Directive (EU) 2024/825 – the EmpCo Directive for short (“Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition”) – has been transposed in Germany by the Third Act Amending the Act against Unfair Competition (UWG), promulgated on 19 February 2026 (Federal Law Gazette (BGBl.) 2026 I No. 43). The relevant provisions apply from 27 September 2026.
The new rules work on two levels. First, the provisions on misleading practices are extended:
- § 5 para. 2 no. 1 UWG will in future expressly cover ecological and social characteristics as well as circularity aspects,
- § 5 para. 3 UWG gains two new categories, § 5b UWG a new paragraph on product comparisons.
- Second – and this is the practically decisive lever – twelve practices move into the Annex to § 3 para. 3 UWG. There they are deemed unfair under all circumstances. Public understanding, relevance and appreciability no longer play any role.
Fundamentals and Scope
1. What does the EmpCo Directive regulate at its core?
Three regulatory areas:
- environmental and social claims in advertising,
- sustainability labels,
- durability, reparability and early obsolescence.
Technically, this is done by means of two levers: extending the provisions on misleading practices (case-by-case assessment, §§ 5, 5b UWG) and – more important in practice – adding twelve new per se prohibitions to the “black list” (Annex to § 3 para. 3 UWG). For the latter, any balancing of interests, any relevance test and any materiality threshold falls away.
2. When does this apply, and are there transitional periods?
From 27 September 2026. There is no transitional or grandfathering provision for packaging, catalogues or existing stock already on the market. Anyone who has goods advertised as “climate-neutral” on the shelf on 28 September 2026 commits an infringement of a per se prohibition from that day on. This is currently the economically most relevant point when advising clients.
3. Does this also apply in B2B?
Partly. The EmpCo Directive and the new black-list prohibitions are in principle aimed at the B2C relationship. The new per se prohibitions of the UWG therefore apply towards consumers.
B2B business is not left entirely outside the scope, however. § 5 UWG also applies towards other market participants and thus in principle also between businesses. In particular, the extension of the essential product characteristics to include ecological and social characteristics, as well as aspects such as durability, reparability and recyclability, can therefore also become relevant for B2B claims.
Added to this is the practical significance along the value chain: manufacturers often provide retailers with environmental claims, labels and evidence which the retailers then use in their communications with consumers. Businesses should therefore not only review their own advertising, but also settle by contract which evidence is to be provided for environmental claims and who is liable for inaccurate statements.
Environmental Claims
4. What is an “environmental claim” within the meaning of the EmpCo Directive?
An environmental claim is any statement or representation that is not legally mandatory and is made in the context of a commercial practice, which states or implies, expressly or tacitly, that a product, a product category, a brand or a business has a positive or no impact on the environment, is less harmful to the environment than others, or has improved its environmental impact over time.
The term is defined by statute in Art. 2 para. 1 point (o) of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (UCPD) and is transposed into German law by § 2 para. 2 no. 5 UWG as amended.
Two points are easily underestimated in practice:
Not only words are covered. The statutory definition expressly mentions text, images, graphic elements and symbols. Recital 9 also clarifies that a written or spoken statement, together with implicit elements such as colours or images, can constitute a generic environmental claim. Green colour schemes, leaf motifs or nature images are therefore not prohibited per se; however, they can shape the overall impression of the advertising and help to convey an environmental message.
Brand names, company names and product names can also be covered. The statutory definition names them expressly. Names such as “EcoLine”, “GreenPack” or “Naturell” can therefore – depending on the specific context and the understanding conveyed as a result – constitute an environmental claim. This is relevant in particular for the use of corresponding signs: even a trade mark can, when used in advertising, be subject to the requirements of unfair competition law for environmental claims.
5. What is a “generic environmental claim”?
An environmental claim is “generic” if it is not specified in more detail. The specification must appear clearly and prominently on the same medium. Otherwise, it is in principle a generic environmental claim (Art. 2 para. 1 point (p) UCPD, § 2 para. 2 UWG as amended).
Under no. 4a of the Annex to § 3 para. 3 UWG, such generic environmental claims are unfair per se if the trader cannot demonstrate any recognised excellent environmental performance on which the claim is based.
The Directive names the following, among others, as examples: environmentally friendly, eco-friendly, green, nature-friendly, ecological, climate-friendly, gentle on the environment, CO₂-friendly, energy-efficient, biodegradable and bio-based.
The difference becomes clear from an example: “Climate-friendly packaging” is a generic environmental claim. “100% of the energy used to manufacture this packaging comes from renewable sources”, by contrast, is specific. The second claim therefore does not fall under the specific prohibition of generic environmental claims; it must, however, still be true and must not be misleading.
6. What is “recognised excellent environmental performance”?
What is meant is a particularly high level of environmental performance that can be demonstrated under a recognised set of rules. This includes in particular the EU Ecolabel, officially recognised eco-labels under DIN EN ISO 14024 Type I, or top environmental performance arising from other EU law – for example energy efficiency class A.
It is important that the demonstrated environmental performance matches the specific advertising claim. Anyone advertising a product as “energy-efficient”, for example, can rely on a corresponding energy efficiency class. The EU Ecolabel, by contrast, does not automatically suffice for the claim “biodegradable” if the award criteria of the label contain no requirements on biodegradability for the product in question.
Nor can claims such as “sustainable”, “conscious” or “responsible” be justified by excellent environmental performance alone, because such terms can go beyond purely environmental characteristics.
Practical consequence: Blanket claims such as “sustainable” will become considerably more difficult from 27 September 2026. Recognised environmental performance alone is not enough for this. Anyone who advertises with “sustainable” must instead be able to substantiate the entire content of the claim in concrete terms.
7. What applies if only one part is “green”?
No. 4b of the Annex to § 3 para. 3 UWG prohibits claiming an environmental characteristic for the entire product or business where it actually relates only to a single aspect or an unrepresentative part.
Textbook examples from recital 11: “Made from recycled material” where only the packaging is recycled. Or the impression of using only renewable energy although numerous facilities continue to be run on fossil fuels. A company-level claim remains permissible if it is accurate, verifiable and not exaggerated.
8. What applies to “climate-neutral”, “CO₂-neutral” or “climate-offset”?
Here the legal position changes fundamentally. Until now, the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) required above all transparency for “climate-neutral”: the advertising itself had to make clear whether climate neutrality is achieved through emission reduction or through offsetting, as in BGH, judgment of 27 June 2024 – I ZR 98/23: in its Katjes decision, the BGH merely required that the advertising itself explain whether climate neutrality is achieved through emission reduction or through offsetting.
From 27 September 2026, clarification is no longer enough. No. 4c of the Annex contains a per se prohibition on any claim that is based on the offsetting of greenhouse gas emissions and according to which a product has a neutral, reduced or positive impact on the environment. Expressly named are: “climate-neutral”, “certified CO₂-neutral”, “CO₂-positive”, “with climate offsetting”, “climate-friendly”, “with reduced CO₂ footprint”.
9. What applies to future promises such as “climate-neutral by 2040”?
Such claims are not prohibited across the board. They must, however, be based on a robust and verifiable plan. What is required are clear and publicly accessible commitments, measurable and time-bound targets, and a realistic implementation plan that also takes account of the necessary resources. In addition, an independent external expert must regularly review implementation. The findings must be accessible to consumers.
Anyone advertising with an environmental goal for the future must already be able to show today, in a comprehensible way, how that goal is to be achieved.
10. What applies to advertising with irrelevant advantages?
Advertising with advantages can also be misleading where they sound positive but offer no real benefit or particular informative value for the specific product. Examples given in the Directive are claims such as “gluten-free mineral water” or “paper sheets without plastic”.
To be distinguished from this is advertising with self-evident legal requirements. No. 10a of the Annex to § 3 para. 3 UWG as amended prohibits presenting a legal requirement as a special advantage of one’s own offering – for instance “free from substance X” where that substance is in any event prohibited for all products in this category.
Businesses should therefore check not only whether an advertising claim is true, but also whether the advantage advertised is actually relevant and special for the product.
Sustainability Labels
11. Which sustainability labels may still be used from 27 September 2026?
Permitted are sustainability labels that were either established by a public authority or are based on a qualifying certification system. Such a system must be accessible in a transparent and non-discriminatory manner, set clear requirements and have compliance with them monitored by an independent third party. In the event of infringements, it must be possible to suspend or withdraw the label.
Self-created sustainability labels that do not meet these requirements, on the other hand, are in principle no longer permissible. A proprietary label such as “Our Green Promise” therefore does not suffice merely because the statements behind it are accurate. Private labels, and labels awarded by trade associations, must also meet the requirements for a certification system.
Practical consequence: What will matter in future is not only what a label promises, but also who sets the criteria and monitors them independently.
No. 2a of the Annex prohibits per se the display of a sustainability label that is neither based on a certification system nor established by public authorities.
The certification system must meet four criteria cumulatively (Art. 2 para. 1 point (r) UCPD; § 2 para. 2 UWG as amended):
- open to all traders on transparent, fair and non-discriminatory terms;
- requirements drawn up by the system owner in consultation with experts and stakeholders;
- defined procedures for infringements, including withdrawal or suspension of the label;
- monitoring by a third party whose competence and independence, in relation to both the system owner and the trader, are based on international, Union or national standards – the reference points are ISO 17065 and the mechanisms of Regulation (EC) No 765/2008.
Self-created in-house labels such as “Our Green Promise”, labels without third-party certification and trade association marks without independent monitoring are impermissible from 27 September 2026 – without any case-by-case assessment.
12. Is a sustainability label automatically permissible if it is registered as a certification mark?
Registration under trade mark law does not protect against the new UWG requirements. Anyone using a sustainability label as a certification mark must therefore additionally check whether the EmpCo requirements are also met.
That is because certification marks under Art. 27 of Directive (EU) 2015/2436 and §§ 106a et seq. of the Trade Mark Act (MarkenG) can be sustainability labels. Registration as a certification mark is not enough, however: the sign must in addition be established by public authorities or be based on a compliant certification system. Anyone who holds a sustainability sign as a certification mark should now check the mark’s regulations against the criteria of Art. 2 para. 1 point (r) UCPD.
In addition, no. 4 of the Annex to § 3 para. 3 UWG continues to apply (claiming a non-existent endorsement, approval or authorisation). And: if the label is combined with communication that suggests positive or no environmental impact, it also counts as an environmental claim (recital 8).
Durability, Reparability, Obsolescence
13. Durability, repair, software updates: What is new?
A whole block of new prohibitions concerns the premature ageing of products. Among other things, the following will be prohibited in future:
-
Updates: Businesses must not conceal that a software update impairs the function of a device, digital content or services – for example where a smartphone becomes slower after the update or battery life deteriorates. It is equally impermissible to present an update as “necessary” where it merely brings new or improved features (no. 23d points (a), (b) UWG as amended; recitals 17 and 18 Directive (EU) 2024/825).
-
Artificially limited durability: Commercial communication for goods is impermissible where the business knows that they contain a feature deliberately introduced to limit their durability (no. 23d point (c) UWG as amended; recital 19 Directive (EU) 2024/825). This affects manufacturers in particular; retailers are covered if they have reliable information on this.
-
False statements on durability and reparability: Anyone who claims, for example, that a product will last a certain number of usage cycles under normal conditions when this is not true, or who presents goods as repairable when they are not, always acts unfairly (no. 23d points (d), (e) UWG as amended; recitals 20 and 21 Directive (EU) 2024/825).
-
Consumables and non-original parts: It is likewise prohibited to induce consumers to replace consumables prematurely – for example a printer cartridge that is not yet empty. In the case of non-original parts, an impairment of functionality that actually exists must neither be concealed nor falsely claimed to exist (no. 23d points (f), (g) UWG as amended; recitals 23 and 24 Directive (EU) 2024/825).
14. Where is the boundary with statutory warranty law on sales?
Not every quality defect is automatically a case for the black list.
Recital 19 draws a clean line: the per se prohibition targets durability-limiting features that have been deliberately introduced. Mere lower quality of materials or processes remains a matter of conformity of the goods with the contract under Directive (EU) 2019/771, §§ 434 et seq. of the German Civil Code (BGB).
Further reading: The seven prohibitions of no. 23d in detail, with case examples on software updates and spare parts, are covered in our article Reparability, Durability and Software Updates.
Pre-Contractual Information Obligations
15. What new information obligations apply to retailers?
Through Art. 2 of the Directive – amending Directive 2011/83/EU, in German law Arts. 246 and 246a of the Introductory Act to the German Civil Code (EGBGB) – the following information obligations, among others, are added:
- notice of the statutory warranty rights for goods and their essential elements, including the minimum duration of two years, using the harmonised notice;
- in the case of a free manufacturer’s commercial guarantee of durability for the entire product of more than two years: notice of its existence and duration using the harmonised label;
- notice of the statutory warranty rights for digital content and digital services;
- for goods with digital elements, digital content and digital services: statement of the minimum period for which software updates will be provided;
- where applicable, statement of a reparability score established at EU level; where none is provided for, information in particular on the availability of spare parts, costs, ordering procedures and repair and maintenance instructions;
- for distance contracts and contracts concluded away from business premises: information on environmentally friendly delivery options, where such options are offered.
The obligations apply only insofar as the manufacturer or supplier makes the information available (recitals 26, 33, 36). There is expressly no duty to actively research product-specific websites. This is the most important point of relief for retailer clients – and at the same time the starting point for defending against corresponding cease-and-desist letters.
16. Does the harmonised label exist yet?
Yes. The design and content of the harmonised notice and the harmonised label are laid down by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/1960 of 25 September 2025. It contains specifications on colour values, minimum sizes, typefaces and QR codes that link to the “Your Europe” portal, and applies from 27 September 2026.
In addition, in electronic distance selling the harmonised label must be pointed out clearly and prominently immediately before the order is placed (Art. 8 para. 2 Directive 2011/83/EU as amended). The order page must therefore be adapted.
Further reading: For the design, minimum sizes and placement of the two labels, and on the question of exactly where the statutory warranty notice must appear in the shop, see our article Warranty and Guarantee Labels from 27 September 2026.
Enforcement, Cease-and-Desist Letters, Defence
17. Who can take action, and with which claims?
Nothing changes as regards standing under § 8 para. 3 UWG: proceedings can be brought in particular by competitors, qualified trade associations and consumer organisations, as well as Chambers of Commerce and Industry and the other bodies named there. The focus is on claims for removal and injunctive relief under § 8 para. 1 UWG. Claims for damages are governed by § 9 UWG. A claim to information, where required, can arise in addition, in particular from § 242 BGB.
Administrative fines under § 19 UWG do not come into consideration for every individual infringement, but for widespread infringements or widespread infringements with a Union dimension, and only within the framework of a coordinated enforcement action under Art. 21 of the CPC Regulation (EU) 2017/2394. The fine range generally extends up to EUR 50,000; for businesses with an annual turnover of more than EUR 1.25 million in the Member States concerned, it can amount to up to four per cent of that turnover.
18. Why do the Annex prohibitions make enforcement easier?
The new prohibitions are in the so-called black list of § 3 para. 3 UWG. Where such a prohibition is met, no additional examination is needed as to whether the commercial practice was appreciable in the individual case or relevant to the consumer’s transactional decision.
The dispute therefore shifts to the requirements of the respective prohibition: Is the claim actually a “generic environmental claim”? Is it specified clearly and prominently on the same medium? Can the trader demonstrate the underlying recognised excellent environmental performance? Is a sustainability label based on a permissible certification system?
For the defence, it therefore becomes even more important to examine precisely whether the respective prohibition is met at all.
19. Should we expect a wave of cease-and-desist letters?
An increased risk of cease-and-desist letters is to be expected after 27 September 2026. Many of the new prohibitions concern claims and labels that are directly visible on websites, packaging or product pages. In addition, for the black-list prohibitions no additional case-by-case assessment of unfairness is required.
How intense cease-and-desist activity will actually be remains to be seen. A screenshot can document the advertising complained of. Whether all the requirements of a prohibition are met, however, may require further evidence.
20. How is urgency to be assessed in preliminary injunction proceedings?
§ 12 para. 1 UWG continues to apply unchanged and makes it easier to obtain preliminary injunctions. Nevertheless, waiting for a longer period after becoming aware of an infringement can count against urgency.
This will be particularly interesting for advertising that was already in use before 27 September 2026 but only becomes impermissible through the new rules. There is much to be said for assessing urgency by reference to knowledge of the infringement as continued under the new law. Naturally, there is as yet no settled case law on this.
Practical consequence: For advertising that predates the new rules, both applicants and respondents should document precisely when the advertising continued to be used under the new law and when knowledge of this was obtained.
Outlook
The EmpCo implementation shifts the focus of competition-law disputes from assessment to stocktaking. Anyone who knows which claims and labels are on the market will in most cases already know the outcome. This favours those who are prepared – and it punishes those who have waited for a transitional period that does not exist. The coming weeks will decide which side a business ends up on.
Received a cease-and-desist letter over environmental advertising? Or is a competitor advertising unfairly with “climate-neutral”?
We review the cease-and-desist letter and your prospects of success, and advise you on a legally sound basis.
What should you do now?
The effort lies less in the legal assessment than in taking stock. Anyone who knows which claims and labels they use will in most cases already know the outcome. The following order makes sense:
1. Complete inventory. Capture website, shop, packaging, catalogues, social media, newsletters, product names and trade marks. Document every environmental claim.
2. Critical cases first. Immediately remove or specify anything with “climate-neutral”, “CO₂-neutral”, “climate-offset”, “sustainable”, “environmentally friendly”, “green” or “eco” that comes without explanation.
3. Review labels. For every label used, document the certification system and independent monitoring. Remove proprietary labels without third-party certification.
4. Substantiate future-oriented claims. Provide and publish the implementation plan, targets and expert report – or delete the claim.
5. Adapt the shop. Integrate the harmonised notice and label, add the update period and repair information, insert a notice before the order button.
6. Update supplier contracts. Evidence, information and indemnification clauses for environmental claims, labels, and durability and update statements. You are liable to the consumer – you can only protect yourself in your relationship with the supplier.
7. Have a response plan ready. A prepared review routine for incoming cease-and-desist letters, so that the typical ten-day deadline does not become a problem.
Note: This article is no substitute for legal advice in individual cases.
