Green Claims & Advertising Law

1. Generic “green” claims are now high‑risk (EU/UK) and risky (US) unless tightly qualified. The EU added new blacklist bans for generic environmental claims unless backed by recognised excellent performance (e.g., EU Ecolabel/EMAS), sustainability labels not based on a certification scheme, and offset‑based “carbon neutral” product claims. Transpose by 27 Mar 2026; apply from 27 Sep 2026. [EUR‑Lex]
2. US recyclability hinges on access. Unqualified “recyclable” requires a substantial majority (≥60%) of consumers or communities to have access; otherwise, qualify and explain the limitation. [FTC Green Guides]
3. UK enforcement just got teeth. The DMCC Act 2024 empowers the CMA to impose direct fines up to 10% of global turnover for consumer‑law breaches, including misleading green claims, from 6 Apr 2025. [Legislation.gov.uk/GOV.UK]
4. “Carbon neutral / net zero” claims require nearby, specific basis statements. State reductions vs offsets, timeframes, methodology, scope, and verification; ensure prominent proximity per ASA/CAP. [ASA/CAP]
5. California SB 343 will set a de facto US floor for recycling labels. CalRecycle’s Final Findings clock began 4 Apr 2025; ~18‑month compliance runway to ~4 Oct 2026 for aligning claims/icons to what is commonly collected/sorted/sold in CA by material type & form. [CalRecycle]
6. Certifications and seals must mean something. Do not imply endorsement where none exists; in the EU it is per se unfair to display sustainability labels not based on a certification scheme or established by a public authority. [Empowering Consumers Directive]
7. Substantiation = competent & reliable evidence aligned to the specific claim. For offsets, quantify robustly, avoid double‑counting, and disclose if reductions occur ≥2 years in the future. [FTC]

• Retire generic claims (“eco‑friendly”, “green”, “sustainable”) unless tied to recognised excellent performance and the basis is stated prominently (EU/UK) or tightly qualified (US).
• Re‑paper “recyclable” claims with region‑specific access/system evidence; qualify if US access <60%; reflect local collection/sortation limits for EU/UK; plan SB‑343 alignment for CA.
• Rebuild carbon‑neutral copy to state scope, baseline, % reduction vs offsets, offset type/standard, timing, verification; in the EU, avoid offset‑based neutrality on product labels.

• EU Green Claims Directive (GCD) in limbo. Treat Directive (EU) 2024/825 as the binding baseline; monitor any GCD revival/alternatives.
• UK CMA direct enforcement ramp‑up (DMCC) on neutrality, plastic‑free, LCA claims.
• CA SB 343 becomes a de facto national standard for packs sold into CA; expect relabels through 2026.

• Generic environmental claim: Broad, unqualified claim (e.g., “green”, “eco‑friendly”). EU bans many unless recognised excellence is shown; UK/US generally require tight qualifiers.
• Recognised excellent environmental performance: Performance evidenced by schemes like EU Ecolabel or EMAS relevant to the claim (EU context).
• Substantiation: Competent, reliable evidence that matches the exact claim (method, scope, dates, third‑party review where relevant).
• Access (recycling): Share of consumers/communities with collection & processing access; ≥60% enables unqualified “recyclable” in US.
• Offset‑based claims: Claims relying on carbon credits; EU bans product‑level neutrality based on offsets; FTC requires timing disclosures ≥2 years.
• Certification/seal: Logos implying third‑party approval; policed by FTC/CMA; EU per se unfair if no certification scheme/public authority basis.

• Claims → (General | Specific) → General high‑risk unless recognised excellence; Specific (recyclable/compostable/carbon) → substantiation (tests, access, scope, dates).
• Presentation → clear & conspicuous/nearby qualifiers (FTC; ASA proximity).
• Labels → based on certification scheme (EU) | not misleading (FTC/CMA).

• US: FTC Green Guides (16 CFR Part 260) inc. General Environmental Benefit, Carbon Offsets, Recyclable, Renewable. Enforced under FTC Act §5.
• UK: CMA Green Claims Code; ASA/CAP Code Section 11 + carbon‑neutral guidance; DMCC Act 2024 enables direct fines up to 10% turnover.
• EU: UCPD as amended by Directive (EU) 2024/825 (Empowering Consumers) — black‑listed greenwashing practices; transpose by 27 Mar 2026; apply 27 Sep 2026.
• Voluntary supports: ISO 14021 (Type II self‑declared claims); EU Ecolabel Reg. 66/2010.

• General environmental benefit (§260.4): Unqualified “green/sustainable” likely deceptive; specify attribute and context.
• Recyclable (§260.12): Unqualified only if ≥60% access; otherwise qualify (e.g., “may not be recyclable in your area”).
• Carbon offsets (§260.5): Quantify, avoid double‑counting; disclose if benefit occurs ≥2 years in future; no credit for reductions required by law.
• Renewable energy/materials (§§260.15–.16): Unqualified claims only if all/virtually all; else state percentage and source.
• California SB 343: Align labels/icons to CalRecycle Final Findings (material type & form) by ~Oct 2026.

• CMA Green Claims Code: Six principles — truthful, clear, no omissions, fair comparisons, lifecycle considered, substantiated.
• ASA/CAP Section 11 + guidance: Basis must be clear; carbon‑neutral/net‑zero claims require proximity and strategy for future goals.
• DMCC Act 2024: CMA direct fines up to 10% global turnover from 6 Apr 2025.

• Black‑listed practices (examples): sustainability label without certification scheme/public authority; generic environmental claims without recognised excellent performance; product‑level neutrality/reduction/positive claims based on offsets; whole‑product/company claims when only one aspect qualifies.
• Timelines: transpose by 27 Mar 2026; apply from 27 Sep 2026.
• GCD status: Negotiations paused June 2025; plan on EmpCo compliance regardless.

• FTC Green Guides (2012) — includes ≥60% access rule; offsets; renewable claims.
• CMA Green Claims Code (2021) — six principles; enforcement context.
• ASA/CAP guidance (2023–) — proximity and specificity for neutrality/net zero.
• Directive (EU) 2024/825 (EmpCo) — binding EU baseline on greenwashing.
• ISO 14021 — Type II self‑declared claims.
• CA SB 343 Final Findings — material type & form in CA.

• US unqualified “recyclable”: ≥60% access.
• Offset timing disclosure: disclose if ≥2 years to benefit.
• EU recognised excellence: EU Ecolabel/EMAS (or equivalent) if making broad claims.

EU bans product‑level neutrality based on offsets; UK/US permit with stringent qualifiers. Build one global template, then switch off offset‑based neutrality for EU product labels.

Rigid PET bottle + PP cap + paper PSL: bottle widely recyclable in many locales; cap generally acceptable if captured; paper PSL + aggressive adhesive can hinder recycling → check APR/OPRL rules at spec time.

• Qualification text must survive all print runs and appear near the claim; encode resize logic in dielines.
• Multi‑market packs: pre‑plan switchable layers (EU vs non‑EU carbon copy; CA‑compliant recycling icons).

• US/Canada: How2Recycle — uses ≥60% access for “Widely Recyclable”; operationalises FTC thresholds.
• UK: OPRL — Recycle / Do Not Recycle labels aligned to RAM/EPR.

Maintain a substantiation dossier: tests, access studies, LCA sections used, label decisions, change‑control logs per SKU/market. Expect to show your work to CMA/FTC.

• Avoid: “eco‑friendly,” “environmentally safe,” “carbon neutral” (EU product‑level), “plastic‑free” when any plastic present, “100% recyclable” when subparts fail.
• Prefer: “Bottle recyclable in curbside programs covering ≥60% of US consumers; cap/label may not be” (US). “OPRL: Recycle” (UK). “Company on track to reduce Scope 1+2 by 46% vs 2019; remaining emissions offset via [standard], verified by [body] (no product neutrality claim in EU).”

• Claim wording + scope (product/part/company/campaign).
• Evidence type (test, LCA section, access study, certification).
• Date/vintage; lab/method; market coverage.
• Access (US: ≥60% unqualified?) & local scheme fit (OPRL/How2Recycle).
• Qualifier text proximity/legibility (FTC clear & conspicuous; ASA proximity).
• EU EmpCo triggers (generic claim? certification scheme? offset‑based neutrality?).

• Qualifiers on same panel as headline claim; minimum x‑height near headline cap height.
• Market‑switch layers: EU carbon wording OFF; CA SB‑343 icon set ON (2026+).

1. US recyclability access gate: distribution × access studies → % access + claim eligibility.
2. Carbon claim composer: inputs (Scopes, baseline, % reduction, offsets standard & vintage, verification, time‑to‑benefit) → region‑specific copy (EU/UK/US toggles).

• Substantiation Dossier: SKU, claim, regions, evidence IDs, method, dates, verifier, renewal cadence.
• Artwork naming/versioning: SKU_Region_Lang_ClaimShort_YYYYMMDD_vX.

Bottle recyclable in curbside programs covering a substantial majority (≥60%) of US households. Cap & label may not be recyclable in all areas. Scan for local guidance.

Recyclability claims in California are aligned to CalRecycle’s SB 343 Final Findings for material type & form. See QR for CA‑specific guidance.

−38% Scope 2 emissions vs 2020 (market‑based), verified by [body]. No product‑level neutrality claim is made.

Product carbon footprint (cradle‑to‑gate) 1.8 kg CO₂e; −32% vs 2019. Residual emissions offset with [program/standard]; offset benefits delivered in 2026–2028. Full method & verification: [short link].