If your company displays a green seal on its packaging, website or advertising, you have less than a month to check one thing: who stands behind it. From 27 September 2026, displaying a sustainability label that is not based on a certification scheme or established by public authorities becomes an unfair commercial practice across the European Union — prohibited in all circumstances.
The label does not need to mislead anyone. No consumer needs to suffer harm. It is enough that the label exists and does not meet the requirements.
This article explains which labels are affected, what the law requires for a label to be lawful, and what a company should do in the coming weeks.
Where the obligation comes from
Directive (EU) 2024/825 on empowering consumers for the green transition amends the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive and adds new conduct to its blacklist — practices deemed unfair in all cases, with no need to prove deception case by case. Member States had to adopt their transposing legislation by 27 March 2026 and must apply it from 27 September 2026.
In Spain, transposition is channelled through the draft Sustainable Consumption Act (Anteproyecto de Ley de Consumo Sostenible), which amends the Unfair Competition Act and the consolidated Consumer Protection Act. [VERIFY BEFORE PUBLISHING: current status of the Sustainable Consumption Act — if enacted, cite number and date; if still in progress, keep the following wording.] Whatever the state of the Spanish text, the application date is the one set by the Directive, and Spanish consumer authorities and courts must interpret the law in force in line with it from that day.
In an earlier article we explained the general framework of what changes on 27 September for environmental claims. Here we focus on one of the changes with the greatest practical impact: labels.
What counts as a “sustainability label”
The definition is deliberately broad. A sustainability label is any voluntary trust mark, quality mark or equivalent, public or private, that aims to set apart and promote a product, a process or a business by reference to its environmental or social characteristics, or both.
In practice, the definition captures:
- “Eco”, “green”, “sustainable” or “responsible” logos and labels printed on packaging and labelling.
- Sustainability icons and badges on websites, product pages and marketplaces.
- “Committed company”, “responsible production” or “ethical trade” seals in advertising and social media.
- Graphic marks created by the company itself or by its agency to communicate environmental or social attributes.
That last case is precisely what the rule targets: the self-designed seal, with no verification behind it, that consumers perceive as a certification.
What the law requires for a label to be lawful
From 27 September, only two types of label may be displayed:
1. Labels established by public authorities. The EU Ecolabel, the EU organic production logo, the energy label, and labels created by national or regional administrations.
2. Labels based on a certification scheme. This is the key point, because the Directive defines what a valid certification scheme is. It must meet all of the following conditions:
- Be open to any trader wishing to join, under transparent, fair and non-discriminatory terms.
- Rely on objective criteria, set by the scheme owner in consultation with experts and stakeholders.
- Include a verification procedure carried out by a third party independent of both the scheme owner and the trader, checking compliance with the requirements.
- Provide a monitoring mechanism for compliance and sanctions in case of non-compliance.
If a label does not meet these four conditions, it is not a certification scheme for the purposes of the law — even if it is run by an external body, even if it has a rulebook, and even if a fee is paid to use it.
The three groups of labels to review
In practice, a company will encounter three different situations.
Self-declared labels. Those created by the company itself or its agency. These are outright prohibited. There is no way to “fix” them: they must be removed or replaced by clear, specific information without the format of a seal (for example, “packaging made with 80% recycled plastic”, together with the source that substantiates it).
Third-party labels that do not meet the requirements. The market is full of private marks run by associations, consultancies or platforms that grant use of the logo in exchange for a fee, with loosely defined criteria and no independent verification. Many will not pass the four-condition test. Here the company must request the scheme owner’s documentation — criteria, verification procedure, sanctions regime — and assess whether it can continue using the label.
Labels from established certification schemes. Recognised certification schemes, with verification by independent auditors and public criteria, should in principle meet the requirements. Even so, it is worth confirming that the company’s specific certification is in force and that the label is used within its scope (a label for one certified product cannot be displayed across the whole range, nor a label for one production site across the whole company).
What else changes the same day
The blacklist adds other conduct that directly affects environmental communication and should be reviewed in the same exercise:
- Generic environmental claims (“eco-friendly”, “green”, “environmentally friendly”) unless the company can demonstrate recognised excellent environmental performance.
- Claims about the whole product when they actually concern only part of it.
- Claims based on emissions offsetting — “carbon neutral”, “net zero” — which we will address in a dedicated article in the coming weeks.
What is at stake
The consequence of keeping a non-compliant label is not only reputational. Because the practice is on the blacklist, the consumer authority does not need to prove that consumers were actually misled: the conduct is unfair in itself.
Two fronts open up. The administrative one, with penalties from regional and national consumer authorities that can reach significant amounts for serious infringements and, for widespread infringements with a cross-border dimension, up to 4% of annual turnover. And the civil one, through the actions available under the Unfair Competition Act, which any competitor may bring: cessation, rectification, damages. Disputes between competitors over environmental communication had already reached the Spanish courts before this reform; from 27 September, with an express prohibition in the law, the claimant’s position is considerably stronger.
What to do before 27 September
The work is well-defined and can be completed in weeks:
- Inventory every seal, logo and mark with environmental or social connotations the company uses: packaging, labelling, website, marketplace listings, advertising, social media, sales presentations.
- Classify each one into the three groups: self-declared, unverified third-party, certification scheme.
- Remove those in the first group and replace the information with specific, substantiated statements.
- Request documentation from the owners of second-group labels and decide, on legal grounds, whether they can be kept.
- Check validity and scope of third-group labels.
- Document the exercise: in the event of an inspection or a claim, showing that the company reviewed its communication diligently before the deadline is the best possible defence.
How we can help
At Ferrer-Bonsoms Abogados we review the environmental communication of consumer, industrial and service companies: an audit of labels and claims across packaging, website and advertising, a gap report against Directive 2024/825 and Spanish law, and a prioritised adaptation plan before 27 September.
Contact us to review your sustainability labels and environmental claims →
This article is part of our series on greenwashing and environmental communication. Previous article: Greenwashing: what changes on 27 September 2026 for environmental claims and sustainability labels. Next article: “Carbon neutral” and “plastic neutral”: why these claims must be withdrawn and what to say instead.