23:59
Link eelnõu toimiku vaatele: https://eelnoud.valitsus.ee/main/mount/docList/9d485812-f603-4018-a197-8801d779389f
Link menetlusetapile: https://eelnoud.valitsus.ee/main/mount/docList/9d485812-f603-4018-a197-8801d779389f?activity=2
Eelnõude infosüsteem (EIS)
https://eelnoud.valitsus.ee/main