EN   EN 
 
 
 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 1  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 furt her 
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 imp acts 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 s olid and harmonised calculation 
methods covering the full value chain.  
                                                 
1 Europe an 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, Directive s 
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 2  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 produc ts, in 
particular in Proposal 5 on sustainable consumption, packaging and production and Proposal 
20 on Defining standards within and outside the EU in environmental polici es. 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 p rocesses 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 ov erall 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 c laims 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, wh ich also accompanies the proposal on 
environmental claims both through its inception impact assessment13 and its public 
consultation14 together with an additional public consultation carried out in 202015, suggests 
that misleading practices, such as greenwash ing 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 mak ing 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 circula r 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 3  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 201416 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 swe ep 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 j udgement 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 envi ronmental 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) whi ch 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 relia bility 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, p p. 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 4  EN Environmental labels existing on the EU internal market are subject to different levels 
of robustness, supervision and transparency, i.e., di fferent 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 prolif eration 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 gover nance 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 labellin g 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 i nformation 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 are a 
 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 5  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 estab lishes 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 compete nt 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 pref erred 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 
circums tances, 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 requiremen ts 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 sale s 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  Parlia ment  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 6  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 
metho dologies 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 Sustainabl e 
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 info rmation 
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 propose d 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 Ec olabel 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 legislatio n 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 specifi c 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 layin g 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 20 09 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) , repeal ing 
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 7  EN environmental claims complements as lex specialis  the existing set of EU rules on 
consumer protection. The proposal will allow to implement fully the prefer red 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 environmen tal 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 Dire ctive 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 predominant ly 
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 futu re 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 c laims 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 n ew circular economy action plan5 and new consumer agenda6. the proposal 
will also reinforce overarching strategies such as the zero pollution acti on 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 chan ge41. 
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 8  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 Europea n Climate Law of balancing 
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and removals within the Union at the latest by 2050 b y 
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 prot ection.  
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 remai ns the appropriate legal basis.  
2.2 Subsidiarity  (for non-exclusive  competence)   
Putting in place a common set of rules within the EU inter nal 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 meth ods 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 int ernal 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 methodol ogical 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 c o-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 
consume rs 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 9  EN to end up with many competing different systems leading to a fragmented interna l 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 D irective 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 asses sment 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 provid ing 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 le gal 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 STAKEHOLDE RS CONSULTATIONS  & IMPACT ASSESSMENT , 
COMPLIANCE WITH BETT ER REGULATION PRINCI PLES & FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS  
3.1. Stakeholder consultations  
In the preparatory process of this proposal, the Commission consulted stakeholders via:   EN 10  EN – Several public consultations in the context of t he 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 org anizations 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 sho uld, 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 , indepen dent 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 -Towar ds-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 informat ion available at  https://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/smgp/initiative_on_green_claims.htm  EN 11  EN harmonised EU -level approach. Several stakeholders indicated the need to continue using the 
EU Ecolabel and o ther 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 divi ded 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 individ ual 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 12  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 certaint y 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 communicat ion 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 develope d 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 adeq uately 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 13  EN categories for all product types (e.g. as regards marine fisheries – the sustainability of the 
targeted fish stock; as regards food and agric ultural 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 cl aims 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 t o 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. Inste ad, 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 preferr ed 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 rep orted 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 farm s 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 pro posal 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 14  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 st ill 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 m easures 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 i mpacts 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 consume rs 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 o f 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, t he 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 includ e (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 substan tiation 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 15  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 nu mber 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 i mpacts of the requirements on communicati on 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 additio nal 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 lab els 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 sustainab ility 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 scheme s 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 cri teria 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 di splaying 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 cr oss-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 managi ng 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 harmonisa tion might reduce the need to apply for several labels.  
                                                 
58 Details on administrative cost break down in SWD(2022) 85 final, pp. 200  EN 16  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 on line 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 fo r 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 autho rities 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 val idation 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 numbe r 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 lab els. 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 ac tual 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 i mpacts 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 compl aints 
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 certific ation  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 inter nal market.  EN 17  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 
empowe ring 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 pr actices 
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 an d 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 y ears 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 prop osal 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 ensu re 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 18  EN As detailed in the Legislative financial statement, the initiative foresees human resources and 
administrative expenditure to implement the Directive and prepare delegated and 
imple menting 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 p arties 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 implementati on 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 require ments, 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 PLAN S & MONITORING , EVALUATION & 
REPORTING ARRANGEMEN T  
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 th is 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 SP ECIFIC 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 com mercial 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 substantia tion 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 19  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 activitie s 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 a n annual turnov er not exceed ing 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 se ts out f urther 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 
requireme nts 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 le vels 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 o f the product or of the overall activities of the trader in order to 
                                                 
60 OJ L  124, 20.5.2003, p.  36 EN 20  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 si gnificantly 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 substan tiation. 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 
prim ary 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 th e 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 c laims. 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 f or 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 o ut 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 21  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 prod uct 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 c onformity 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 whic h 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 communi cation 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 re quiring 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 w ith 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 a nd 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 interpreta tion 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 practic es and better information.  
64 i.e. not based on a certification scheme , or not established by public authorities  EN 22  EN rating or score based on an aggregated indicator representing cumulative environmental 
impacts unless these are establ ished 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 sche mes, 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 existenc e 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 n ew 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 t erms 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 
compan y 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 Memb er 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 I nformation 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 th rough the Internal Market Information System and repealing Commission Decision 
2008/49/EC (OJ L 316, 14.11.2012, p. 1 –11) EN 23  EN their certified claim will not be challe nged 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 sp ecifying the format of certificate of conformity of claims.  
Article 11 sets out that the ‘verifier’ must be an officially accredited66 independent body, with 
no conflicts of interest to ensure independence of judgment and hold the highest degree of 
professi onal 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 progr ammes 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 w ay, 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 estab lish 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 inf ormation 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 inj unctive 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 regula r 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 justi ce.  
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 charact er (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 State s 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 f or 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 24  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 25  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 
Direct ive) 
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 environ mentally 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 legi slation 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 pu rchasing 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 a nd 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, inv estors, public 
administrations, NGOs) included in environmental claims, the lack of reliability, 
                                                 
1 OJ C , , p. .  EN 26  EN comparability and verifiability leads to an issue of trust in environmental information 
and confusion in interpreting heterogeneous, contradictory messages. Th is 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 claim s. 
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 towa rds 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 cla ims 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 consume rs for the green 
transition4, amending Directive 2005/29/EC  of the European Parli ament 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 consumer s 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 
Com mercial 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 27  EN (8) The specific needs of individual economic sectors should be recognised and this 
Directive should therefore apply to voluntary explicit environment al 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 le gislation 
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 m andatory 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 
aquacultu re 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 sh ould 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 farmin g 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, wheth er 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 inste ad 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 f or 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 lis ted in Annex I to Directive 2013/3 69 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 Europe an 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 28  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 Directiv e 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 o r 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 enviro nmental 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, environ mental 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 ex cellent 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, com parable 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 substantia tion 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 Directiv e 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 Sep tember 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 29  EN environmental impacts, environmental aspects and environmental performance of 
products or traders, and it should result in reliable, transparent, co mparable 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 environm ental 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 
perfor mance 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 , inclu ding 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 
establishin g a framework for setting ecodesign requirements for sustainable products15 
or from other relevant Union rules.  
(18) In line with Directive 2005/2 9/EC as amended by the proposal for a Directive on 
empowering consumers for the green transition , the trader sh ould 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 respe ctive 
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 30  EN the sp ecific 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 sect or 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 impac ts 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 en sure 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 i dentify 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 
containi ng 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 be neficial 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 substantia te 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 rig ht 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 trad er 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 polluti ng 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 accu racy.  
(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 31  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, pe rmanence, 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 expli cit 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 jo ining 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 informat ion 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 ex plicit 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 envi ronmental 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 32  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 ass essment 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 on e 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 t o 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 o f 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 u p 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 exp licit 
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 th e 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 33  EN of enterprises outside the EU, and thus sustainability related informat ion 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 t o 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 environm ental 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, incl uding 
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 environment al 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 a fter 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 ex ample, 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 2005/2 9/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 Parl iament 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 34  EN (32) The Commission Recommendation (EU) 2021/2279 contains guidance on ho w 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 est ablish 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 on ly 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 targe ted 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 t he 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 environmen tal 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 environm ental 
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 p rotection 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, i t 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 p roduct 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 35  EN consumers.  For that purpose, traders should either provide this informati on 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 s ubstantiation 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 delega ted 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 explic it 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 prese nted 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 pro cedures. 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 la bel 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 r isks 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 36  EN different operator s, 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, risk s 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 agg regated 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 t o 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. T his 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 misl eading 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, comp lementing 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 ot her 
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 c onsider 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 i n 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 sc ope, 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 37  EN they offer significant added val ue 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 proc edure 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 ap ply 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 a n approval procedure  by the Commission  for proposed schemes established 
by public a uthorities outside of the Union , implementing powers should be conferred 
on the Commission to adopt common rules specify ing detailed requirements  for 
approval of such environmental labelling sche mes, 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 ex plicit 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 upda tes  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 complyi ng 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 consumer s, 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 t he 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 38  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 reco gnition 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 provisi ons 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 envi ronmental 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 fina ncial, 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 o f 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 Parli ament 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 39  EN authorities, Member State shou ld 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 
investig ation  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 enfor cement 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 unla wful 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 cl aims 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 com petent 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 
minim ise 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 inf ringement. 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 a lso 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 infring ements 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 40  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 th e 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 maki ng 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 tr ader’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 accorda nce 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 a t 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 Di rective 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 prohibi tion 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 environment al 
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 41  EN particular their use in co nsumer 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 statemen ts 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 Str ategy 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 measure s, 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 ach ieve 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 tra nsposition 
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 a uthorities 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 Marke t 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 
representa tive 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 42  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 Parlia ment 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 Europea n 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 Co uncil 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 layi ng 
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 requir ements 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 Eur opean 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 t he 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 43  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 cert ain 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, a nd amen ding 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 Parli ament 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 Co uncil 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 7 8/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC  (OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, p. 19 ). EN 44  EN (6) ‘business -to-consumer commercial practices’ means business -to-consumer 
commercial practices as defined in Ar ticle 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 o f 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 facilitie s 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 produ ct 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 t o 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 sh all 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 45  EN (b) rely on widely recognised scientific evidence, use accurate information and 
take into account relevant international standards;  
(c) demonstrate that environmental impacts, environment al 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 signific ant 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 subje ct 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 releva nt 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, su stainable 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, specif y whether th ose 
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 environment al 
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 va lue 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 paragrap h 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 46  EN 4. When the regular monitoring of the evolution of environmental claims referred to in 
Article 20 reveals differences in the applic ation 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 widesp read 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 env ironmental 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 secto rs 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 acc ess 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 47  EN (b) the data used for assessing the environmental impacts, environmental aspects 
or environmental perform ance 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 aspect s 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) assump tions 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 re quirements 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 48  EN the expected environmental performance of that product. That information shall be 
made available together with the claim.  
4. Whe re 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 e nvironmental 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 fol lowing:  
(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 monit or 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 t rade 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 cl aim 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 r elate 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 a im 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 49  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 informat ion 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 
enviro nmental 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 environm ental 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 impact s 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 com ply 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 objecti ves 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 t he environmental labelling schemes are 
proportionate to the size and turnover of the companies in order not to exclude 
small and medium enterprises;  EN 50  EN (d) the requirements for the environmental labelling scheme have been developed 
by experts that can ensure thei r 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 resolu tion 
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 enviro nmental 
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 label ling 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 label s 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 Dir ective.  
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 s upporting documents setting out 
the following:  
(a) the rationale underlying the development of the scheme  EN 51  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 esta blished 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 i mpacts 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 referr ed 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 updat ed 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 52  EN Article 10  
Verification and certification of the substantiation and commu nication 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 procedur es 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 env ironmental  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 re quirements 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 vi a 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 i n 
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 53  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 
verifi cation 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 finan cial, 
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 carryi ng 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 monito r 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 me asures 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 54  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 ther e 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 shal l 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 r equire 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 D irective 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 requir e 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 55  EN 2. Where the competent authorities of a Member State detect an infringement of an 
obligatio n 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 substantiatio n 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 c laim. 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 Dire ctive.  
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 ref erred 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 o f 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 administrati ve and judicial review procedures referred to in this 
Article.  EN 56  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 n ational 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 penaltie s 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 infringemen t 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 aggr avating 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 e stablished 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 mo nths 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 fine s 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 57  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 = th e 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 i dentical 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 Eur opean 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 ex piry 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 58  EN (a) an overview of the types of explicit environmental claims and of environmental 
labelling schemes which have been sub ject 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 accord ance 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 paragra ph 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 sc hemes 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 communicatin g such 
claims;  
(e) strengthening the functioning of the internal market.  EN 59  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 sub stantiation 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, reparabi lity, 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) 1024/2 012 
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 
environment al 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 Dire ctive (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 60  EN Article 25  
Transposition  
1. Member States shall adopt and publish by [OP ple ase 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 Commissi on. 
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 ref erence 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 Sta tes. 
Done at Brussels,  
For the European Parliament  For the Council  
The President  The President  EN 61  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 action117  
 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 an d 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, 
produc t 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 62  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 object ive 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 implem entation 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 (consu mers, 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 informatio n (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 63  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 int ernal market of green products.  
1.5. Grounds for the propos al/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 propo sal 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 a dopt 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 
environ mental 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 clai ms 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 ongo ing process to develop further 
substantiation methods.  EN 64  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 intervent ion, 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 differ ent 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 t he 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 m ethods 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 com mon 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 introdu cing 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 t he 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, E MAS, and the development of the environmental 
footprint methods . EN 65  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, whi ch 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 Envi ronment), 
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 corr esponding 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 environm ental 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 Horiz on 
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 fo r 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 Ec onomy.  
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 
industria l 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 66  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 appropriatio ns 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 de signated;  
–  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 p ublic 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 
adeq uate 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 Regu lation may be found on 
the BUDGpedia site: https://myintracomm.ec.europa.eu/corp/budget/financial -rules/budget -
implementati on/Pages/implementation -methods.aspx  EN 67  EN 2. MANAGEMENT  MEASURES   
2.1. Monitoring and reportin g 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 co ntrol 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 68  EN 3. ESTIMATED  FINA NCIAL  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.  
Heading of 
multiannual 
financial 
framework  Budget line  Type of  
expenditure  Contribution  
Number  
 Diff./Non -
diff.119 from 
EFTA 
countries
120 from 
candidate 
countries 
and 
potential 
candidates
121 fromother 
third 
countries  other assigned 
revenue  
3 09 02 02 Circular Economy and 
quality  of life  
 Diff.  YES  NO YES  NO 
3 09 10 02 European Environment 
Agency  Diff.  YES  YES  NO NO 
7 20 01 02 01 – Remuneration and 
allowances  Non-
diff. NO NO NO NO 
7 20 02 01 03 – National civil servants 
temporarily assigned to the institution  Non-
diff. NO NO NO NO 
7 20 02 06 02 – Meetings, expert groups  Non-
diff. NO NO NO NO 
 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 69  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  
framework  3 Natural resources and environment  
 
DG: ENV    
2024  2025  2026  2027 
and 
beyond  TOTAL  
 Operational appropriations       
09 02 02 Circular Economy and quality of 
life Commitments  (1) 2,540  6,964  5,264  5,214  19,982  
Payments  (2) 2,540  6,964  5,264  5,214  19,982  
TOTAL appropriations  
for DG ENV  Commitments  =(1) 2,540 6,964  5,264  5,214 19,982  
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 dat abase for the 
period 2026 -2027 (EUR 10,095 million). The access to EF datasets will support companies, especially SMEs, in com plying with the 
Green Claims Directive in a more cost efficient and less burdensome manner. The easy access to high quality data related to t he 
environmental perfromance of products will be a key enabler for all companies, but especially for SMEs, to subst antiate their 
environmental claims in a robust manner unrelated to the question if delegated acts based on Art 3 of this proposal on enviro nmental 
claims are in place or not. The access to EF datasets will also support the implementation of other EU polici es on environmental  
EN 70  EN sustainability and helping consumers to make the right choices, such as the proposal for Ecodesign for Sustainable Products R egulation 
(ESPR) 122. The ESPR introduces the possibility to set mandatory information requirements, which may al so be linked with labelling 
requirements, and it will result in improved information flows through Digital Product Passports. The EF datasets will suppor t the 
calculation and setting of information and performance requirements e.g. related to carbon and en vironmental 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 evaluatio n of the 
Direct ive 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 Arrangemen t is 
expected to represent a cost around EUR 1,700 millions  
 Administrative and technical su pport 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 
importan t 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 requir ements 
described in deleg ated acts according to Art 3(4) (EUR 1,210 million).  
 
Agency: EEA    2025  2026  2027  TOTAL  
     
Title 1: Staff expenditure  Commitments  (1a) 0,180  0,367  0,375  0,922  
Payments  (2a) 0,180  0,367  0,375  0,922  
Title 2: Infrastructure  Commitments  (1b)     
Payments  (2b)     
Title 3: Operational expenditure  Commitments  (1c) 0,095  0,065  0,065  0,225  
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 71  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 moni toring 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 in formation 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 t hese 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 necess ary 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  
of the multiannual financial framework  Commitments  =4 2,540  7,239  5,696  5,654  21,129  
 
 
Heading of multiannual financial  
framework  7 ‘Administrative expenditure’  
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 up loaded to DECIDE for interservice consultation purposes.  
EUR million (to three decimal places)  
   2024  2025  2026  2027 and 
beyond  TOTAL   
EN 72  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 task s:  
 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, man agement 
of the transition phase PEFCRs/OEFSRs (including addition al 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.  
 Manag ing 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. Therefor e, 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 establ ishing 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 autho rties and 
the format of certificate of conformity of  claims and labelling schemes;   
EN 73  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 labell ing 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 environment al 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 prepa ration 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/yea r per each expert group.  
 
TOTAL appropriations  
under HEADING  7 
of the multiannual financial framework   (Total commitments = 
Total payments)  0,786  0,786  0,786  0,786  3,144  
EUR million (to three decimal places)  
   2024  2025  2026  2027 and 
beyond  TOTAL  
TOTAL appropriations  
under HEADINGS 1 to 7  
of the multiannual financial framework   Commitments  3,326  8,025  6,482 6,440  24,273  
Payments  3,326  8,025  6,482 6,440  24,273  
 
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 74  EN objectives and 
outputs  
 
 N N+1 N+2 N+3 duration of the impact (see point 1.6)  
OUTPUTS  
Type
123 
 Avera
ge 
cost 
No 
Cost 
No 
Cost 
No 
Cost 
No 
Cost 
No 
Cost 
No 
Cost 
No 
Cost Total 
No Total 
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 75  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 
Grades)  1 1 1  
Temporary agents 
(AST grades)      
Contract staff  1 1 1  
Seconded National 
Experts      
 
TOTAL  2 2 2   
EN 76  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 appropri ations of an 
administrative nature, as explained below:  
 
EUR million (to three decimal places)  
 
2024  2025  2026  2027 and 
beyond  TOTAL  
 
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  
 
Outside HEADING 7125 
of the multiannual 
financial framework  
 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 
Human resources       
Other expenditure  
of an administrative 
nature       
Subtotal  
outside HEADING 7  
of the multiannual 
financial framework  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 
 
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 D G 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 th e implementation of EU  programmes 
and/or actions (former ‘BA’ lines), indirect research, direct research.   
EN 77  EN –  The proposal/initiative requires the use of human resources, as explained 
below:  
 
 
Estimate to be expressed in full time equivalent units  
 
2024  2025  2026  2027 
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  
126 
 - at Headquarters  
     
- 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 78  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 rel evant 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)  
 
Year 
N127 Year 
N+1 Year 
N+2 Year 
N+3 Enter as many years as necessary 
to show the duration of the 
impact (see point 1.6)  Total  
Specify the co-financing 
body           
TOTAL appropriations 
co-financed          
 
 
                                                 
127 Year N is the year in which implementation of the propos al/initiative starts. Please replace "N" by the 
expected first year of implementation (for instance: 2021). The same for the following years.   
EN 79  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)  
Budget revenue line:  Appropriations 
available for 
the current 
financial year  Impact of the proposal/initiative128 
Year 
N Year 
N+1 Year 
N+2 Year 
N+3 Enter as many years as necessary to show 
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.