Starting September 27, 2026, stricter rules for sustainability claims will apply in the Netherlands. Terms such as “sustainable,” “green,” and “environmentally friendly” may then only appear on packaging or in advertisements if a company can substantiate them in a concrete and verifiable manner. The rules stem from a European directive often referred to as the Empower Consumer Act, officially known as the Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition Directive (EmpCo or ECGT, Directive (EU) 2024/825). In this article, we explain what is changing, which claims are prohibited, and how enforcement works, with recent Dutch examples of companies that made mistakes and organizations that demonstrate how it should be done.
What is greenwashing?
Greenwashing is the practice of misleading consumers by portraying a product, service, or organization as greener than it actually is. This doesn’t have to be intentional: a vague term on the packaging or a made-up logo is enough. The problem is twofold. Greenwashing erodes consumer trust, causing them to become skeptical of all green claims, and it harms companies that do genuinely invest in cleaner production. An international review by regulatory agencies revealed that more than four in ten of the green claims examined were vague, exaggerated, or misleading.
What changes will the Empower Consumer Act bring?
The EmpCo Directive is not a standalone law, but amends two existing European directives: the one on unfair commercial practices (2005/29/EC) and the one on consumer rights (2011/83/EU). The Netherlands incorporates the rules into Book 6 of the Civil Code; the bill was passed by the Senate in May 2026 and takes effect on September 27, 2026. The key feature is the chosen approach: the rules do not intervene through legislation on labeling or products, but rather through consumer law. As soon as a claim can influence a consumer’s purchasing decision, a prohibited claim is legally equivalent to deception. The question, therefore, is not whether a claim sounds appealing, but whether you can prove it—including to a regulatory authority.
The rules apply to anyone who sells to consumers, from online stores and retailers to companies that incorporate sustainability into their marketing; only the very smallest businesses are exempt from certain obligations. This date is separate from the Green Claims Directive, a supplementary directive that would have prescribed how claims must be verified in advance, but which has been temporarily suspended since June 2025. In practice, EmpCo is now the primary focus.
A List of Prohibited Claims
The core of the law is an expansion of the list of commercial practices that are always considered misleading:
- Vague, generic claims. Terms such as “environmentally friendly,” “green,” “eco,” or “climate-friendly” may only be used if backed by evidence of recognized, outstanding environmental performance. Words like “conscious” and “sustainable” are particularly problematic, as they also imply social aspects. This also applies to imagery: colors, leaves, or a green logo can constitute an implicit claim.
- Climate-neutral through offsetting. Claims such as “climate neutral,” “CO2 neutral,” or “net zero impact” are prohibited if they rely solely on offsets outside the company’s own value chain, such as CO2 credits or forestry projects elsewhere. Companies may communicate about offsets, but not as a path to neutrality.
- Unreliable quality seals. Labels may only be used if they are based on independent, official certification. Self-created green logos will be phased out. You can demonstrate recognized performance using, for example, the EU Ecolabel or a certification mark in accordance with the EN ISO 14024 standard, such as Milieukeur or On the way to PlanetProof.
- Selective and irrelevant claims. A claim that appears to apply to the entire product but actually refers to only one aspect is misleading; for example, a milk carton labeled as having 30% less CO2, when this refers only to the packaging. It is also not permitted to present a legal requirement as a benefit, such as bottled water that is marketed as gluten-free.
- Claims about the future. Promises such as “on the path to climate neutrality” may only be made if accompanied by a concrete, measurable, and publicly available action plan with intermediate steps, which is regularly verified by an independent body.
Who enforces
In the Netherlands, the Netherlands Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM) is the regulatory body; a prohibited environmental claim is considered an unfair commercial practice, punishable by fines of up to 900,000 euros per violation or a percentage of annual revenue. In addition, the Advertising Code Committee can require an advertisement to be amended, and interest groups and competitors can also file lawsuits under civil law. A substantiated claim thus provides protection on multiple fronts simultaneously.
Dutch examples: from KLM to Tony’s Chocolonely
The EmpCo Directive largely codifies what Dutch courts and regulators have already ruled.
Aviation: From KLM to the Entire Industry
The best-known example is the lawsuit filed by the Fossielvrij NL Foundation against KLM. On March 20, 2024, the Amsterdam District Court ruled that fifteen of the nineteen statements presented were misleading and unlawful, including campaigns such as “Fly Responsibly” and the “CO2ZERO” product. The judge found claims about a more sustainable future too vague and ruled that offsetting emissions by planting trees does not actually reduce actual emissions. It didn’t stop with KLM: in November 2025, 21 airlines revised their misleading sustainability claims following joint action by European consumer regulators, including the ACM.
Retail and Fashion Under the Microscope
Albert Heijn marketed itself as the most sustainable supermarket in the Netherlands, was unable to sufficiently substantiate this claim, and withdrew the campaign following intervention by the ACM. In the fashion sector, Zalando removed misleading claims following action by European regulators, and the Bijenkorf department store revised unclear claims on its website in September 2025. SHEIN, PostNL, and DHL had also previously revised their claims following an investigation by the ACM.
Food and Energy
Attention is now shifting to new sectors. In August 2025, the ACM announced that it would be scrutinizing sustainability claims in the coffee and cocoa sectors, where it sees increased risks. In the energy sector, broad, ambitious claims such as “Faster Climate Neutrality” (Eneco) and “Fossil-Free Living Within One Generation” (Vattenfall) came under fire.
How to Do It Right
The common thread among claims that do hold up is specificity. Tony’s Chocolonely talks about slave-free chocolate instead of a vague concept like “ethically produced”: specific, understandable, and traceable. The same applies at the product level. Replace a vague “eco-friendly” bottle with one made from 25% ocean plastic and 75% recycled PET, and highlight the characteristic that you can actually demonstrate. We’ve written before about communicating sustainability in concrete terms.
Evidence-based practice is becoming the norm
What these issues have in common is that they do not revolve around a company’s ambitions, but rather around the evidence supporting them. And many organizations are already gathering precisely that evidence to comply with other European regulations. The Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR ) (Regulation (EU) 2025/40), which takes effect on August 12, 2026, requires companies to demonstrate—through technical documentation and a declaration of conformity—that packaging is recyclable and to specify the amount of recycled material it contains. That same data supports a packaging claim and prevents you from calling something recyclable if it no longer meets the harmonized criteria. At the product level, the digital product passport under the Ecodesign Regulation serves the same purpose: it contains verified data on materials, origin, and environmental performance—exactly the information needed to substantiate a claim and make it available upon request by a regulatory authority. Anyone who treats these processes—along with the dual materiality analysis under the CSRD—as a single, cohesive task rather than separate obligations will already have the substantiation for their claims largely in order.
The Empower Consumer Act thus marks the end of non-binding green marketing. For organizations that take sustainability seriously, this is more of an opportunity than a burden: honest, verifiable claims will soon stand out more clearly from the noise. Would you like to know if your claims meet the new standards, or how your communications, supporting evidence, and ESG strategy align? Feel free to contact us.