The EmpCo Directive applies in Austria from 27 September 2026. In plain terms, from that date the only thing that counts in environmental advertising is what you can prove. Austria implemented the rules through an amendment to its Unfair Competition Act (UWG), passed by the National Council on 7 July 2026 and published as BGBl. I Nr. 58/2026. From that date, “sustainable” is no longer a feeling that fits nicely in a caption. It’s a claim you have to back up if it comes to it.

“From 27 September 2026, ‘sustainable’ is no longer an advertising phrase. You have to prove your claim.”

— Olivia Ulbing-Sommeregger, Founder oha! digital

What exactly changes on 27 September 2026?

Two EU projects often get mixed up in the coverage. The separate “Green Claims Directive” was meant to introduce mandatory prior checks for environmental claims. The European Commission officially withdrew it on 20 June 2025, after the EPP group in the European Parliament in particular had warned of too much red tape. It isn’t coming, not even in a reworked form.

The EmpCo Directive (EU) 2024/825 is a very different story, as it has been in force since 26 March 2024. Austria had to transpose it into national law by 27 March 2026 and did so through the UWG amendment mentioned above. It applies from 27 September 2026, a Sunday, which makes Monday 28 September the first regular working day. From then on, the things banned include blanket terms such as “climate neutral”, “environmentally friendly” or “green” without a recognised environmental label, self-created sustainability seals without certification, and climate neutrality promises based solely on offsetting outside your own value chain.

Does this only affect corporates, or your small business too?

The rules apply to communication between businesses and consumers (B2C), regardless of company size. A one-person online shop is subject to the same requirements as a corporate. Pure business-to-business communication (B2B) is, according to the WKO, generally exempt, but that exemption doesn’t automatically cover everything a B2B company puts out. As soon as the same claim also appears in a B2C channel, for example on the public website or on social media, it counts as B2C communication and falls under the new rules. A machine builder who only advertises “climate-neutral production” in quotes to business customers is therefore outside the rules, but as soon as the same line appears on the public company website, it counts as a B2C claim.

Breaches can bring classic cease-and-desist letters and lawsuits from competitors or consumer protection associations, plus administrative fines of up to four per cent of annual turnover for intentional, widespread breaches across several EU countries, or up to two million euros if turnover can’t be determined. For an SME, a single successful cease-and-desist letter often hurts already. A corporate risks the four per cent with systematic greenwashing across several markets. That’s exactly why the check is worth it for both, just with different resources.

One point missing from most guides affects not only brands but also us as service providers. Under § 18 UWG, the owner of a business is liable for unlawful acts committed by another person “in the operation of his business”, and that expressly includes commissioned agencies. If you, as an agency, freelancer or social media manager, actually write and publish an environmental claim, you will regularly also carry possible joint responsibility yourself as the person directly acting. For clients and service providers alike, this means that approval processes and evidence documentation need to be settled contractually and organisationally before the first “climate neutral” caption goes online.

What can you still say from 27 September 2026, and what not without evidence?

The following overview doesn’t replace a case-by-case review, but it does show the direction every claim has to move in from 27 September 2026.

Allowed or banned: the quick check

The “climate neutral” row in the table above deserves one more nuance. If the claim refers to a single product, a statement based predominantly on offsetting is as a rule banned under the Directive. If the same claim refers to the company as a whole rather than a specific product, correctly presented offsetting shares are more likely to be permissible. (WKO) So “Our company offsets its remaining emissions” is something different from “this product is climate neutral”, even if both claims rest on the same numbers.

Which quality seals can you keep?

Labels established by public authorities remain valid regardless of the new Directive. They include the EU Ecolabel, the Austrian Ecolabel, the Blue Angel and the EU organic logo for food, as well as national or regional environmental labels under EN ISO 14024 Type I, which covers the Nordic Swan, for example. (tww.law, 23.9.2026) All other seals, the ones no public body awards, have to pass a four-point test. That means open access on transparent, fair terms for all companies, standards developed together with experts and stakeholders, a procedure for breaches that can go as far as withdrawing the seal, and independent third-party monitoring under recognised standards. According to its own statements, Fairtrade meets this test through the certification body FLOCERT, which is accredited under ISO 17065. (Fairtrade International) Before you keep using a seal that isn’t on this short list, check exactly these four points rather than simply worrying that the seal is automatically affected.

The background to the tightening is a 2020 European Commission study. It examined 344 environmental claims, found reason to believe that 42 per cent were false or misleading, and 37 per cent were simply too vague. (European Commission, 28 January 2021) A follow-up survey in 2023 came to even higher figures. 53.3 per cent of the claims examined were vague, misleading or unsubstantiated, and around 230 different environmental labels were in circulation across the EU at the time, many without independent verification. (European Commission, 22 March 2023) Yes, this was a problem even before the Directive. From now on, it’s one with real legal consequences.

27.9.2026 is when the EmpCo Directive applies in Austria, implemented through the UWG amendment · 53% of the environmental claims examined in the EU in 2023 were vague, misleading or unsubstantiated · 230 different environmental labels are currently in circulation across the EU, many of them unverified · 4% of annual turnover is the maximum fine for intentional, widespread breaches

Do you have to delete old social media posts and blog articles now?

Short answer? Don’t delete across the board, but do check and sharpen where needed. The three-year transition period many guides cite refers exclusively to products placed on the market before 27 September 2026, and for this existing stock civil claims are limited until 2029. (E+H Rechtsanwälte) This grace period does not apply to advertising claims themselves, meaning website copy, social media posts or newsletter wording. An Instagram post from 2024 that’s still online counts as ongoing advertising, so from 27 September 2026 it falls under the new rules just like a post published after that date.

In practice, this means a website and content audit isn’t a nice-to-have but the most obvious immediate step. At oha! digital we’re currently doing this for clients in three steps. We collect the instances (website, social media channels, newsletter archive, product packaging), rate the risk (blanket claim without any evidence versus specific but poorly documented claim), and then either sharpen them, add evidence or, in rare cases, actually remove them.

How do you make sure you don’t slip up?

1. Take stock across all channels. Website, social media, newsletter archive, packaging, press releases. Collect everything that contains environmental claims.

2. Assign every claim to a category. Evidenced and specific, provable but poorly documented, or blanket with no evidence at all.

3. Tackle category three straight away. Delete it, make it more precise or back it with a recognised seal such as the EU Ecolabel or the Austrian Ecolabel.

4. Secure your future promises. Only leave “climate neutral by 2030” up with a publicly accessible, externally verified implementation plan.

5. Introduce an approval process. From now on, every new environmental claim needs a source of evidence before it’s published.

6. Don’t decide individual cases on your own. If you’re legally unsure, bring in specialist advice. This doesn’t replace legal advice on your specific case, but it does give you confidence in your day-to-day content work.

This interplay of legal situation and content practice is exactly where we help at oha! digital in our Online Consulting. We’re not a law firm and we don’t replace legal advice on individual cases, but on complex questions we work closely with specialised partner law firms. So you have the key points to hand, we’ve put the complete checklist into a cheat sheet, free to download when you sign up to our newsletter.

Please note that this article offers a practical assessment based on publicly available sources and doesn’t replace legal advice on individual cases. For a binding assessment of your specific wording, we recommend legal advice or a law firm specialising in competition law.