{"id":204794,"date":"2025-06-22T09:37:33","date_gmt":"2025-06-22T09:37:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/204794\/"},"modified":"2025-06-22T09:37:33","modified_gmt":"2025-06-22T09:37:33","slug":"european-commission-yanks-proposed-anti-greenwashing-rules-on-eve-of-final-negotiations","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/204794\/","title":{"rendered":"European Commission Yanks Proposed Anti-Greenwashing Rules on Eve of Final Negotiations"},"content":{"rendered":"

\n\t\u201cWe are now in a situation where we have to admit that Europe has failed,\u201d Claus Teilmann Petersen, sustainability\/stakeholder engagement and human rights manager at Bestseller, said of the European Union<\/a>\u2019s omnibus package<\/a>, somewhat deflatedly, ahead of the Global Fashion Summit in Copenhagen<\/a> earlier this month. \u201cWe cannot deliver what we set out to do. I\u2019m pretty sure that we will get into a situation where the simplification will be deregulation.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tPetersen words took on a prophetic air Friday after the European Commission<\/a> revealed that it would withdraw a proposed law targeting nebulous or unfounded corporate environmental claims\u2014a practice better known as \u201cgreenwashing<\/a>\u201d\u2014saying that legislative proposal, as it stands, goes against the executive arm\u2019s \u201csimplification agenda,\u201d particularly regarding microenterprises.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cAround 30 million micro-enterprises\u201396 percent of all companies\u2014 could be covered by the proposal if microenterprises were to be included,\u201d Maciej Beresteck, a spokesperson for the European Commission, wrote in an email. \u201cThis would distort the Commission proposal in a manner which prevents the achievement of the objectives pursued by the proposal, i.e., supporting the development of green markets, while preventing undue burden on the smallest enterprises.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tThe decision, which arrived ahead of the final negotiating round with member state representatives to solidify the deal on Monday, is yet another sign of Europe\u2019s so-called \u201csustainability retreat\u201d as the world\u2019s largest single market continues on a rightward swing that mirrors a similar about-face on progressive ideals that have been branded \u201cwoke\u201d and \u201cradical\u201d in the United States.<\/p>\n

\n\tIt also appeared to be a sudden and highly unusual one, considering how late in the rulemaking process this is happening. The move followed a letter on Wednesday from the center-right European People\u2019s Party seeking the proposal\u2019s retraction from the European Commissioner for the environment, Jessika Roswall, who is affiliated with the political bloc, and confirming that it would not support \u201cany trilogue outcome.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tIt was only recently, on the Global Fashion Summit\u2019s main stage, that Roswall talked about \u201cmoving barriers to bridges to shape a more sustainable future where textiles, fashion and environmental care go hand in hand.\u201d It\u2019s not \u201cjust about rules,\u201d she said, but about \u201cworking together\u201d to place \u201cbetter products\u201d on the market. Roswall\u2019s office did not respond to a request for a comment.<\/p>\n

\n\tWhile the EPP said it supports protecting consumers from falling prey to environmental marketing spin, the green claims directive<\/a> \u201crisks unduly hindering sustainability communication through procedures that are overly complex, administratively burdensome and costly,\u201d including a \u201cfundamentally flawed\u201d preapproval requirement that deviates from established internal market practices and is not being applied across sectors.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cThere is, quite simply, no dedicated cost-benefit analysis or supporting data underpinning the ambitious system proposed by the GCD,\u201d the letter said. \u201cNor does the proposal convincingly demonstrate that the expected benefits of the regime would outweigh the significant costs and regulatory uncertainty it entails.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tBut Elisabeth von Reitzenstein, senior director of public affairs at Cascale<\/a>, the multi-stakeholder organization formerly known as the Sustainable Apparel Coalition, said she was \u201cextremely\u201d concerned about the European Commission\u2019s \u201cabandonment\u201d of the green claims directive. It pointed to more \u201csoft-pedalling\u201d on environmental requirements from the EU, she said, further degrading a Green Deal<\/a> that sought to zero out the continent\u2019s carbon emissions by 2050 and marking a \u201ctroubling\u201d about-face for markets that \u201conce set the pace\u201d on climate action.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cWhile not perfect, the green claims directive would have marked an important leap forward in enhancing transparency, ensuring a level playing field for businesses investing in progress, and providing clarity for consumers on the products they are choosing to buy,\u201d von Reitzenstein said. \u201cNow we risk letting unchecked green claims proliferate and greenwashing go unchallenged. We may also see a continued risk of \u2018greenhushing\u2019 where companies are not able to communicate the great work they are doing in times of legal uncertainty.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tBeresteck said that the European Commission remains committed to fighting greenwashing, adding that it will continue to work on making sure consumers are \u201ccorrectly informed\u201d through policies such as the directive on empowering consumers for the green transition, which the EPP endorsed during a plenary vote in 2024 and is poised to go into force in 2026.<\/p>\n

\n\tWhile both sets of legislation aim to stave off greenwashing with fines up to 4 percent of an offending company\u2019s annual turnover, the green claims directive was supposed to clarify the other\u2019s rules and enforcement mechanisms, said Nusa Urbancic, CEO of the Changing Markets Foundation<\/a>, a watchdog group that campaigns against greenwashing. Pulling it at this point would be a \u201cdisaster,\u201d she said, pointing to research that shows that nearly 60 percent of claims<\/a> by fashion brands can be considered misleading or unsubstantiated according to guidelines from the United Kingdom\u2019s Competition and Markets Authority<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cSince the Commission and several other consumer agencies announced a clampdown on greenwashing, the market has slowly been moving in a better direction with dishonest claims being scrapped by companies,\u201d Urbancic said. \u201cReversing these efforts will not only undermine consumer trust but will also be a setback for companies that are really investing in environmentally friendly products and services at a time when the climate and biodiversity crises are accelerating.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tLast month, EU ombudsman Teresa Anjinho said she had opened an investigation into the process behind the omnibus bill, following complaints by civil society organizations, including Anti-Slavery International, the Clean Clothes Campaign and the European Coalition for Corporate Justice, alleging that the European Commission had circumvented the necessary procedural requirements in its haste to table the amendments without conducting out a public consultation, a detailed impact assessment and a a \u201cclimate consistency\u201d assessment.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cStrong sustainability laws like the CSDDD and CSRD are key to the EU\u2019s competitive advantage in a global market where consumers and investors increasingly demand responsible corporate action,\u201d the coalition said. \u201cWe have seen time and time again that vague corporate promises aren\u2019t driving the change we need. Weakening environmental and human rights requirements is a step in the wrong direction.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\tWhether any recourse remains for the green claims directive\u2014other then proceeding with negotiations\u2014is less clear. It was this proposal that suggested using the Product Environmental Footprint, or PEF, as a harmonized tool to evaluate products across 16 environmental indicators, including freshwater, resource and land use. Nixing the legislation would also prevent the PEF from being incorporated into EU law through this particular route, though it continues to be referenced in the CSRD and the ecodesign for sustainable products regulation<\/a> and could still be rolled into future legislation.<\/p>\n

\n\tFor now, withdrawing the proposal risks damaging European credibility and leadership on climate action globally, said Thorfinn Stainforth, senior policy manager of EU climate policy at Environmental Defense Fund Europe, a nonprofit.<\/p>\n

\n\t\u201cThis directive would have provided businesses with the certainty they\u2019ve asked for and empowered consumers to make sustainable choices,\u201d he said. \u201cInstead, we\u2019re left with continued ambiguity at a time when Europe could be providing the clear framework businesses need to accelerate the shift toward sustainable investments and environmental integrity.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"\u201cWe are now in a situation where we have to admit that Europe has failed,\u201d Claus Teilmann Petersen,…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":204795,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5174],"tags":[82523,82524,2000,299,5187,2557,1699,11479],"class_list":{"0":"post-204794","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-eu","8":"tag-cascale","9":"tag-changing-markets-foundation","10":"tag-eu","11":"tag-europe","12":"tag-european","13":"tag-european-commission","14":"tag-european-union","15":"tag-greenwashing"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@uk\/114726347986500401","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/204794","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=204794"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/204794\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/204795"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=204794"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=204794"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=204794"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}