What Directive (EU) 2024/825 Means for Private Sustainability Labels
Certification-scheme requirements, independent third-party monitoring, social labels and key compliance questions from 27 September 2026
From 27 September 2026, new EU consumer-protection rules will significantly change the conditions under which private sustainability labels and certain environmental claims may be used in consumer-facing commercial communications.
Directive (EU) 2024/825 on Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition, often referred to as EmpCo or the ECGT Directive, amends the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (UCPD) and the Consumer Rights Directive. Among other changes, it introduces specific rules for sustainability labels, environmental claims, future environmental-performance claims and certain climate-related communications. EU Member States were required to transpose the Directive by 27 March 2026, with the new provisions applying from 27 September 2026.
For owners of private sustainability badges, labels and proprietary programmes, one of the most significant changes concerns the basis on which a label may be displayed. Unless established by a public authority, a private consumer-facing sustainability label must be based on a qualifying third-party certification scheme.
This article focuses on what that requirement means for private label and scheme owners.
From 27 September 2026, new EU consumer-protection rules will significantly change the conditions under which private sustainability labels and certain environmental claims may be used in consumer-facing commercial communications.
Directive (EU) 2024/825 on Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition, often referred to as EmpCo or the ECGT Directive, amends the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (UCPD) and the Consumer Rights Directive. Among other changes, it introduces specific rules for sustainability labels, environmental claims, future environmental-performance claims and certain climate-related communications. EU Member States were required to transpose the Directive by 27 March 2026, with the new provisions applying from 27 September 2026.
For owners of private sustainability badges, labels and proprietary programmes, one of the most significant changes concerns the basis on which a label may be displayed. Unless established by a public authority, a private consumer-facing sustainability label must be based on a qualifying third-party certification scheme.
This article focuses on what that requirement means for private label and scheme owners.
Sustainability labels and environmental claims
are not the same
are not the same
EmpCo addresses sustainability labels and environmental claims through related but distinct rules.
An environmental claim is broadly defined as a voluntary commercial message or representation, including text, graphics, symbols, labels, brand names, company names or product names, that states or implies that a product, brand or trader has a positive or zero environmental impact, is less damaging to the environment than alternatives, or has improved its environmental performance over time.
A sustainability label is a voluntary public or private trust mark, quality mark or equivalent that distinguishes and promotes a product, process or business by reference to its environmental or social characteristics, or both. Mandatory labels required by EU or national law are excluded from this definition.
A sustainability label may itself communicate an environmental claim, but meeting the certification-scheme requirements does not make every statement used in connection with that label automatically compliant. The European Commission has expressly clarified that sustainability labels do not provide a “safe haven” for claims that would otherwise be misleading under the UCPD. The wording of the claim, its scope and the overall impression created for consumers remain relevant.
As a result, the scope of the consumer-facing claim should remain aligned with the scope of the criteria, evidence and independent verification supporting it. A certification covering a limited characteristic, activity or part of an organisation should not be presented as evidence of a substantially broader sustainability outcome.
An environmental claim is broadly defined as a voluntary commercial message or representation, including text, graphics, symbols, labels, brand names, company names or product names, that states or implies that a product, brand or trader has a positive or zero environmental impact, is less damaging to the environment than alternatives, or has improved its environmental performance over time.
A sustainability label is a voluntary public or private trust mark, quality mark or equivalent that distinguishes and promotes a product, process or business by reference to its environmental or social characteristics, or both. Mandatory labels required by EU or national law are excluded from this definition.
A sustainability label may itself communicate an environmental claim, but meeting the certification-scheme requirements does not make every statement used in connection with that label automatically compliant. The European Commission has expressly clarified that sustainability labels do not provide a “safe haven” for claims that would otherwise be misleading under the UCPD. The wording of the claim, its scope and the overall impression created for consumers remain relevant.
As a result, the scope of the consumer-facing claim should remain aligned with the scope of the criteria, evidence and independent verification supporting it. A certification covering a limited characteristic, activity or part of an organisation should not be presented as evidence of a substantially broader sustainability outcome.
B2C scope and non-EU businesses
The UCPD applies to business-to-consumer commercial practices before, during, and after a commercial transaction. This includes advertising, websites, booking interfaces, product pages, marketing campaigns, social media and other consumer-facing communications connected with the promotion or sale of products and services.
Purely B2B commercial practices fall outside the harmonised scope of the UCPD, although other EU or national requirements may apply.
The rules are also relevant to businesses established outside the European Union where their commercial practices target consumers in the EU Single Market. The Commission confirms that the UCPD applies to relevant consumer-facing practices irrespective of whether the trader or product originates inside or outside the Union.
Purely B2B commercial practices fall outside the harmonised scope of the UCPD, although other EU or national requirements may apply.
The rules are also relevant to businesses established outside the European Union where their commercial practices target consumers in the EU Single Market. The Commission confirms that the UCPD applies to relevant consumer-facing practices irrespective of whether the trader or product originates inside or outside the Union.
Sustainability labels may cover social as well as
environmental characteristics
environmental characteristics
The sustainability-label provisions are not limited to environmental or “green” labels.
The definition expressly includes labels referring to social characteristics. The Commission gives examples including working conditions, wages and social protection, workplace safety, human rights, equal treatment and equal opportunities, gender equality, inclusion and diversity, contributions to social initiatives and animal welfare.
A private badge that distinguishes or promotes a business on the basis of such characteristics may therefore fall within the sustainability-label rules even where it makes no environmental claim.
This is relevant to programmes addressing areas such as social responsibility, diversity and inclusion, responsible employment, ethical sourcing or community impact, as well as to more conventional environmental sustainability schemes.
The definition expressly includes labels referring to social characteristics. The Commission gives examples including working conditions, wages and social protection, workplace safety, human rights, equal treatment and equal opportunities, gender equality, inclusion and diversity, contributions to social initiatives and animal welfare.
A private badge that distinguishes or promotes a business on the basis of such characteristics may therefore fall within the sustainability-label rules even where it makes no environmental claim.
This is relevant to programmes addressing areas such as social responsibility, diversity and inclusion, responsible employment, ethical sourcing or community impact, as well as to more conventional environmental sustainability schemes.
The key rule for private sustainability labels
Directive (EU) 2024/825 adds to Annex I of the UCPD a prohibition on displaying a sustainability label that is not based on a certification scheme or established by public authorities.
Because the provision sits within Annex I, it is part of the UCPD list of commercial practices considered unfair in all circumstances. Unlike provisions requiring a case-by-case assessment of whether a consumer was actually misled, practices falling within Annex I are prohibited once the relevant conditions are met.
For private label owners, this shifts the focus from the existence of sustainability criteria alone to the structure of the programme behind the label. Internal assessment, self-declaration or occasional external checks do not in themselves establish the certification scheme described by the Directive.
Because the provision sits within Annex I, it is part of the UCPD list of commercial practices considered unfair in all circumstances. Unlike provisions requiring a case-by-case assessment of whether a consumer was actually misled, practices falling within Annex I are prohibited once the relevant conditions are met.
For private label owners, this shifts the focus from the existence of sustainability criteria alone to the structure of the programme behind the label. Internal assessment, self-declaration or occasional external checks do not in themselves establish the certification scheme described by the Directive.
What must a qualifying certification scheme contain?
Under Article 2(r) of the UCPD, as amended by Directive (EU) 2024/825, a private sustainability label must be based on a third-party verification scheme whose terms and requirements are publicly available.
The Directive identifies four core elements:
The Directive identifies four core elements:
- Transparent and open participation. The scheme must be open under transparent, fair and non-discriminatory terms to all traders willing and able to comply with its requirements. A proprietary programme may set eligibility and participation conditions, but these conditions must operate transparently and consistently.
- Expert and stakeholder involvement. The scheme requirements must be developed by the scheme owner in consultation with relevant experts and stakeholders. The Directive does not prescribe a single consultation format; the appropriate expertise and stakeholder groups will depend on the subject and sector covered by the scheme.
- Defined consequences for non-compliance. The scheme must establish procedures for dealing with non-compliance and provide for suspension or withdrawal of the right to use the sustainability label where the requirements are not met. A mature certification scheme will normally also address related matters such as corrective action, renewal, complaints and appeals, changes affecting certification and misuse of the label, although these additional elements are not separately listed as Article 2(r) conditions.
- Objective independent monitoring. Compliance with the scheme requirements must be monitored through an objective procedure by a competent third party that is independent from both the scheme owner and the trader. The competence and independence of the monitoring body must be based on relevant international, EU or national standards and procedures. Recital 7 refers to ISO/IEC 17065 as one example of a relevant international conformity-assessment standard.
The scheme owner and the independent monitoring body
must be separate
must be separate
The European Commission’s June 2026 Q&A provides additional clarification on the independence requirement.
The scheme owner may establish and govern the programme and develop its requirements. However, the party responsible for the independent monitoring required by Article 2(r) must be independent from both the scheme owner and the trader.
The Commission states that the scheme owner and the third-party monitoring body must be legally separate entities.
In practical terms, this creates a separation between scheme ownership and conformity assessment. The scheme owner defines and governs the framework and the conditions for use of the label, while the independent third party objectively assesses and monitors conformity with those requirements.
The detailed allocation of responsibilities for evaluation, review, certification decisions, surveillance and administration of the label should be defined within the scheme.
The scheme owner may establish and govern the programme and develop its requirements. However, the party responsible for the independent monitoring required by Article 2(r) must be independent from both the scheme owner and the trader.
The Commission states that the scheme owner and the third-party monitoring body must be legally separate entities.
In practical terms, this creates a separation between scheme ownership and conformity assessment. The scheme owner defines and governs the framework and the conditions for use of the label, while the independent third party objectively assesses and monitors conformity with those requirements.
The detailed allocation of responsibilities for evaluation, review, certification decisions, surveillance and administration of the label should be defined within the scheme.
What happens to existing private sustainability labels?
The new rule is not limited to labels introduced after September 2026.
According to the Commission’s June 2026 Q&A, sustainability labels on the market from 27 September 2026 must comply with the new requirements. Existing schemes that do not satisfy the certification-scheme conditions must be adapted; otherwise, the associated label should no longer be displayed in commercial communications. The Directive does not provide a general transition period beyond that date.
Existing label owners should therefore distinguish between adapting the certification scheme before the application date and the longer-term operation of surveillance and verification after that date.
A scheme may establish migration arrangements for existing participants, taking account of valid existing evidence, previous assessments or recognised third-party certification. Such arrangements are part of the scheme design; they should not be confused with a regulatory grace period.
Where a label continues to be displayed after 27 September 2026, the scheme owner should be able to demonstrate the basis on which its continued use is permitted under the applicable certification framework.
According to the Commission’s June 2026 Q&A, sustainability labels on the market from 27 September 2026 must comply with the new requirements. Existing schemes that do not satisfy the certification-scheme conditions must be adapted; otherwise, the associated label should no longer be displayed in commercial communications. The Directive does not provide a general transition period beyond that date.
Existing label owners should therefore distinguish between adapting the certification scheme before the application date and the longer-term operation of surveillance and verification after that date.
A scheme may establish migration arrangements for existing participants, taking account of valid existing evidence, previous assessments or recognised third-party certification. Such arrangements are part of the scheme design; they should not be confused with a regulatory grace period.
Where a label continues to be displayed after 27 September 2026, the scheme owner should be able to demonstrate the basis on which its continued use is permitted under the applicable certification framework.
Does EmpCo prescribe a particular verification methodology?
No.
Directive (EU) 2024/825 does not specify a fixed audit percentage, mandatory on-site assessment of every participant, a particular surveillance frequency, or one universal verification methodology.
The Commission confirms that certification schemes have flexibility to design requirements and monitoring arrangements appropriate to their sector and circumstances, provided that monitoring is objective, performed by the required independent third party and based on relevant international, EU or national standards and procedures.
Depending on the scheme, claim and risk profile, verification may therefore incorporate documentary review, data validation, remote or on-site assessment, automated controls, risk-based checks, representative enhanced assessment or multi-site approaches for eligible centrally controlled organisations.
The relevant question is whether the methodology provides an objective and credible basis for the conformity represented by the label.
Directive (EU) 2024/825 does not specify a fixed audit percentage, mandatory on-site assessment of every participant, a particular surveillance frequency, or one universal verification methodology.
The Commission confirms that certification schemes have flexibility to design requirements and monitoring arrangements appropriate to their sector and circumstances, provided that monitoring is objective, performed by the required independent third party and based on relevant international, EU or national standards and procedures.
Depending on the scheme, claim and risk profile, verification may therefore incorporate documentary review, data validation, remote or on-site assessment, automated controls, risk-based checks, representative enhanced assessment or multi-site approaches for eligible centrally controlled organisations.
The relevant question is whether the methodology provides an objective and credible basis for the conformity represented by the label.
Can a certification scheme use sampling?
Sampling can be used for purposes such as programme-level assurance, testing the reliability of a broader verification process, identifying systemic weaknesses, validating declarations or automated controls, and carrying out deeper evidence review for selected participants.
It is important, however, to distinguish between sampling as a monitoring technique and the conformity basis for an individual badge holder.
From a conformity-assessment perspective, checking a representative sample of a population does not by itself establish an individual conformity decision for participants that have never been assessed. Where a scheme awards an individual sustainability label to a particular organisation, property, product or other participant, the scheme should be able to identify the basis on which that participant is entitled to use the label.
This does not necessarily require a full manual or onsite audit of every participant. Depending on the scheme, a proportionate model may combine a baseline conformity check across the badge-bearing population with deeper representative and risk-based verification.
For genuine centrally managed multi-site organisations, site sampling may also form part of the assessment methodology where formal multi-site eligibility and assessment rules have been established.
It is important, however, to distinguish between sampling as a monitoring technique and the conformity basis for an individual badge holder.
From a conformity-assessment perspective, checking a representative sample of a population does not by itself establish an individual conformity decision for participants that have never been assessed. Where a scheme awards an individual sustainability label to a particular organisation, property, product or other participant, the scheme should be able to identify the basis on which that participant is entitled to use the label.
This does not necessarily require a full manual or onsite audit of every participant. Depending on the scheme, a proportionate model may combine a baseline conformity check across the badge-bearing population with deeper representative and risk-based verification.
For genuine centrally managed multi-site organisations, site sampling may also form part of the assessment methodology where formal multi-site eligibility and assessment rules have been established.
Is self-assessment sufficient?
Self-assessment cannot serve as the sole conformity mechanism for a private sustainability label that must be based on a qualifying certification scheme.
Participant declarations, questionnaires, and supporting evidence may form part of the assessment process, but the scheme must include objective monitoring by the competent independent third party required under Article 2(r).
The distinction is between information or evidence submitted by the participant and the independent assessment of whether that evidence demonstrates conformity.
Participant declarations, questionnaires, and supporting evidence may form part of the assessment process, but the scheme must include objective monitoring by the competent independent third party required under Article 2(r).
The distinction is between information or evidence submitted by the participant and the independent assessment of whether that evidence demonstrates conformity.
Other EmpCo provisions relevant to label owners
Meeting the certification-scheme requirements does not remove the need to review the environmental claims made around the label.
EmpCo introduces additional restrictions relevant to sustainability communications.
Generic environmental claims. Broad statements such as “environmentally friendly”, “eco-friendly”, “green” or similar generic claims will be prohibited unless the trader can demonstrate recognised excellent environmental performance relevant to the claim. The Directive defines recognised excellent environmental performance by reference to the EU Ecolabel, officially recognised national or regional EN ISO 14024 Type I ecolabelling schemes, or top environmental performance under other applicable EU law.
Claims relating to an entire product or business. The amended UCPD prohibits environmental claims about an entire product or business where the claimed environmental performance relates only to a specific aspect or activity. The scope of the public claim should therefore correspond to the scope of the supporting evidence and verification.
Climate claims based on offsetting. The Directive prohibits claims that a product has a neutral, reduced or positive impact in terms of greenhouse gas emissions where that claim is based on carbon offsetting. This should be distinguished from transparent communication about investments in environmental or carbon-credit projects and from claims based on actual lifecycle emissions performance, which remain subject to the general rules on misleading practices.
Future environmental-performance claims. Claims concerning future environmental performance may be misleading unless they are supported by clear, objective, publicly available and verifiable commitments and targets, a detailed and realistic implementation plan, measurable and time-bound targets, appropriate resources and regular verification by an independent third-party expert whose findings are made available to consumers.
EmpCo introduces additional restrictions relevant to sustainability communications.
Generic environmental claims. Broad statements such as “environmentally friendly”, “eco-friendly”, “green” or similar generic claims will be prohibited unless the trader can demonstrate recognised excellent environmental performance relevant to the claim. The Directive defines recognised excellent environmental performance by reference to the EU Ecolabel, officially recognised national or regional EN ISO 14024 Type I ecolabelling schemes, or top environmental performance under other applicable EU law.
Claims relating to an entire product or business. The amended UCPD prohibits environmental claims about an entire product or business where the claimed environmental performance relates only to a specific aspect or activity. The scope of the public claim should therefore correspond to the scope of the supporting evidence and verification.
Climate claims based on offsetting. The Directive prohibits claims that a product has a neutral, reduced or positive impact in terms of greenhouse gas emissions where that claim is based on carbon offsetting. This should be distinguished from transparent communication about investments in environmental or carbon-credit projects and from claims based on actual lifecycle emissions performance, which remain subject to the general rules on misleading practices.
Future environmental-performance claims. Claims concerning future environmental performance may be misleading unless they are supported by clear, objective, publicly available and verifiable commitments and targets, a detailed and realistic implementation plan, measurable and time-bound targets, appropriate resources and regular verification by an independent third-party expert whose findings are made available to consumers.
EmpCo and the proposed Green Claims Directive
are different instruments
are different instruments
Directive (EU) 2024/825 is adopted EU legislation and applies from 27 September 2026. It should not be confused with the separate legislative proposal commonly referred to as the Green Claims Directive, which concerns substantiation and communication of explicit environmental claims.
As of the latest European Parliament Legislative Train update referenced at the time of publication, the Green Claims proposal had not been adopted.
Because the legislative status of that proposal may change, its status should be checked separately when assessing future regulatory requirements.
As of the latest European Parliament Legislative Train update referenced at the time of publication, the Green Claims proposal had not been adopted.
Because the legislative status of that proposal may change, its status should be checked separately when assessing future regulatory requirements.
What should owners of private sustainability
labels do now?
labels do now?
An existing private label or proprietary sustainability programme should be reviewed as a complete certification system rather than only as a set of sustainability criteria.
As a practical starting point, scheme owners should identify the exact consumer-facing claim associated with the label; assess the programme against the Article 2(r) certification-scheme requirements; check whether the criteria and evidence adequately support that claim; establish the required separation between scheme ownership and independent monitoring; define an objective verification methodology and conformity-decision process; formalise conditions for use, renewal, suspension and withdrawal of the label; and determine how existing participants will migrate into the updated framework.
Existing evidence, recognised certifications and established programme controls may remain useful. The purpose of the review is not necessarily to rebuild an established programme, but to determine whether its existing components form a complete and defensible certification architecture.
The relationship should ultimately be clear:
consumer-facing claim → scheme requirements → evidence → independent assessment → conformity decision → right to use the label → ongoing monitoring
As a practical starting point, scheme owners should identify the exact consumer-facing claim associated with the label; assess the programme against the Article 2(r) certification-scheme requirements; check whether the criteria and evidence adequately support that claim; establish the required separation between scheme ownership and independent monitoring; define an objective verification methodology and conformity-decision process; formalise conditions for use, renewal, suspension and withdrawal of the label; and determine how existing participants will migrate into the updated framework.
Existing evidence, recognised certifications and established programme controls may remain useful. The purpose of the review is not necessarily to rebuild an established programme, but to determine whether its existing components form a complete and defensible certification architecture.
The relationship should ultimately be clear:
consumer-facing claim → scheme requirements → evidence → independent assessment → conformity decision → right to use the label → ongoing monitoring
Independent sustainability-label verification by UCSL
UCSL supports sustainability-label and proprietary-scheme owners in two related areas.
Scheme Readiness & Verification Architecture covers review of existing programmes against certification-scheme requirements and support in structuring or refining criteria, evidence requirements, verification methodology, conformity processes, migration pathways, and other scheme controls.
Independent Third-Party Verification & Conformity Assessment covers objective assessment and monitoring of conformity under an approved proprietary scheme.
Where UCSL supports elements of scheme architecture and subsequently performs independent conformity assessment, the engagement is structured to preserve the required separation of responsibilities, impartiality, review and decision-making controls.
Learn more about EU Sustainability Label Verification by UCSL
Scheme Readiness & Verification Architecture covers review of existing programmes against certification-scheme requirements and support in structuring or refining criteria, evidence requirements, verification methodology, conformity processes, migration pathways, and other scheme controls.
Independent Third-Party Verification & Conformity Assessment covers objective assessment and monitoring of conformity under an approved proprietary scheme.
Where UCSL supports elements of scheme architecture and subsequently performs independent conformity assessment, the engagement is structured to preserve the required separation of responsibilities, impartiality, review and decision-making controls.
Learn more about EU Sustainability Label Verification by UCSL
Primary Sources and Additional Information
Directive (EU) 2024/825 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 February 2024 – primary legal text.
European Commission – Questions & Answers on Directive (EU) 2024/825, June 2026 – Commission guidance on scope, certification schemes, independent monitoring, social characteristics and existing labels. The Commission notes that the document reflects the preliminary views of its services and does not constitute a legally binding interpretation of EU law.
European Commission – Sustainable Consumption – official information on the Directive and its application timeline.
European Parliament – Legislative Train: Substantiating and Communicating Green Claims – current procedural information on the separate Green Claims proposal.
Important notice
This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or a legally binding interpretation of Directive (EU) 2024/825 or national implementing legislation. The application of EU consumer-protection rules depends on the specific facts, claims, scheme structure and relevant national law. Scheme owners and traders should obtain independent legal advice on their particular circumstances. UCSL provides certification-scheme, conformity-assessment and independent verification expertise; it does not provide legal services.
Directive (EU) 2024/825 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 February 2024 – primary legal text.
European Commission – Questions & Answers on Directive (EU) 2024/825, June 2026 – Commission guidance on scope, certification schemes, independent monitoring, social characteristics and existing labels. The Commission notes that the document reflects the preliminary views of its services and does not constitute a legally binding interpretation of EU law.
European Commission – Sustainable Consumption – official information on the Directive and its application timeline.
European Parliament – Legislative Train: Substantiating and Communicating Green Claims – current procedural information on the separate Green Claims proposal.
Important notice
This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or a legally binding interpretation of Directive (EU) 2024/825 or national implementing legislation. The application of EU consumer-protection rules depends on the specific facts, claims, scheme structure and relevant national law. Scheme owners and traders should obtain independent legal advice on their particular circumstances. UCSL provides certification-scheme, conformity-assessment and independent verification expertise; it does not provide legal services.