Become a Vogue Business Member to receive unlimited access to Member-only reporting and insights, our Beauty and TikTok Trend Trackers, Member-only newsletters and exclusive event invitations.
For several years now, the European Union (EU) has stuck to the party line that greenwashing is rife and needs to be stamped out. Its own research found that 53 per cent of green claims give vague, misleading or unfounded information; 40 per cent of claims have no supporting evidence; and 50 per cent of all green labels offer weak or non-existent verification.
Its solution, the long-awaited Green Claims Directive, was due to be finalised in the coming weeks. The directive called for green claims to be specific, proven with scientific evidence, checked by independent accredited verifiers, and communicated to consumers in a clear way, all of which required significant paperwork and auditing. Many fashion businesses had already started working in line with it, keen to get ahead and avoid broader crackdowns on greenwashing from consumer market authorities. But on Friday, the European Commission caused a stir when it withdrew its support for the directive at the eleventh hour.
In a press briefing on Monday morning, the Commission’s chief spokesperson Paula Pinho clarified its position, following a weekend of confusion. “One of the priorities of this Commission is to reduce the administrative burden for small companies, and, in particular, for microenterprises. This is an essential part of our simplification agenda,” she said, pointing to similar rollbacks on sustainability reporting and due diligence made under the EU Omnibus Simplification Package earlier this year.
The European Union’s new Omnibus Simplification Package has divided the fashion industry. Is the drive for simplicity and competitiveness undermining sustainability?
The Green Claims Directive, she continued, was subject to a proposed amendment, which would apply the rules to around 30 million microenterprises, together comprising around 96 per cent of all EU companies. According to the Commission, the administrative burden required to comply with the directive would undermine the competitiveness of these businesses, and competitiveness is now the Commission’s main priority, following a swing to the right after the June 2024 European Parliament elections. Unless the proposed amendment is removed, the Commission plans to withdraw its support for the Green Claims Directive entirely, Pinho was careful to emphasise. This would stop the directive in its tracks. “If the amendment is revoked, then we can reconsider our suggestion to withdraw,” she explained.
The decision essentially now lies with the Commission’s co-legislators, the European Council and the European Parliament, applying pressure for them to comply with the Commission’s demands. Over the weekend, several media outlets claimed that the co-legislators seemed blindsided by the Commission’s position. Pinho refuted this. “In the meetings between the institutions, which are obviously not public, this position has been made very clear to both the European Parliament and the Council,” she said. “It is not a surprise to our colleagues.” Pinho confirmed that the trilogue planned for Monday — where all three co-legislators were due to implement the directive — would no longer go ahead.
A climate of confusion
The Commission says it remains steadfastly committed to cracking down on greenwashing, but will do so via other avenues, including the framework for empowering consumers for the green transition, which entered into force in March 2024. The framework forbids companies from claiming to be ‘green’ or ‘environmentally friendly’ if they cannot prove this is true. It also stops them from displaying ‘unreliable’ voluntary sustainability certifications and tries to limit commercial practices linked to ‘early obsolescence’ (where companies design products with deliberately shortened lifespans).
However, proponents of the Green Claims Directive argue that it would harmonise the rules in a more actionable and enforceable way across European jurisdictions. The consequences for non-compliance with the directive could range from fines and the removal of products to adjustments in product positioning, depending on the scale of violations. Many observers remarked on the potential for inconsistent enforcement and confusion of existing greenwashing rules, should the directive be scrapped entirely.
Earlier this month, at the Global Fashion Summit in Copenhagen, Ganni’s chief sustainability officer Lauren Bartley captured the mood among fashion brands, many of which are greenhushing rather than risking greenwashing accusations if they get things wrong. Speaking on a panel discussion about consumer engagement, titled ‘Who Cares?’, Bartley said the brand was one of many struggling to get its green claims right amid heightened scrutiny and potential greenwashing fines.
In response to the news of the European Commission withdrawing its support, Bartley says the lack of clarity makes things even harder to navigate. “If the Green Claims Directive is pulled back, it only adds to the confusion brands are already facing,” she tells Vogue Business. “We’re being asked to communicate sustainability with more accuracy and accountability — which is absolutely right — but without clear, consistent frameworks, it becomes a minefield. The intention to do the right thing is there, but brands are increasingly hesitant to say anything at all for fear of getting it wrong and confusing the customer. And that doesn’t move us or the industry forward. Clear guidance gives people the confidence to communicate honestly, and that’s what builds trust.”
This was echoed by Harriet Vocking, founder of strategic communications agency For Tomorrow, which specialises in greenwashing advice for fashion brands. “Clarity will help competitiveness, and not having clarity harms it,” she says. “Many businesses are desperate for clear, enforceable standards to level the playing field. The current patchwork of voluntary claims and certifications creates confusion and opens the door for bad actors to outcompete responsible businesses. If anything, the absence of regulatory guidance undermines trust and creates friction for companies genuinely trying to do the right thing.”
The Commission’s new stance is a blow to green claims, but the regulatory rollback on sustainability it feeds into is even more troubling, says Elisabeth von Reitzenstein, senior director of public affairs at global non-profit alliance Cascale. “We’re seeing a troubling shift away from progressive climate action in markets that once set the pace. While not perfect, the Green Claims Directive would have marked an important leap forward. We urge the Commission [...] not to halt the negotiations.”
When the interinstitutional conversation on the directive will continue is unclear. Right now, the ball is back in the court of the co-legislators, but there is potential for businesses to influence how the process evolves, says Vocking. “The EU is at a crossroads. It can either be swayed by the big agents with the money to employ the best lobbyists, or it can decide to be brave and embrace the Green Claims Directive, putting the planet over profit,” she continues. “In an ideal world, the fashion industry would align and brands would work collaboratively to propose improvements to the directive, rather than staying silent or lobbying for its demise behind closed doors. This would be the biggest achievement and enable real progress.”
Comments, questions or feedback? Email us at feedback@voguebusiness.com.
