As the final political trialogue on the Green Claims Directive approaches, we urge policymakers not to rush its adoption.
Brussels, 21st of May 2025 - As the final political trialogue on the Green Claims Directive approaches, we urge policymakers not to rush its adoption. Without clear, fully harmonised, and workable rules for all stakeholders, the framework will discourage companies from communicating legitimate sustainability efforts (greenhushing), and diverting critical financial and human resources from sustainability innovation to compliance, ultimately undermining the EU’s goals of fostering consumer information and safeguarding the competitiveness of the European industry.
Our associations are strongly committed to advancing research and innovation to enhance the sustainability of products and production processes. Communicating these achievements is vital to empower consumers and enable businesses to innovate and remain competitive in an evolving global market. Both are essential drivers for accelerating the green transition.
Amid global uncertainty, companies already struggle to communicate their sustainability progress due to the ambiguities of the Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition (ECGT) Directive (applicable from September 2026). Tight compliance timelines and the risk of fragmented interpretations and enforcement undermine legal certainty and business confidence. The Green Claims Directive, based on the ECGT Directive, further adds complexity through a one-size-fits-all approach for substantiation and verification requirements.
We have been calling for a proportionate and clear framework on green claims from its outset, levelling the playing field for all economic operators and safeguarding businesses’ competitiveness and incentive to invest. This will also avoid short-term revisions (e.g., future Omnibus) to address inconsistencies, ambiguities or other unintended negative impacts of the Directive on businesses.
Despite ongoing discussions to streamline and reduce the burden of the substantiation and ex-ante verification, including through a “simplified procedure”, the framework remains unclear, complex, impractical and insufficiently harmonised. As it stands, we still have strong concerns on: