Unsubstantiated fashion terms like “sustainable”, “green” and “planet-friendly” are about to become relics of fashion’s unregulated past. Europe is strengthening its consumer protection laws to clamp down on greenwashing with the Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition Directive (known as EmpCo) that, starting September 27, will require all sustainability claims to be proven by third-party evidence like a certification or government backed label.

Certain claims, such as carbon offsetting or carbon neutrality, are completely blacklisted.

Experts say the new rules are thorough and clear: any explicit and implicit claims, from sustainability buzzwords to imagery, which imply sustainability must now be verified by a third party. What remains to be seen is whether they will drive brands further into greenhushing territory, whether third-party certifiers are prepared for increased demand, and what it will take to rebuild broken consumer trust in sustainability claims.

Brands have had over two and a half years to prepare for EmpCo, which was officially adopted in March 2024. But the issue has been on the European Commission’s agenda for far longer. In 2020, it released a study finding that 53.3% of environmental claims about products sold in the EU were unfounded, while 40% were unsubstantiated.

A number of high-profile cases since then have spelt the demise of greenwashing. In 2022, both Dutch and Norwegian consumer authorities targeted H&M over the green claims associated with its Conscious Collection, stating that the brand didn’t make clear what criteria it used or provide evidence of why certain products were in the collection.

A Changing Markets Foundation investigation found that H&M’s ‘sustainable’ line contained more polyester than its main line, leading the brand to close its Conscious Collection in late 2022. Last year, French authorities fined Shein €40 million, then Italian authorities fined the ultra-fast fashion giant €1 million, for overstating sustainability efforts and misleading consumers.

Until now, investigations have been conducted at the discretion of individual EU member states. While enforcement of the new rules will be controlled at a national level, EmpCo provides a unified framework on what can and cannot be claimed.

Any brand selling into the EU, whether European or not, must comply. “I would say that for EU regulation, it is surprisingly robust,” says Andreas Rasche, associate dean at Copenhagen Business School, whose work focuses on sustainability regulations.

While many regulations leave language deliberately vague and open to interpretation, EmpCo’s scope is well-defined and unanimous. “There are lots of nuances to greenwashing.

This actually clarifies quite a bit, and it also provides more security for companies.”

Understanding EmpCo

Unlike many incoming regulations, which often have phased rollouts for different sized businesses, EmpCo will apply to all brands and products on the market from the end of September. That means the same rules apply if you’re a billion-dollar retailer with well-resourced legal and sustainability teams, or a small independent fashion brand. Importantly, it’s not just applicable to environmental issues.

“One often overlooked point is that EmpCo extends beyond greenwashing to misleading claims about the social characteristics of products and businesses,” says Alexandra Mihailescu Chicon, global head of market development at RepRisk, an ESG data science company focused on business transparency and risk management. “This is particularly relevant in fashion, where RepRisk’s research found that nearly two-thirds of supply chain risk incidents were linked to social issues, including poor working conditions, human rights abuses, and forced labor.

Credible sustainability communications therefore need to reflect the wider conduct of brands and their suppliers, not only their environmental performance.”

Among vague or false claims, EmpCo will ban claims about a whole product that only applies to a part of the product (like claiming a shoe is ‘made with recycled materials’ when only a small part is), communications that state future sustainability targets without evidence of a strategy, and legal requirements presented as special features of a product.

Some are concerned that the crackdown could mean increased greenhushing, where brands undercommunicate to protect themselves legally. “There’s a real risk that some organizations respond to increased regulatory scrutiny by becoming overly cautious and communicating less about genuine sustainability initiatives,” like those that are third-party certified or can otherwise be proven through supply chain data, says Aleksandra Czajka, public procurement specialist at Global Standards, the certification body behind the Global Organic Textile Standard (GOTS) and the Global Responsible Textile Standard (GRTS).

“The most constructive response is not silence, but more precise and better substantiated communication.”

Sandra Capponi, co-founder of brand sustainability rating platform Good On You, believes that in some cases, greenwashing and greenhushing are the result of a lack of clarity. “Maybe there is an argument that regulation could make some brands even more cautious, but the rules are now clear and coming into force, so that uncertainty can no longer be an excuse for a lack of transparency,” she says.

EmpCo addresses what brands can say about their products across all marketing, labels and sustainability pages, but it will have deeper implications than just customer communications. “Compliance is not simply a communications exercise: every consumer-facing claim must be grounded in accurate, up-to-date product, and supply chain data,” says Mihailescu Chicon.

“In our experience, the risk often lies not in what a company says, but in whether its underlying business and supply chain practices support those claims over time.”

Increasing demand — and pressure — on certifiers

The new rules could spell the end of sustainability-linked collections, search filters and edits, unless brands invest in traceability tech and measurements like lifecycle assessments to prove their claims. In lieu of this, many will lean into certifications that do this deep supply chain work on their behalf.

The EU has set requirements of transparency and objectivity for certification schemes to be used as evidence, which should help strengthen the validity of auditing systems, some of which have been ineffective in identifying and rectifying unethical or unsustainable behavior in the past.

“There’s been criticism of certifications over the years, because of questions about their reliability and the independence of their business model,” says Good On You’s Capponi. “So this change has increased expectations on certification schemes to be more robust and independent, which is obviously valuable.” Brands and retailers rated “good” and “great” by Good On You can display a label on products and create EmpCo-compliant search filters and edits.

To align with EmpCo, Good On You appointed an independent monitoring body that oversees the ratings process and governance, as well as formalizing the division between the platform’s commercial and ratings teams.

Oeko-Tex, a certification system for chemicals in textiles and leather, has worked closely with companies to prepare for EmpCo. “We did a lot of preparatory work, especially with the customers, because there was a lot of uncertainty,” says CEO Alfred Beerli. “Uncertainty in the sense of: what can we claim? How can we claim it? These were the questions that arose a year ago, and we had to really take them seriously.”

Global Standards has created a practical guide to help companies navigate the new rules. “It will help them identify potential risk areas, assess the clarity and accuracy of communications, and determine whether additional evidence, explanations, or revisions may be needed,” says Czajka. “Ultimately, the goal is to help certified entities communicate responsibly while protecting the credibility, integrity, and value of our certifications.”

Well-prepared brands know that certifications aren’t the silver bullet, and that strong supplier relationships strengthen not just green claims, but overall supply chain resilience. This is the approach sneaker brand Veja has always taken, says co-founder François-Ghislain Morillion.

“For me, it’s a minimum to be certified. It does not prove that it’s perfect, [but] perfection is also not attainable,” he says.

“This is also why it’s important to visit, to feel things, and to not only rely on it because a certification is [just] paper.”

Restoring consumer trust

Much has been speculated about consumer appetite for sustainability in recent years. Zalando’s 2025 It Takes Many report found that 71% of surveyed shoppers want to make more sustainable shopping decisions, but identifying these products was a major barrier to closing the attitude-behavior gap.

Good On You, which has rated more than 7,000 brands on their publicly available information, says consumer demand for sustainable product information is still high. “We hear from shoppers all the time asking us to rate brands, and in fact, we have a big backlog of requests,” says Capponi.

“That’s a big indication that shoppers are still wanting to know how brands measure up on the issues that they care about.”

It’ll be trial and error to establish the level of detail that resonates with consumers. According to ad agency VML’s 2026 Future Shopper report, while 48% of shoppers like the idea of being shown carbon footprint information on products, 41% admit to not fully understanding what it means. “Consumers have limited capacity to absorb complex information,” says Mihailescu Chicon. “Brands therefore need to focus on what matters most and communicate it clearly and consistently.”

On the other hand, Veja, which has always shunned traditional marketing, has detailed breakdowns of material compositions and web pages dedicated to its supply chain partners and various projects, like its Fair for Life-certified rubber from the Amazon, which makes up half of Veja shoe soles. “The story is so rich that people can relate to it differently, and it’s always good to bet on the intelligence of people,” says Morillion.

“If it’s complicated, OK, it’s complicated.”

Shoppers can now expect more detailed and accurate information. But without knowing the ins and outs of EmpCo, how will they know it’s now trustworthy?

Rasche from Copenhagen Business School is unsure how brands will navigate this. “The claims will be different, they will be more factual, and they will be backed up.

But consumers don’t see that,” he says. Rebuilding trust will come with time, as shoppers see fewer but more precise green claims.

“Trust is something that takes a very long time to develop, but unfortunately, a very short time to destroy. So that’s the bad news for companies.”

For EmpCo to live up to its name, brands must find a way to align sustainability efforts and communication channels across all customer touchpoints, from the product page to the in-store sales associates. “Ultimately, consumers benefit when credible sustainability efforts can be communicated clearly and accurately,” says Czajka. “The challenge is finding the right balance between preventing misleading claims and ensuring genuine progress remains visible.”