Green claims update: July 2026

Welcome to our round-up of the key legal and regulatory developments relating to green claims. If you have any questions about this, or about wider ESG and sustainability regulatory developments, please get in touch.

For future updates, please subscribe here.

Key updates

CMA confirms green claims a continued focus area for enforcement

During a recent webinar, the CMA confirmed that misleading green claims continue to be a focus area for enforcement activity under the DMCCA, given they can undermine consumer trust and carry a risk of significant harm. In guidance, the CMA has indicated that consumers who are particularly concerned about the environment could be more susceptible to misleading green claims and therefore deemed to be "vulnerable consumers" under the DMCCA – potentially resulting in higher fines/penalties for brands found greenwashing to these consumers.

New ASA study finds green claims rare but often absolute

In its new Pulse Report: Environmental Claims in Ads, the ASA analysed over 7 million ads using its Active Ad Monitoring system to explore how green claims are being made in online advertising. The study found that green claims were made in just 1% of ads analysed indicating a wider trend for 'greenhushing'. However, of those claims that did appear, around three-quarters were framed in broad or absolute terms such as “eco-friendly”, “sustainable” or “carbon neutral”, indicating that regulatory risk is less about the number of green claims made and more about the specific framing and language of the claim.

Guidance on new EU green claims rules published

On 18 May, the European Commission published updated FAQs on the Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition Directive (ECGT). The update clarifies (amongst other things) that brand names, labels or trademarks with sustainability-related elements — such as “green”, or images of leaves or water drops — will only amount to environmental claims where the average consumer would interpret them as such. The FAQs are a useful steer on how the new EU rules apply in practice, particularly to implied environmental messaging in branding.

EU Commission takes action against Member States for failing to transpose the ECGT

The European Commission has announced action against 20 Member States, including France, Spain and the Netherlands, for failing to notify transposition measures for the Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition Directive by the 27 March deadline. The Directive, which applies from 27 September 2026, introduces new rules to strengthen the reliability and transparency of green claims and sustainability labels used in the EU. If full compliance is not achieved, the Commission could escalate the case to the CJEU.

ASA Rulings

Adidas, Calvin Klein and UNIQLO

The ASA has upheld complaints against Adidas, Calvin Klein and UNIQLO over unqualified environmental claims in paid search ads. The ASA found that claims such as “recycled”, “organic” and “responsibly sourced” were likely to be understood as meaning that the relevant products, ranges or collections were made entirely from relevant materials. The ASA rejected the companies' arguments that qualifying information was available on the relevant product pages and instead held that this was material information that must be made clear in the ad itself.

Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board (t/a AHDB) 

The ASA has partially upheld a complaint about AHDB "Let's Eat Balanced" press ads which claimed that British beef and milk had lower carbon footprints than the global average. The ads referred to “full lifecycle emissions”, but AHDB’s evidence was limited to cradle-to-retail emissions, thus the ASA found the claims to be misleading. The ruling is a useful reminder that green claims must be clearly framed and supported by evidence matching the precise scope, metrics and basis of comparison used in the ad.

Grind Coffee Roasters 

The ASA has upheld a complaint from Nestlé UK about Grind’s “our pods vs. their pods” ad which compared Grind and Nespresso coffee pods. The ASA found the ad misleading because, amongst other things, it compared different pod quantities, presented prices on an unclear “per month” basis, and included Nespresso Vertuo pods, which were not directly comparable with Grind pods. The ruling is a useful reminder that competitor comparisons must be genuinely like-for-like, clearly framed and properly substantiated — particularly where price and environmental claims sit side by side.

Sector updates and global developments

Apple wins US greenwashing case 

A US federal court has dismissed a class action challenging Apple’s “carbon neutral” claims for certain Apple Watch models. The claimants had alleged that Apple had failed to retire sufficient carbon credits to offset emissions linked to its watches, however the court held that the claimants' allegations had not been substantiated and they had failed to establish that Apple’s carbon-neutrality marketing was false or misleading.

California introduces new “Truth in Recycling” rules

As US federal approaches to ESG soften, green claims regulation is increasingly shifting to the state level. In California, a new "Truth in Recycling" rule (SB 343) will restrict the use of certain recyclability symbols on products and packaging manufactured after 4 October 2026 and sold in California, unless certain statutory criteria are met. To be labelled as recyclable, products/ packaging must (amongst other things) meet minimum recycling rates, not contain any components, inks, adhesives or labels that limit recyclability, and must not contain certain PFAS. Businesses selling products into the US, should review any recyclability labelling carefully to ensure compliance and manage fragmented state requirements.