Sustainability Claims and the EmpCo Directive
“Responsible” is also a claim about working conditions. The new EU rules on sustainability claims make it a compliance question – and the evidence sits in your supply chain, not in your marketing department.
Does this apply to us?
The Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition Directive (EmpCo) has applied across the EU since 27 September 2026 through national consumer protection laws. There is no size threshold: the rules apply to every company that markets products to consumers.
The debate has focused almost entirely on greenwashing. What has received far less attention is that the same rules also cover claims about working conditions, human rights and ethical commitments. And a claim can be much more than an advertising slogan:
- Packaging and product descriptions
“Made in fair conditions”, “responsibly sourced”, “ethical”. - Own labels and logos
A self-developed “Responsibly Sourced” badge with no independent certification behind it. - Sustainability sections of websites and online shops
Descriptions of the supply chain, factories and working conditions. - Codes of ethics and supplier codes of conduct
When they are referred to in communication aimed at consumers.
When a company tells consumers it is responsible, it must be able to show whose working conditions it is talking about – and how it knows.
What the new rules require
Social characteristics are now named in the law. Misleading information may concern, in particular, the environmental, social and circularity characteristics of a product. Social characteristics include working conditions – adequate wages, social protection, a safe working environment and social dialogue – as well as human rights, equality and ethical commitments. This is essentially the same list that human rights due diligence uses to map supply-chain risks.
Generic claims require more than environmental performance. “Responsible”, “sustainable” or “conscious” cannot rest on good environmental performance alone, because these terms also concern social characteristics. In Finland, the Consumer Ombudsman’s draft guidance urges companies to replace generic terms with specific claims.
Your own label no longer works. A sustainability label must be based on a certification scheme with independent third-party monitoring, or be established by a public authority.
The consequences are real. Infringements can lead to injunctions, penalty payments imposed by the courts and damages claims from consumers.
Why a social claim is harder than an environmental one
An environmental claim usually concerns the product itself: its materials, emissions or recyclability. A social claim almost always concerns someone else – a factory the company does not own and subcontractors it may not even know.
There is no blacklist for social claims comparable to the one for environmental claims. They are assessed case by case: is the claim misleading, and does it affect the consumer’s decision? That makes the assessment harder, not easier.
The evidence for a social claim is information about the supply chain: where the product comes from, which risks are involved, what has been done about them and how they are monitored. That is exactly the information human rights due diligence produces. Many companies outside the scope of the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) will face their first question about supply-chain working conditions through consumer law.
Read the full analysis: Whose working conditions is your packaging talking about?
Where most companies start at the wrong end
The issue is handed to marketing.
Wording gets polished, but nobody checks whether there is evidence behind the claim. The evidence lies with procurement and the sustainability team, not with communications.
Only packaging is reviewed.
Websites, codes of ethics, supplier codes of conduct and sustainability reports can all come under scrutiny. In 2025, the Italian competition and consumer authority fined a fashion house €3.5 million over exactly these kinds of ethical claims.
A certificate is assumed to cover everything.
A label covers what its certification scheme covers. “Responsibly produced” written next to the label is a separate claim and is assessed separately.
Claims are not compared with internal risk data.
If marketing promises fair working conditions and your own risk assessment or audit says otherwise, the contradiction is a more serious problem than missing evidence.
Contracts give no right to the evidence.
A typical sustainability annex grants audit and termination rights, but does not require the supplier to provide the information the buyer needs to substantiate its own claims, or to report changes.
How we help
- 01 Claims mapping
All channels, from packaging to sustainability pages. Which claims concern working conditions and human rights, and which of them are at risk. - 02 Matching claims with evidence
Each claim is linked to the part of the supply chain it concerns and to the information available about it. You end up knowing what you can say, how – and what is better left unsaid. - 03 Contracts and approval process
Information and notification obligations in supplier contracts so that claims stay true. Clear internal responsibility for approving a social claim before it is published. - 04 Training for marketing, procurement and legal
In the same room. The claim is made in marketing, but its evidence is created in procurement.
The same work also supports compliance with the EU Forced Labour Regulation and your customers’ supply-chain requirements. On the contractual side, see supply chain contracting.
Frequently asked questions
Is the EmpCo Directive only about greenwashing?
No. The new rules also cover the social characteristics of a product, such as working conditions and human rights. The outright bans apply to environmental claims, but social claims are assessed under the general prohibition of misleading practices.
Can we still call a product responsible?
A generic term is risky. It is safer to state precisely what the responsibility is based on and to make sure there is evidence behind it.
Is certification enough?
A certification label can be justified when the scheme meets the requirements. It does not, however, cover a broader claim written next to the label, nor does it replace knowing what actually happens in your supply chain.
Does this apply to us if the CSDDD does not?
Yes. Consumer protection law has no size threshold, and the rules apply now. If a company markets to consumers and makes sustainability claims, it must be able to substantiate them.
What about packaging produced before September 2026?
Finland has a limited transition period: for some labels on products placed on the market before 27 September 2026, the new bans apply only from 27 March 2027. The transition does not cover online advertising or new packaging, and it does not change the general prohibition of misleading claims.
Let’s review what you claim – and how you know it.
The first conversation is free of charge. We go through the channels where you make sustainability claims, which of them concern working conditions, and what evidence currently supports them.