The end of ‘eco-friendly’: What the EU's anti-greenwashing rules mean for corporate communications

Over the past decade, consumers have come to increasingly expect businesses to demonstrate environmental responsibility. Many organisations have responded by investing heavily in sustainable products, services and supply chains to meet that demand. In a crowded marketplace, sustainability messaging has become a key differentiator for businesses.

However, many of the terms and claims that have become commonplace are about to face much greater scrutiny.

On September 27th 2026, the EU's Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition Directive will come into force. The legislation aims to combat greenwashing by ensuring consumers receive clear, reliable and transparent information about the environmental, social and circular characteristics of products and services.

For communicators, the impact could be significant as many familiar sustainability phrases will be banned unless they can be backed by robust evidence.

From broad claims to specific evidence

One of the Directive's most significant changes is the prohibition of generic environmental claims that cannot be substantiated. Terms such as ‘eco-friendly’, ‘environmentally friendly’, ‘green’, ‘sustainable’ and ‘climate friendly’ have become deeply embedded in communications language. Under the new rules, businesses will be unable to use these descriptions unless they can provide clear, verifiable evidence to support them.

The challenge is that many of these terms are inherently vague and open to interpretation. Without details of the environmental benefit being delivered, organisations risk misleading consumers, even unintentionally.

The Directive introduces a new standard for sustainability communications, requiring organisations to demonstrate greater transparency and accountability in how environmental claims are presented. Key changes include:

• Environmental claims must be backed by evidence, with clear, transparent information about the environmental, social and circular characteristics of products and services.
• Sustainability labels must be independently verified and based on recognised certification schemes or established by a public authority.
• Comparisons with competitors' products or previous product versions must be transparent and supported by objective, verifiable data.
• Carbon offsetting alone will not justify climate claims, prohibiting claims that a product is "carbon neutral", "climate positive" or similar solely because emissions have been offset.
• Environmental benefits cannot be overstated by suggesting an entire product, service or organisation is environmentally beneficial if the claim relates only to one component, ingredient or stage of its lifecycle.
• Compliance with existing laws or regulations can’t be presented as a unique environmental benefit, for example, highlighting the absence of chemicals that are banned.

This marks a fundamental shift in how businesses can communicate. The question is no longer whether you have a sustainability story to tell, but whether every claim made can stand up to independent scrutiny.

The consequences of breaching this could be significant. As the new rules sit within existing consumer protection legislation, enforcement in Ireland will fall to the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission. Potential sanctions range from compliance notices to fixed payment notices, while penalties for widespread infringements could reach up to either 4% of an organisation’s annual turnover or €2 million.

For many organisations, however, the greater risk may be reputational rather than regulatory. Misleading or unsubstantiated environmental claims can erode consumer trust, damage brand credibility and attract negative publicity. At a time of heightened scrutiny, reputational damage can often have longer lasting consequences than financial penalties.

What does this mean for your communications strategy?

The new rules don’t mean businesses should stop communicating about sustainability. If anything, credible sustainability communications will be more important than ever. The key difference is that environmental messaging must be grounded in evidence rather than ambition.

The most effective communications will focus on measurable outcomes, verified achievements and clear, substantiated claims. This benefits businesses as much as consumers. Evidence based messaging is more credible, more resilient to scrutiny and ultimately more persuasive.

As the deadline approaches, every organisation should be asking three questions:

1. What sustainability claims are we currently making?
2. Can each claim be independently verified?
3. Are we communicating sustainability accurately, transparently and within the scope of the evidence available?

Ultimately, the brands that succeed in this new environment will not be those with the most ambitious sustainability narratives, but those with the evidence to support them.

Emer Sugrue, Director