<\/p>\n
The regulation of sustainability communication will finally take effect in practice by fall 2026 at the latest. What was still heavily influenced by draft bills, questions of interpretation, and internal preparatory projects in 2025 is now becoming a binding legal framework with immediate implications under competition law.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Basics<\/strong><\/p>\n Where do we stand today?<\/strong><\/p>\n The EmpCo Directive has been in force since March 26, 2024. Member states must transpose the directive into national law by March 27, 2026. The new regulations will be binding as of September 27, 2026.<\/p>\n Germany <\/u>is implementing the directive through an amendment to the Unfair Competition Act (UWG). Once the regulations take effect in September 2026, impermissible environmental claims will no longer merely be a reputational risk but will be legally actionable and subject to cease-and-desist letters.<\/p>\n The key difference from 2025 is clear: strategic preparation becomes a reality of liability.<\/u><\/p>\n <\/p>\n EmpCo 2026: What\u2019s Changing Now.<\/strong><\/p>\n In 2025, the focus for many companies was on analysis. Claims were documented, marketing materials reviewed, and initial internal guidelines developed.<\/p>\n In 2026, the focus shifts significantly:<\/p>\n The EmpCo does not change the products themselves. But it changes the way sustainability can be discussed.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n What the EmpCo specifically regulates<\/strong><\/p>\n Statements such as \u201cenvironmentally friendly,\u201d \u201csustainable,\u201d or \u201cgreen\u201d are only permissible if they are based on demonstrably outstanding environmental performance and are clear, specific, and verifiable for consumers.<\/p>\n Only state-recognized systems or transparent certification models with verifiable methodologies are permitted. Independence is essential here: A label must be based on objective criteria and must not effectively function as a \u201cproprietary label\u201d without an independent awarding and verification structure.<\/strong><\/p>\n Statements such as \u201cclimate-neutral by 2030\u201d are only permissible if there is a realistic, verifiable transformation strategy with clear interim targets. Blanket promises without a robust roadmap increase the risk of warnings and liability.<\/p>\n Particularly risky are statements that justify climate neutrality solely through compensation models, as well as statements that refer to the entire product even though only certain aspects are actually affected. A clear definition of system boundaries, the reference object, and methodology is crucial.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Implications for the packaging industry<\/strong><\/p>\n For manufacturers and distributors of packaging, particularly in the areas of plastic, paper, and composite solutions, EmpCo is shifting the focus significantly from marketing toward robust data and governance structures<\/u>.<\/p>\n Three critical points stand out<\/strong><\/p>\n In our consulting practice, we see three critical points in particular:<\/p>\n The implication: Companies must be aware that the EmpCo requires not only linguistic precision but also a robust internal structure comprising data management, validation, and documented approval\u2014ideally integrated into existing ESG, quality, and product development processes.<\/u><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Practical examples<\/strong><\/p>\n Permissible only if it is clearly defined whether \u201ctechnically\u201d or \u201cpractically\u201d recyclable is meant, which testing standards are referenced, and what limitations (e.g., regional collection\/sorting\/recycling infrastructure) exist. Without a solid basis, the statement is misleading.<\/p>\n Percentage claims are comparative claims. They are only permissible with a clearly defined reference, disclosed methodology, and transparent system boundaries. Without a verifiable derivation, the claim is open to challenge.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Data as a common basis<\/u><\/p>\n EmpCo is communication law. The Digital Product Passport (DPP) is data and product law. In practice, the two complement each other: The more systematically companies collect product and sustainability data, the more robust claims, labels, and comparative statements become<\/u>.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Practical Bridge to the DPP <\/u><\/p>\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
EmpCo & Digital Product Passport<\/strong><\/h4>\n