The European Commission is preparing to withdraw the Green Claims Directive, a legislative proposal designed to protect consumers from greenwashing. The decision, revealed by Commission spokespersons, follows mounting political pressure from the European People’s Party (EPP) and the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR).
“There is an intention to withdraw the proposal,” said Commission spokesperson Stefan de Keersmaecker during a press briefing. “At the moment, we’re not in a position to provide further information. We ask for your patience as we determine how to move forward.”
The move comes after two years of legislative work and negotiations, marking a surprising turn for a file central to the European Green Deal agenda.
What is the Green Claims Directive?
The Green Claims Directive aimed to overhaul how companies communicate environmental benefits in their marketing. It required businesses to conduct robust, science-based checks before making claims such as “biodegradable,” “less polluting,” “water-saving,” or “made with bio-based materials.”
The need was clear. According to a Commission-led investigation, misleading environmental claims are widespread. Among 344 company-issued green claims reviewed, 42% were found to be false, exaggerated, or deceptive, while 37% were too vague or generic to verify.
A key part of the EU Green Deal
The directive was part of the broader European Green Deal. In its 2019 communication, the Commission pledged to address the risk of misleading green marketing. A year later, it committed to proposing a dedicated legal instrument.
The Green Claims Directive, published on March 22, 2023, was the first EU-wide effort to set minimum standards for environmental labeling and voluntary green claims made in business-to-consumer communications.
Among its core requirements: all environmental claims had to be backed by recognized scientific evidence and state-of-the-art technical knowledge. Each claim would be subject to independent pre-verification, with distinctions between whole-product and partial-product claims, as well as full life-cycle versus partial life-cycle assessments.
The draft directive also introduced validation procedures for new environmental labeling systems launched by private entities, aiming to eliminate unregulated or misleading eco-labels.
The only exception in scope: micro-enterprises, and only for a limited period.
The legislative journey
After publication, the proposal moved to the co-legislators. In March 2024, the European Parliament voted in favor of its position, including an amendment allowing green claims to be based on carbon offset mechanisms.
The Council of the European Union followed with its general approach three months later. It allowed for the creation of new national or EU-regulated systems exempt from third-party verification, provided they met EU procedural and technical standards.
Recognition by a single member state would be valid across the entire EU market. The Council also introduced support measures for small and medium enterprises (SMEs), such as tailored guidance, digital tools, and administrative relief for farmers.
The final phase, known as the trilogue, was set to begin, where the Commission, Parliament, and Council negotiate to reconcile their respective positions into a joint text.
EPP and ECR push back against the Green Claims Directive
The trilogue process, however, faced significant resistance. Members of the EPP and ECR raised strong objections, ultimately derailing the negotiations.
EPP shadow rapporteur Danuše Nerudová sent a formal letter to the Commission urging withdrawal of the proposal. “The current version is too complex, expensive, and lacks proper impact assessment,” she argued.
Nebojím se ozvat. Se švédskou kolegyní @ArbaKokalari jsme jako stínové zpravodajky za EPP požádaly Evropskou komisi o stažení návrhu směrnice o ekologických tvrzeních (Green Claims). Navrhovaná verze je příliš složitá, nákladná a chybí jí dopadové studie.
— Danuše Nerudová (@danusenerudova) June 18, 2025
Přitom právě méně… pic.twitter.com/PW3VJrh1Mr
The most criticized aspect: the mandatory pre-verification of environmental claims. “Requiring pre-approval for green claims is not a standard practice within the internal market and is not applied uniformly across sectors,” reads the EPP’s letter. “Such an approach risks setting a precedent at odds with our broader goals of regulatory coherence, competitiveness, and administrative simplification.”