Greenwashing ban: from 27.09.2026 a generic environmental claim without recognised excellent environmental performance is always misleading

Under the amendments to the Consumer Protection Act (tarbijakaitseseadus, TKS) in force since 27.09.2026, it is always misleading and prohibited to make „üldise keskkonnaväite esitamine, ilma et kaupleja suudaks näidata väite seisukohast olulist tunnustatud suurepärast keskkonnatoimet“ (translation: a generic environmental claim where the trader cannot demonstrate recognised excellent environmental performance relevant to the claim) (TKS § 16 lg 8 p 4¹) [1]. Claims based on greenhouse gas offsetting that a product has a neutral, reduced or positive impact on the environment are also prohibited [1].

What changes

• TKS § 2 lg 1 p 9 and 10 (new definitions): the previous list of terms ended with „järjestus“ (translation: ranking) and did not define an environmental claim [2]. Now an environmental claim is „sõnum või kujutis, mis ei ole kohustuslik ja millega jäetakse mulje, et toote, tootekategooria, tootemargi või kaupleja mõju keskkonnale on soodne või puudub“ (translation: a non-mandatory message or representation which suggests that a product, product category, brand or trader has a positive or zero impact on the environment) or is less damaging than others or has improved over time; a generic environmental claim is „keskkonnaväide, mida ei ole kestlikkusmärgisel ja mida ei ole väite esitamisel kasutatud meediumis selgelt ja hästi märgatavalt selgitatud“ (translation: an environmental claim not on a sustainability label and not clearly and prominently explained in the same medium) [3].
• According to the explanatory memorandum, generic environmental claims include, for example, „keskkonnasõbralik“ (environmentally friendly), „loodussäästlik“ (nature-friendly) and „kliimasõbralik“ (climate-friendly), whereas the claim „see kott on valmistatud 80% ulatuses taaskasutatud materjalist“ (translation: this bag is made of 80% recycled material) is not generic, because it clearly states what it is based on [4].
• TKS § 16 lg 8 (practices that are always misleading) now includes, among others: „sellise kestlikkusmärgise kasutamine, mis ei põhine sertifitseerimisskeemil või mida ei ole kehtestanud avaliku sektori asutus“ (translation: displaying a sustainability label not based on a certification scheme or not established by public authorities) (p 3¹); „keskkonnaväite esitamine kogu toote või kogu kaupleja ettevõtte kohta, kui see puudutab ainult toote konkreetset osa või ainult kaupleja ettevõtte konkreetset tegevust“ (translation: making an environmental claim about the entire product or the trader's entire business when it concerns only a certain aspect of the product or a specific activity of the business) (p 4²); „kasvuhoonegaaside heite kompenseerimise alusel esitatud väide, et kaubal on keskkonnale kasvuhoonegaaside heite poolest neutraalne, väiksem või positiivne mõju“ (translation: claiming, based on offsetting greenhouse gas emissions, that a product has a neutral, reduced or positive impact on the environment in terms of greenhouse gas emissions) (p 4³) [1].
• TKS § 16 lg 4 p 4 and 5: a claim about future environmental performance can also be misleading if it is not backed by clear and verifiable commitments in an implementation plan that „kontrollib regulaarselt sõltumatu kolmandast isikust ekspert“ (translation: is regularly verified by an independent third-party expert), and so can „tarbijale sellise kasu reklaamimine, mis ei ole asjakohane ega tulene kauba või ettevõtte omadusest“ (translation: advertising benefits to consumers that are irrelevant and do not result from any feature of the product or business) [1]. In the memorandum's example, a claim such as „meie ettevõte saavutab aastaks 2030 CO2-neutraalsuse“ (translation: our company will achieve CO2 neutrality by 2030) must be backed by an implementation plan verified by an independent expert, and an irrelevant benefit is, for example, a claim that a producer's bottled water is gluten-free [5].
• TKS § 77² (transition): for goods and packaging produced before 27.09.2026, the producer or trader may, to comply with the requirements, use „ühe aasta jooksul alates 2026. aasta 27. septembrist selgelt arusaadavat ja tarbijale üheselt mõistetavat parandusmärget, tingimusel et see ei ole eksitav“ (translation: for one year from 27 September 2026 a correction mark that is clearly understandable and unambiguous for the consumer, provided it is not misleading) [6].

Who is affected

Traders and producers using environmental claims, sustainability labels or carbon-neutrality claims in marketing to consumers [1] [3], and consumers, whom these provisions protect against misleading information [1].

What to do

1. Review packaging, advertising and websites: a generic environmental claim is allowed only if you can demonstrate recognised excellent environmental performance [1]; a specific claim explained in the same medium is not a generic environmental claim [3] [4].
2. Drop claims that a product is climate-neutral or has a reduced impact because of offsetting [1].
3. Use only sustainability labels based on a certification scheme or established by public authorities [1].
4. For goods and packaging produced before 27.09.2026, consider a correction mark, which may be used for one year [6].