The EmpCo Directive and Food Sustainability Claims

1. Executive Summary

2. What EmpCo Is and When It Applies

3. Why Using a Carbon Label Matters

4. Klimato's Labels and How They Are Affected

5. The Certification Framework

6. What Traders Should Do

7. Conclusion

8. References

1. Executive Summary

From 27 September 2026, vague environmental claims like “sustainable” or “eco-friendly” will be prohibited across the EU due to the Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition Directive (EmpCo). To keep using an environmental label, a company will need to back it with a certified, third-party scheme. This chapter explains what that means for companies, in five parts: why it matters, how the scheme works, what you as a trader actually need to do, how the scheme keeps things low-cost and low-effort, and where to go for the full detail.

Why it matters

EmpCo changes the rules. It will clear out unsubstantiated claims that have crowded the market for years—and that is good news for operators who are already doing the work. Having a certified environmental label becomes a real competitive advantage: fewer labels and the ones that stay can be trusted. Moreover, carbon labeling is one of the most evidence-based tools available for shifting consumer choices toward lower-carbon options.

Klimato solution

Klimato and the European Sustainable Food Coalition (ESFC) are building the third-party certification scheme that will make EmpCo compliance practical for food and beverage operators. ESFC is a multi-stakeholder coalition and Klimato is an active member, co-creating the scheme alongside ESFC and industry peers.

Klimato's approach through ESFC is designed to keep your costs and effort low. The alternative for any operator would be to build and govern a third-party scheme independently.

How the scheme works: four actors, one rulebook

• ESFC: scheme owner. Writes and maintains the rulebook, sets certification requirements, appoints and oversees independent certifiers, and runs the public verification registry.
• Klimato: methodology owner. Produces the carbon calculations, methodology, and evidence system behind every claim, and is itself certified by the independent certifier—the foundation that makes traders certification possible.
• You, the trader: claim owner. The retailer, brand, or food service operator making the claim. You use Klimato's certified pathway and are responsible for correct display, evidence availability, and compliance with the scheme rules.
• Independent certifier. Legally separate from both ESFC and you. Reviews and certifies both Klimato's system and your use of the claim, using sample-based checks rather than reviewing every item.

A simple compliance process

What you, as a trader, need to do:

• Sign Klimato's EmpCo terms and conditions.
• Pay the compliance fee.
• Appoint a contact person, available for occasional questions—only if you are selected for sampling, which happens at most once a year.
• Follow the updated labeling and communication guidelines: include the provided QR code in the label text, avoid misleading terms (for example “environmentally friendly”), and use Klimato's communication material.

What happens next: Klimato, ESFC, and the certification body register you to the scheme, and the process is finalized. From there, you are responsible for following the terms and conditions, and Klimato actively monitors claim use and addresses misuse if it occurs.

How the scheme stays low-cost and low-effort

Collective Assurance and sampling. As a food service operator, you are listed in an aggregated way on the ESFC public portal under Klimato, rather than individually. You are subject to sampling at the next annual review and no audit is needed before you start using the label. If you are selected, you may need to provide claim-display evidence and recipe information for a limited number of recipes.

Optional individual public listing. If you would rather have your own named entry (business name, city, provider link, and status) instead of the aggregate-only listing, you can opt into that. It is consent-based and does not change your compliance process. It is a visibility choice and carries an extra administrative fee paid to the certification body.

This was the essential picture. The rest of this document covers the same topics in full regulatory and scientific depth: the underlying EU directive, the certification framework in detail, etc. Read on if you want to go deeper, share this with legal or compliance colleagues, or simply want the full picture before deciding how to proceed.

Directive (EU) 2024/825, the Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition Directive, commonly referred to as EmpCo, amends two existing EU directives: the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (2005/29/EC) and the Consumer Rights Directive (2011/83/EU). It was adopted on 28 February 2024, had to be transposed into national law by 27 March 2026, and applies to all consumer-facing commercial communications from 27 September 2026. There is no transition period beyond this date.

EmpCo is not a new regulatory framework; it tightens existing rules. Its target is greenwashing: the use of vague, unverifiable, or misleading environmental claims in consumer communication.

The directive operates through two mechanisms. The first is a blacklist in Annex I, a set of commercial practices prohibited under all circumstances, with no defense possible and no need for authorities to demonstrate harm to an individual consumer. If a practice appears on this list, it is illegal.

The second is a set of case-by-case provisions in Articles 6 and 7. Article 6 covers misleading actions, for example presenting a partial environmental benefit as if it applied to the whole product, or using imagery and colors that imply environmental performance the product does not have. Article 7 covers misleading omissions, for example failing to disclose the scope of a carbon claim, or not making the methodology behind a label accessible.

For these provisions, regulators must demonstrate that the claim would likely cause an average consumer to make a purchasing decision they would not otherwise have made. The risk sits in the label surrounding communication: the framing, the imagery, and any language that implies a broader environmental benefit than the label actually substantiates. However, where a label is backed by a science-based methodology, the claim scope is clear (for example, that it refers specifically to climate impact), and the surrounding communication is the wording provided by the label's own experts and developers, companies should not fear falling out of compliance.

Specific, factual, substantiated claims are explicitly permitted under EmpCo. A carbon footprint value expressed in kg CO₂e, calculated using a documented and independently reviewed methodology, clearly scoped, and not implying a comparative benefit it cannot substantiate, is a factual disclosure and does not typically qualify as a generic environmental claim under the directive's definition. This is distinct from vague sustainability language, which the directive targets.

What a Compliant Certification Scheme Requires

For a sustainability label to be compliant under EmpCo, it must be based on a certification scheme that meets four conditions established in the directive:

• The scheme's terms and requirements are publicly available.
• The scheme is open to all traders under transparent, fair, and non-discriminatory conditions.
• The scheme's requirements were developed in consultation with relevant experts and stakeholders.
• Compliance is monitored by an objective procedure carried out by a third party whose independence from both the scheme owner and the trader is based on international, EU, or national standards.

Section 4 covers the scheme in full detail.

Penalties

Non-compliance carries significant financial consequences. Article 13 of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (2005/29/EC), as amended by Directive (EU) 2019/2161, requires member states to be able to impose fines of at least 4% of a trader's annual turnover in the member state or states concerned, or at least €2 million where turnover cannot be determined, for widespread infringements coordinated under the Consumer Protection Cooperation Regulation (EU) 2017/2394. This penalty regime predates EmpCo and is unchanged by it; EmpCo's own contribution is the new unfair-practice categories and disclosure duties it adds to the same directive, enforced through this existing framework. The 4%/€2 million figure is a floor for the maximum fine each member state's law must allow, not a fixed penalty for every infringement, so the amount actually imposed varies case by case and by country. Enforcement sits with national competent authorities, and member states can set higher ceilings under their own law. For operators with a multi-country presence, turnover is calculated in the member state or states where the infringement occurred, so exposure differs by market.

Geographic Scope

EmpCo is EU law, and it applies based on where the customer is, not where the company is based: any trader marketing to EU consumers has to follow it, regardless of home country.

It is also expected to extend to the EEA (European Economic Area), the wider trade zone linking the EU with Norway, Iceland, and Liechtenstein. Norway is on track for the same 27 September 2026 date as the EU, having passed its own national law independently, ahead of the separate EU-EEA decision that would formally fold the directive into the EEA Agreement for all three EEA countries, and which is still pending (Iceland and Liechtenstein, by contrast, have no confirmed law or timeline of their own yet).

In the United Kingdom, EmpCo does not apply to claims aimed only at UK consumers, since the UK is outside the EU, but a UK company that also sells into the EU still has to follow EmpCo for that EU-facing marketing. Domestically, the UK has its own green-claims regime, with the Competition and Markets Authority now able to fine companies directly up to 10% of global turnover or £300,000, whichever is higher. Even though UK-only companies do not need EmpCo certification, we recommend they follow the same communication guidance as EU clients, since it is built for full transparency and backed by a verified methodology.

3. Why Using a Carbon Label Matters

Some operators wonder whether removing their carbon label lowers regulatory risk. It does the opposite. It strips out a transparency tool that EmpCo is built to protect, and it removes evidence that buyers increasingly ask for. The label is an asset.

Carbon labeling is one of the most evidence-based ways to lower the climate impact of food. WRI's Food Service Playbook for Promoting Sustainable Food Choices, drawing on close to 350 academic trials, ranks labeling among the most effective tools for shifting people toward lower-carbon choices. A carbon label on a menu gives people information they act on, so it actively helps cut emissions.

There is little trust in sustainability labels today, because almost anyone can claim almost anything. EmpCo changes that. A Klimato label sits on top of an independently reviewed methodology, so a customer sees proof rather than a slogan, and the steps a business takes to cut emissions become visible and verifiable.

The market is moving toward more disclosure, not less. Corporate clients, hotel groups, catering tenders, and procurement teams increasingly ask food suppliers for Scope 3 data and lower-carbon options. A Klimato label, backed by an independently reviewed methodology, is audit-ready evidence: the substantiation these buyers ask for, already in hand.

For operators not yet using a label, the same logic applies. As generic claims phase out, a specific, verified carbon label is the form of environmental communication that still stands.

4. Klimato's Labels and How They Are Affected

Klimato offers two label types. They differ in what they communicate, and therefore in how EmpCo applies to them.

Product Carbon Footprint (PCF) Label

Because it simply states a specific, quantified, methodology-backed carbon value, with no rating scale and no comparative claim, the PCF label reads as a factual disclosure rather than a sustainability claim. That is precisely why its EmpCo exposure is limited: it doesn't make the kind of environmental judgment that EmpCo regulates, it just discloses a number. This is different from the menu carbon label below, which pairs the same kind of factual value with an A–E rating and color coding, and for that reason sits more directly in scope.

Menu Carbon Labels (A–E Rating)

The menu carbon label is used by food service operators to display the climate impact of individual dishes. It provides two data points: the absolute carbon footprint per serving or 100g in kg CO₂e, and a rating from A to E based on a normalized standard 400g portion (Willett et al., 2019).

The thresholds are science-based. The A and B thresholds come from the remaining carbon budget available to the food system to meet the Paris Agreement goals for 2050, with an interim goal in 2030 (Waite et al., 2020). The C, D, and E thresholds correspond to a potential overshoot of those limits, calculated using the TCRE metric, Transient Climate Response to Cumulative Carbon Emissions (Rogelj et al., 2019).

Because of its A–E rating and color coding, the label sits directly in scope for EmpCo's certification requirements. That is why traders using Klimato's menu carbon labels need to comply with EmpCo. The sections that follow walk through exactly how that process works.

5. The Certification Framework

The European Sustainable Food Coalition (ESFC) is a multi-stakeholder coalition working to accelerate credible, comparable, and accurate product-level impact assessments in the European food and beverage sector.

ESFC developed an EmpCo compliant Certification Scheme as set out by the Directive. This certification verifies compliance of product-level impact claims, including claims at the dish level.

Klimato, as an active member of the coalition, contributes directly to the scheme and this gives Klimato direct visibility into, and input on, the rules as they take shape.

The certification framework involves four parties, each with a clear job:

• Scheme owner: ESFC owns and runs the scheme. It writes and maintains the rulebook, sets the requirements every certified method must meet, runs the public register, manages how the scheme changes over time, and appoints the Conformity Assessment Bodies.
• Technology provider: The service provider, like Klimato, produces the carbon calculations, runs and maintains the system behind them, generates the evidence files, and helps traders meet the scheme's requirements.
• Trader: the retailer, brand, or food service operator that owns the claim shown to consumers and is accountable for it. The trader uses Klimato's certified method to back the claim, and is responsible for displaying it correctly, keeping evidence available, running internal checks, updating it when recipes change, and giving a point of contact for complaints.
• Conformity Assessment Body: an outside body that checks and signs off both Klimato's system and the trader's use of the claim. It holds accreditation under EU Regulation (EC) No 765/2008. It is legally separate from both ESFC and the trader.

The scheme does not tie everyone to one calculation method or one provider. Every technology provider clears a two-layer normative floor. Layer 1 requires demonstrated alignment with ISO 14067. Layer 2 covers everything a provider does beyond those frameworks: database choices, characterization factors, gap-filling logic, functional unit, primary-data workflows, and label derivation.

Provider Certification (Klimato’s Responsibility)

Provider certification assesses whether Klimato, as the tool provider, can generate robust and traceable evidence for a defined claim scope. It covers the methodology, database, and data sources; the calculation process and system boundaries; how missing or uncertain data is handled; and version control, audit trails, and evidence file structure.

This is Klimato's certification to hold. Once Klimato holds it, it creates a validated, auditable foundation for every trader claim, so the trader's certification process does not need to re-examine the underlying science. Initial certification runs on a three-year cycle, with an annual surveillance audit each year in between. A material change to the methodology triggers a targeted change audit before the change goes into live claims, on top of the regular cycle.

Klimato already holds several third-party reviews. Its database and label methodology has been reviewed by WRI, the organization behind the GHG Protocol and Science Based Targets. Bureau Veritas also reviewed the Klimato Database as part of the PCF methodology. These existing reviews are recognized against ESFC's Layer 1 and Layer 2 criteria, shortening Klimato's certification process rather than starting from scratch.

Trader Certification (Operator's Responsibility)

Trader certification assesses whether the operator uses the certified methodology correctly in consumer-facing communication. It covers how the claim is worded and displayed; what disclosures reach consumers; internal processes for approving, updating, and correcting claims; complaint handling.

This is the operator's certification to hold, but not to navigate alone. Klimato helps prepare documentation, connects the operator with the Conformity Assessment Body, and streamlines the review. The scheme uses a sample-based approach: the certifier reviews a representative sample of PCFs or recipes, not every individual item, which keeps the process scalable.

Trader certification runs on two Assurance levels, Individual and Collective, named for how a trader is contractually bound rather than for how rigorously a claim is checked.

Most Klimato food service clients fall under Collective Assurance, the lighter of the two routes.

Self-Managed and Hybrid Pathways

Two further routes sit alongside Klimato's standard certified pathway. A Self-Managed Pathway lets a trader with existing in-house life-cycle-assessment capability certify directly with a Conformity Assessment Body instead of using a commercial technology provider, provided its own methodology clears the same Layer 1 and Layer 2 floor; this fits larger F&B companies with established internal LCA teams rather than most food service operators, who are better served by Klimato's certified pathway.

A Hybrid Provider-Trader Pathway lets a trader run its own branded label on top of Klimato's certified methodology, with some bespoke elements of its own, reviewing only the trader-specific elements rather than repeating the Layer 1 and Layer 2 review Klimato has already completed for the shared elements.

Cost

Costs have not been defined yet, as discussions with the Conformity Assessment Body are still ongoing. Within the Collective Assurance pathway, Klimato is the trader's only point of invoicing: the trader pays Klimato, and Klimato settles the corresponding fees with ESFC and the Conformity Assessment Body directly. This keeps things simple for the trader, with one invoice instead of several.

We expect the overall cost to stay reasonable, largely because of how the scheme is designed. Traders are sampled for audit once a year, not every year for every claim, and within that audit only a sample of the full recipe list is reviewed, not every recipe. Both design choices are built to keep the certification process lean, and the cost with it.

6. What Traders Should Do

A prioritized action list for food service operators, brands, caterers, and retailers using Klimato's labels.

Whether you're proactive or reactive, don't worry: you can start the process whenever it suits you best. Just remember that EmpCo is EU law, and it doesn't wait for traders or providers to be ready. It takes effect regardless, so it's on all of us, together, to be ready in time.

For operators considering labels for the first time, now is the moment to act. Operators who start now shape their internal processes before requirements harden, rather than retrofitting later. For them, everything is included from the start: the signed contract already contains the T&Cs, and the communication material provided is EmpCo-compliant from day one.

7. Conclusion

From September 2026, the claims that survive are the ones that can be substantiated: specific, scoped, independently verified, and backed by evidence available on demand. Everything else is either withdrawn or at risk of a penalty of at least 4% of annual turnover. For operators using Klimato's labels, this is a structural advantage over those who are not.

The legal responsibility sits with the trader. What changes under EmpCo is that the standard of proof is now explicit, the penalties are defined, and the bar is the same for everyone. Klimato's role is to make sure that when that bar arrives, traders are already above it, with a methodology that has been independently reviewed, evidence structured for audit, and a certification pathway designed to be as streamlined as possible.

In practice, that means very little work on your side. Traders sign a terms and conditions document that binds them to the scheme, and pay a single, reasonable fee to Klimato, who redirects the relevant share to the Conformity Assessment Body and ESFC. Traders update their communication material and add the QR code to the menu, using text that Klimato provides and checks against EmpCo compliance. Finally, traders stay available to provide evidence of their claims if requested. That is the whole list. Klimato handles the rest.

8. References

1.     Directive (EU) 2024/825 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 February 2024 on empowering consumers for the green transition. Official Journal of the European Union.
2.     European Sustainable Food Coalition (ESFC). ESFC approach to an EmpCo-compliant certification scheme for food and beverage environmental claims. Proposal v0.2, April 2026.
3.     Klimato. Product Carbon Footprint Methodology and Database Methodology. Version current as of May 2026. klimato.com/science-and-data.
4.     Bureau Veritas Solutions Denmark A/S. Critical Review—Klimato AB CF Calculation System and Methodology. Ref: Critical Review_Klimato AB_CF Calculation System and Methodology_20250811. Valid through August 2027.
5.     World Resources Institute (WRI)/Coolfood. Coolfood's Alignment with Greenhouse Gas Protocol and Science Based Targets Initiative. coolfood.org.
6.     Pollicino, D., Blondin, S., and Attwood, S. (2024). The Food Service Playbook for Promoting Sustainable Food Choices. World Resources Institute.
7.     Waite, R., and Blondin, S. (2020). Identifying Cool Food Meals. World Resources Institute.
8.     Willett, W. et al. (2019). Food in the Anthropocene: The EAT–Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems. The Lancet, 393(10170), 447–492.
9.     ISO 14067:2018. Greenhouse gases—Carbon footprint of products—Requirements and guidelines for quantification. International Organization for Standardization.
10.  GHG Protocol / WRI & WBCSD. Product Life Cycle Accounting and Reporting Standard. 2011.
11.   European Free Trade Association (EFTA). EEA-Lex 32024L0825 (status of EEA incorporation). efta.int.
12.   UK Competition and Markets Authority. Green Claims Code (2021) and Making green claims: getting it right across the supply chain (January 2026); Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024.