The European Union’s (EU) Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition Directive (the Directive) started to apply from 27 September 2026. However, many brands may find themselves still sitting on old stock carrying environmental claims or sustainability labels that were developed before the new rules took effect.

The EU’s Consumer Protection Cooperation (CPC) Network issued guidance in the summer clarifying how national authorities might approach that old stock, including products, packaging, labels, e-commerce listings, point-of-sale materials, and marketing assets that remain in circulation.

The CPC guidance confirms a strict baseline:

• businesses are expected to comply from the application date (27 September 2026), even for products already placed on the market; and
• although transitional flexibility may be available in limited cases, there is no general exemption for old stock.

This article considers what brands need to know to mitigate risk under the new regime, including practical implications and immediate action points for businesses with potentially non-compliant products still in circulation in the EU market.

What Counts as “Old Stock”?

The CPC guidance addresses products or packaging displaying green claims or sustainability labels that were manufactured, ordered, distributed or placed on retailers’ shelves before 27 September 2026. It also covers associated claims and labels appearing online, in advertising or in other commercial communications linked to the product or trader.

For brands that have not yet taken steps to ensure compliance with the Directive, this creates immediate implications for:

• product packaging;
• labelling;
• e-commerce listings;
• physical point of sale materials; and
• marketing materials/assets and campaigns in any channel.

Core Principles From the CPC Guidance

What Does the Directive Require Businesses To Do?

From 27 September 2026, businesses making environmental claims to consumers in the EU must ensure that those claims are clear, specific, accurate, and sufficiently substantiated. The Directive strengthens the existing consumer protection framework by prohibiting generic or vague environmental claims where the business cannot demonstrate recognised excellent environmental performance and by restricting the use of sustainability labels unless they are based on an approved certification scheme or established by public authorities.

Who Is Responsible for Compliance?

As with the existing consumer rules, the Directive applies to “business-to-consumer commercial practices,” such as communications, advertising, and marketing by a trader to a consumer in the EU. This is interpreted broadly and applies to both brands and retailers alike. 

Brands that include misleading claims on products or packaging—whether about sustainability, performance, or otherwise—cannot escape liability just because they sell products via a retailer. The brand itself is still directing the claim(s) at consumers and may additionally have its own direct-to-consumer operations.

Retailers selling products with misleading claims on to consumers are also in scope and could be liable. While they may in certain circumstances have a stronger defence than the brand if they are simply selling through, this is not a guaranteed free pass. 

Brands and retailers should take practical measures by addressing local law compliance and requiring evidence for claims in their agreements as well as seeking contractual warranties.

What Should Businesses Be Doing to Comply?

Authorities expect businesses to take proportionate but concrete action across all channels, such as:

• removing or correcting misleading green claims online;
• updating advertising and promotional materials;
• revising future packaging and labelling;
• applying stickers or relabelling existing stock, where feasible; and
• providing clear corrective information at point of sale.

This applies to both physical retail and digital channels, increasing exposure for e-commerce operators. 

Businesses should also consider where in the customer journey they place the mandatory harmonised notice setting out the minimum two-year legal guarantee of durability for goods. See our earlier alert for more information on this requirement.

How Can Businesses Evidence Their Compliance?

Documentation is critical. Businesses should maintain robust compliance records, including:

• actions taken to address greenwashing risks;
• dates and timelines of remediation measures; and
• internal decision-making processes.

This documentation may be essential in demonstrating good-faith efforts and proportionate compliance under EU consumer law.

Is There a Grace Period for Old Stock Still in the Market After 27 September 2026?

No. The CPC explicitly reinforces that there is no blanket or general grace period, and businesses must act without delay and in good faith to achieve compliance. Additionally, historic noncompliance does not justify continued use of misleading environmental claims. This reflects a broader EU enforcement trend targeting greenwashing and unsubstantiated sustainability claims.

However, there might be flexibility in certain exceptional cases.

When Will Exceptions Be Granted?

Under the CPC guidance, authorities may allow limited flexibility where there are “genuine and specific transitional difficulties.” The CPC expressly acknowledges operational realities and that some businesses may face greater operational challenges than others. Relevant factors would include:

• product shelf-life and turnover speed;
• business size and resources;
• evidence of active compliance efforts;
• packaging production cycles;
• existing stock volumes;
• preexisting contractual commitments;
• supply chain dependencies; 
• technical feasibility of relabelling; 
• prior regulatory scrutiny of a claim (i.e. if a particular type of green claim has already been investigated, criticised, or challenged by regulators, businesses are less likely to receive sympathy for continuing to use it on old stock); and
• existing guidance on similar green claims (i.e. the more guidance there is, the less persuasive it is to say that the business could not reasonably know how to comply).

However, these do not remove the obligation to address misleading sustainability claims.

Additionally, while intended to support a pragmatic and proportionate approach by enforcement authorities, the CPC guidance is nonbinding. It does not limit the ability of regulators to take immediate enforcement action if they wish to (or of third parties to bring civil claims), particularly in jurisdictions with an established track record of strict enforcement such as Germany, Italy, and France.

Therefore, businesses should not assume they will benefit from any flexibility or a grace period, which will be fact dependent and in the authorities’ discretion.

Supposing a Grace Period is Granted, How Long Would That Be?

There is no predefined grace period—assessment is discretionary and would depend on the circumstances.

Should a Business Be Recalling or Destroying Products to Ensure Compliance by the Deadline?

The guidance indicates that product recalls or destruction of stock should generally be avoided where compliance issues are transitional and genuine. Measures that would result in disproportionate cost or unnecessary environmental harm may be considered unreasonable. This aligns with the Directive’s broader sustainability objectives.

What Are the Consequences of Noncompliance?

The potential consequences of getting this wrong can be serious and costly.

Precise penalties for breaches of the Directive are determined by each Member State’s national law, but the EU consumer law framework requires a maximum fine of at least 4% of annual turnover in the Member State(s) concerned (or €2 million if turnover information is not available). 

However, the guidance recommends that in justified cases, particularly at early stages of application of the Directive, authorities may prioritise:

• Corrective actions over sanctions;
• Guidance or warnings; and
• Reasonable remediation deadlines.

Gentler penalties are not guaranteed though, especially where clear greenwashing risks exist.

Consumers, consumer associations, and competitors can also separately take civil court action to seek injunctions and damages.

Practical Implications for Businesses

With the Directive now live, businesses making green claims in the EU should urgently assess old stock and associated marketing materials if they have not already done so to mitigate legal and reputational exposure.

What Are the Immediate Action Points for Businesses?

• Conduct an immediate audit of environmental claims across products, packaging, websites, and marketing channels to identify potential greenwashing risks under EU consumer law, prioritising high-risk claims (e.g., absolute or unverifiable sustainability statements).
• Remove or update noncompliant online content immediately.
• Implement immediate remediation strategies for legacy stock (e.g., relabelling, stickers or preparing additional information for point-of-sale disclosures).
• Establish internal documentation processes to evidence compliance efforts.
• Monitor enforcement trends, particularly in stricter jurisdictions, conducting jurisdiction-specific risk assessments.
• Ensure future packaging and marketing strategies are updated.
• Take steps to ensure compliance with the broader requirements of the Directive, including displaying the mandatory harmonised notice reminding consumers of the legal minimum guarantee of durability. 

Key Takeaway

The CPC guidance sends a clear signal: the EU will take a strict approach to greenwashing and misleading green claims, with only limited and conditional flexibility for old stock.
Businesses should assume that full compliance is now expected and, where old stock is still in the supply chain or on shelves, take prompt and well-documented steps to reduce enforcement, litigation, and reputational risk.

Please get in touch with our team if you would like to discuss your business’s obligations and a practical roadmap for ensuring compliance with the Directive.