EmpCo and Carbon Labels: What Food Operators Need to Know

1. Executive Summary
2. What EmpCo Is and When It Applies
3. Klimato's Labels and How They Are Affected
4. The Certification Framework
5. What Traders Should Do
6. Why Using a Carbon Label Matters
7. Conclusion
8. References

1. Executive Summary

From 27 September 2026, Directive (EU) 2024/825—the Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition Directive, or EmpCo will prohibit vague, unsubstantiated environmental claims—'sustainable', 'eco-friendly'—across all consumer-facing communication. The Directive will also apply to carbon labels that are not based on a third-party certification scheme, or that are misleading — for example, where the environmental dimension the label covers is not clearly disclosed to consumers.

Under EmpCo, the burden of proof lies with the trader. National authorities can require substantiation of any environmental claim at any time, and non-compliance carries a minimum penalty of 4% of annual turnover per affected member state. There is no transition period.

Klimato embraces this directive as it will remove greenwashing and will make the market a fairer place. Only companies that have taken the right steps towards compliance will be able to make claims and the claims made will be substantiated, grounded in science and real evidence. Companies will stand out and consumers' trust will increase.

Klimato is working with ESFC (European Sustainable Food Coalition) to build the compliance pathway required. ESFC is a multi-stakeholder coalition working to accelerate credible, comparable, and accurate product-level impact assessments in the European food and beverage sector. The ESFC will develop the scheme that will make EmpCo compliance practical for operators.

The scheme involves four parties: ESFC as scheme owner; the technology provider (Klimato or similar), responsible for certifying the methodology and calculations; the trader, the company making the claim and responsible for how it is communicated; and an independent certification body, responsible for reviewing both the methodology and the trader’s claim use. Trader certification now comes in two forms—individual and collective—depending on the type of claim made.

The scheme is not yet finalized and costs are not yet confirmed. A pilot is expected to begin in late summer, around August 2026, and clients can express interest by mid-July 2026. A dedicated pilot guidance document is expected by the end of June, which will clarify how the pilot will work in practice.

Until then, the action is simple: keep the label in place, review any generic sustainability language in surrounding communication and collect it so it is easily available for review, and make sure Klimato has current contact details so we can reach out with practical information.

For operators not yet using a carbon label, this is the right moment to start. EmpCo is eliminating the noise—the vague claims that have crowded the sustainability space for years. What remains after September 2026 is verified, specific, and defensible.

2. What EmpCo Is and When It Applies

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, 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 but a tightening of 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 that are prohibited under all circumstances, with no defence possible and no need for the authorities to demonstrate the practice has not led to any harm to an individual consumer. If a practice appears on this list, it is illegal.

Prohibited practice	Example
Generic environmental claims without substantiation	Claims such as 'eco-friendly', 'green', 'sustainable', or 'environmentally responsible'—without specifying the substantiated environmental characteristic the claim refers to, in clear and prominent terms on the same medium
Offset-based claims based solely on carbon offsetting	Claiming a product has a neutral, reduced, or positive impact on greenhouse gas emissions based solely on carbon offsetting
Sustainability labels without a certified scheme	Any logo, badge, or label implying sustainability performance not backed by a publicly available, independently verified certification scheme
Unverifiable forward-looking claims	Claims about future environmental performance not backed by a concrete, verifiable plan with measurable interim targets and independent verification

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 in question would be likely to cause an average consumer to make a purchasing decision they would not otherwise have made. In practice, for food service operators: the carbon label value itself is unlikely to trigger either mechanism, provided the label is certified and the scope is clearly disclosed. The risk sits in the surrounding communication—the framing, the imagery, and any language that implies a broader environmental benefit than the label actually substantiates.

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 would 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 must be publicly available
The scheme must be open to all traders under transparent, fair, and non-discriminatory conditions
The scheme's requirements must have been developed in consultation with relevant experts and stakeholders
Compliance must be 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.

See more details on the scheme in section 4.

Penalties

Non-compliance carries real financial consequences. The fines do not come from EmpCo itself but from the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive it amends. For cross-border cases—where authorities in several countries act together—the fine can reach 4% of the trader's annual turnover across the markets concerned, or €2 million where turnover cannot be established. The 4% is a ceiling, applied case by case, not a flat charge, and member states can set higher limits in national law. Purely national breaches follow each country's own rules. The exposure is real, and it grows with the number of markets an operator sells into.

Geographic scope

EmpCo is EU law, but its reach extends beyond EU borders in two ways. It applies to any trader marketing to EU consumers, wherever that trader is based. And it is marked ‘Text with EEA relevance’, meaning it is intended to extend to the wider European Economic Area—the EEA links Norway, Iceland, and Liechtenstein to much of the EU single market without their being EU members.

Norway. EmpCo is intended to apply in Norway through the EEA Agreement, but it is not yet formally in force there. Incorporation requires a decision by the EEA Joint Committee; as of mid-2026 a draft decision was still under consideration, so the directive is not yet formally in force there, but we believe it will be enforced soon. The practical position: Norwegian operators should treat EmpCo-equivalent requirements as coming, monitor EEA Joint Committee decisions at efta.int, and not assume they are outside scope. Klimato’s recommendation is to prepare on the same trajectory as EU clients.

United Kingdom. EmpCo does not apply to claims made solely to UK consumers—the UK left the EU before the directive was adopted and is not required to implement it. However, a UK operator that markets into the EU (for example a hotel group with EU properties, or a brand distributed across Europe) must comply with EmpCo for those EU-market communications. Domestically, the UK is tightening its own regime: the Competition and Markets Authority’s Green Claims Code, supplemented by January 2026 guidance on green claims across supply chains, now backed by the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024, under which the CMA can impose fines of up to 10% of global turnover. The direction of travel is the same on both sides of the Channel—operators selling across both markets should treat green claims as a single cross-border compliance question.

3. Klimato's Labels and How They Are Affected

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

Product Carbon Footprint (PCF) label

The PCF label displays the absolute carbon footprint of a product in kg CO₂e per kg of edible product. It carries no rating scale and makes no comparative claim. It includes: the carbon footprint value; the functional unit (per kg of product); the system boundary (cradle to distribution); and a link to the publicly available methodology.

Because it communicates a specific, quantified, methodology-backed value, it is closer in nature to a factual disclosure than to a sustainability claim. Its EmpCo exposure is correspondingly limited.

Menu Carbon Label (A–E Rating)

The menu 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 in kg CO₂e, and a rating from A to E based on carbon intensity normalised to a standard 400g portion (Willett, W. et al. (2019)).

Thresholds are science-based. The A and B thresholds have been calculated from the remaining carbon budget available to the food system if we were 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 overshooting of those limits, calculated using the TCRE metric (Transient Climate Response to Cumulative Carbon Emissions (Rogelj et al., 2019)). Here is the full methodology.

For labels to be certified, being scientifically grounded is necessary but not sufficient on its own.

The claim scope must be stated clearly on the same medium as the label itself, for example 'climate impact' or 'climate score'.
The label must make clear what environmental dimension it covers so the average consumer is not misled about its scope. More detailed technical information such as system boundaries can be made accessible via QR code.
The label must not visually or textually imply a broader sustainability judgment than the underlying data supports, so color coding, scores, or grades need careful design to avoid implying overall product superiority.
A QR code or equivalent link to publicly accessible methodology and verification information is required to meet the transparency and public availability requirements.
Claim wording rules need to be defined to specify what is permitted and what is not alongside the label.
Update and change management rules will apply, so if the methodology changes, the label must be updated within a defined timeframe.

While some of these requirements are already fulfilled by Klimato’s menu carbon labels, the A–E rating and color coding place the label more directly in scope for EmpCo’s certification requirements than the PCF label. In practice, the label may need to show ‘Carbon Footprint’ or similar wording, and the A–E thresholds will need third-party review—so operators may need to update the label design on their menus.

4. 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.

One of ESFC’s 2026 priorities is to develop a European F&B Impact Certification Scheme as set out by the EmpCo Directive. This certification will verify compliance of product-level impact claims.

Klimato, being an active member of the coalition, is contributing to the definition of the certification scheme. We believe that it is the best way to move forward. In fact, the scheme needs to include public availability of terms and requirements, must be open to all traders, needs to have non-compliance procedures, and involve a third-party monitoring process by a competent and independent body. It would be hard for Klimato alone to do all of that. ESFC provides the environment that allows Klimato to focus on science based methodologies development and carbon reduction, while leaving the governance part to the ESFC.

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

ESFC (scheme owner): ESFC owns and runs the scheme. It writes and maintains the rulebook, sets the requirements every certified method has to meet, runs the public register, manages how the scheme changes over time, and appoints the independent certification bodies. It does not certify anyone itself. It also decides what makes a certification body eligible—independence, competence, and accreditation—and keeps the list of approved bodies. Complaints about the scheme are handled by ESFC.
Technology provider (Klimato): the trader’s service provider. 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 the evidence available, running internal checks, updating it when recipes change, and giving a point of contact for complaints.
Independent certifier: an outside body that checks and signs off both Klimato’s system and the trader’s use of the claim. It must be legally separate from both ESFC and the trader. It runs the provider-level and trader-level checks, reviews samples rather than every item, and reports anything that does not comply.

The scheme does not tie everyone to one calculation method or one provider. Instead it sets a common baseline that any approved method must clear—alignment with the GHG Protocol and ISO 14067, and ISO 14044 where a full life-cycle assessment is used—plus an independent scientific check of anything a method does beyond those standards. Klimato’s method already meets much of this and is well placed to be approved as a recognized method, though some additional review is still needed to complete it.

The diagram below shows how ESFC, Klimato, the independent certifier, and the trader relate to each other within the scheme.

Klimato and the trader both have direct relationships with the independent certifier, but different ones. Klimato's certification covers the methodology and evidence system. The trader's certification covers the use of the claim. Neither substitutes for the other, but Klimato's certification is the foundation that makes the trader's certification feasible.

Within the ESFC framework, certification operates at two levels. Understanding the distinction clarifies what Klimato is doing on the trader's behalf, and what the trader will need to do.

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
Version control, audit trails, and evidence file structure

This is Klimato's certification to obtain. When Klimato holds provider-level certification, it creates a validated, auditable foundation for every trader claim—so that the trader's certification process does not need to re-examine the underlying science.

In practice, what the certifier verifies is the data flow—raw input, calculation steps, output result—checked against a sample of real cases. This means a provider that already holds a rigorous independent review against a recognised methodology can have the certifier trace the data flow against existing documentation, shortening the process materially rather than starting from scratch.

Klimato already holds several third-party reviews. Its database and label methodology is reviewed by WRI and its Coolfood Initiative. WRI is the organisation behind the GHG Protocol and Science Based Targets. The PCF methodology, instead, is third party reviewed by Bureau Veritas.

Does an existing verification like Klimato's Bureau Veritas review carry any weight in the ESFC certification process?

"Existing verifications are very much on our radar and we expect them to carry weight. To be precise about what that means in practice: what a certification body verifies is not the tool as software, but the data flow—raw input, calculation steps, output result—checked against real cases. If a provider has already undergone a rigorous independent review against a recognized methodology, that will likely shorten the process significantly, but the certifier would still trace the data flow themselves. We are in early discussions with Bureau Veritas on exactly this question—specifically whether existing verifications can be formally recognized within the scheme, or used as the basis for a lighter gap review rather than a full process from scratch. Nothing is confirmed yet, but the direction of travel is to credit prior rigorous work, not ignore it." — Sophie Erhart, Project Manager at ESFC

Trader Certification (Operator's Responsibility)

Trader certification assesses whether the operator is using the certified methodology correctly in consumer-facing communication. It covers:

How the claim is worded and displayed
What disclosures are provided to consumers
Internal processes for approving, updating, and correcting claims
Complaint handling procedures
Public verification of claim scope

This is the operator's certification to obtain, but not to navigate alone. Klimato will help prepare documentation, connect the operator with the certification body, and streamline the review.

Moreover, the scheme will support a sample-based approach meaning the certifier reviews a representative sample of PCF or recipes and not every individual item contributing to streamlining the process.

Klimato can act as a major operational support layer: preparing much of the evidence package so that the trader-level process remains as lean as possible. For food service operators, where the scheme needs to scale across potentially thousands of operators, this support layer is a core part of how the scheme is designed to work.

Two routes for trader certification: individual and collective

The new ESFC Proposal introduces a two-tier trader certification model. Which route applies depends on the type of claim the trader makes:

Individual certification — for retailers and brands making fixed, high-visibility claims, such as a footprint or label printed on packaging or a shelf edge. The trader signs its own agreement tied to the certified provider, appears in its own right on the public register, and has its claims checked directly. If something is wrong, it is handled through that agreement.
Collective certification — for food service operators, restaurants, and caterers showing claims on menus or in apps, across large or frequently changing ranges. Rather than each operator signing a separate certification contract, the scheme’s rules are built into Klimato’s standard customer terms; Klimato publishes the list of covered operators; and the certifier checks a sample of claims across that list instead of auditing every operator. If a claim is wrong, it is addressed through the customer agreement.

For most Klimato food service clients, collective certification is the relevant and lighter route. Brands using the on-pack PCF label fall under individual certification.

	Individual	Collective
Applies to	Retailers and brands; on-pack or shelf-edge and other high-visibility fixed claims	Food service operators, restaurants, caterers; menu or digital claims
How bound	Its own agreement tied to the certified provider	Built into Klimato’s standard customer terms
Public listing	Listed individually in the public register	Klimato publishes the list of covered operators
How audited	Claim use reviewed directly	Certifier checks a sample of claims across that list
Enforcement	Through that agreement	Through the provider’s authority to terminate the relationship

Next Steps

ESFC has released Proposal 0.2, which sets out the scheme structure in more detail. A pilot phase is planned: ESFC will run a limited number of independently certified pilot claims to test the set-up before opening the scheme more broadly. Klimato intends to take part and invites clients to join.

What we know so far:

Express interest by mid-July 2026.
The pilot is expected to begin in late summer, around August 2026.
A dedicated pilot guidance document, expected by the end of June 2026, will set out exactly what participation involves for each party. Much of the operational detail will be clarified there.
ESFC membership is not required to join, but members are prioritized for pilot places.

For traders who are working toward certification but cannot finish before 27 September 2026, the scheme is introducing a way to register that progress, so they can show authorities they are actively on track. The exact conditions are not set yet.

Costs

EmpCo requires traders’ independent third-party verification. Because Klimato is the methodology and technology provider, it cannot also act as the certifier of a trader's claim. Nevertheless, Klimato will direct traders to the appropriate certification body within the ESFC scheme.

The exact fee structure is still being finalized. In fact, feasibility and cost assessments are not possible until the operational model is spelled out much more concretely. More clarity is needed on what the technology provider does versus what the trader does, who interfaces directly with the certification body, how evidence is structured and submitted, and how onboarding and ongoing surveillance work in practice.

Most likely, there will be a fee to pay to the ESFC as scheme owner and one for the third party review. ESFC is committed to keeping the fees accessible for food service operators. The scalability of the certification by using a sample-based approach will also help reduce the costs of the review.

What mainly drives the cost is how much a trader is certifying and how large a sample the certifier needs to check. Under collective certification, much of the cost is handled through Klimato and shared across the covered operators, rather than billed to each one separately.

What will trader-level certification involve, and how is ESFC thinking about cost?

"Trader-level certification assesses how the operator uses the claim in the market—how it is displayed, what disclosures are provided, and whether internal processes for updating the label are in place. It does not re-examine the underlying science; that is covered by provider-level certification, which the technology provider obtains separately. On cost, proportionality is a key consideration in our design. The scheme intends to uses a sample-based approach—the certifier reviews a representative sample of claims, not every individual product or dish—which keeps the process scalable and the fees accessible, but as of today the trader level certification has not been defined yet." — Sophie Erhart, Project Manager at ESFC

For more information on the EmpCo directive from representatives from the European Union, we recommend watching this webinar from the European Sustainable Food Coalition: “European Commission briefing: What EmpCo means for sustainability claims & how ESFC will support”.

What role does ESFC play in helping food businesses comply with EmpCo, and how close is your work to the EU Commission?

"ESFC acts as the scheme owner for an EmpCo-compliant certification framework built specifically for food and beverage. We write the rulebook—the criteria and governance standards that any certified methodology pathway must meet.

We maintain an active dialogue with DG Justice, which is responsible for the EmpCo directive, and have had Commission representatives present at our recent ESFC online event to ensure the framework we are building reflects how the directive is intended to apply in practice." — Sophie Erhart, Project Manager at ESFC

5. What Traders Should Do

The following is a prioritized action list for food service operators, brands, caterers, and retailers using Klimato's labels.

When	Action	Who	Comment
Now	Keep the label in place	Operator	Removing the label does not improve compliance and eliminates a transparency tool. The certification pathway is designed to bring existing labels into compliance.
Now	Ensure contact details with Klimato are current	Operator	Certification guidance will be communicated directly. Make sure it reaches the right person.
By mid-July 2026	Express interest in the ESFC pilot	Operator Optional but recommended.	Registering interest holds a place as the pilot takes shape. ESFC members are prioritized; membership is not mandatory. Contact Klimato.
Summer 2026	Prepare for trader-level certification	Operator, supported by Klimato	Klimato will issue detailed guidance when the ESFC framework is confirmed.
Before 27/09/2026	Review generic sustainability language in menus and marketing	Operator, with Klimato's guidance	Phrases like 'sustainable food' or 'eco-friendly' require review.

For operators considering implementing labels for the first time, EmpCo is not a reason to wait—it is a reason to act. The certification framework is still being built, and operators who implement it now can shape their internal processes before requirements harden, rather than retrofitting later at higher cost.

Implementation with Klimato is straightforward: Klimato handles the science and the provider-level certification. What the operator needs is a responsible person to coordinate the process at the start of the project, and a budget that accounts for trader-level certification fees knowing that ESFC is committed to keeping these proportionate.

What should food service operators using carbon labels actually do right now?

"The most important thing is not to remove their labels prematurely. EmpCo targets vague, unsubstantiated green claims—not specific, scoped, independently verified carbon disclosures. Operators should review any generic sustainability language in their surrounding communication—that is where the real EmpCo risk sits—and stay connected with their technology provider on the certification timeline for their label." — Sophie Erhart, Project Manager at ESFC

6. 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. When you put a carbon label on a menu, you give people information they can act on, and they act on it—you are actively helping to 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 you take 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 are phased out, a specific, verified carbon label is the form of environmental communication that still stands.

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 starting at 4% of annual turnover. For operators using Klimato’s labels, this is a structural advantage over those who are not.

The work ahead is real. Trader-level certification will require time, a responsible person, and a budget. The scheme is still being finalized, and Klimato will not pretend otherwise. But the direction is clear, the framework is being built by people in this room, and operators who stay close to Klimato through the process will not be navigating it alone.

The legal responsibility sits with the trader. It always has. 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.

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.

EmpCo—short for the Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition Directive (EU 2024/825)—is an EU regulation that tightens the rules on environmental claims made to consumers. It applies from 27 September 2026. Its target is greenwashing: vague, unsubstantiated claims like 'eco-friendly', 'sustainable', or 'carbon neutral based on offsetting' that mislead consumers without evidence behind them. From that date, any sustainability label used in consumer-facing communication must be backed by a certified third-party scheme. There is no transition period, and non-compliance carries a minimum penalty of 4% of annual turnover per affected member state.

The European Sustainable Food Coalition is the multi-stakeholder coalition developing the certification scheme that will make EmpCo compliance practical for food and beverage operators. It acts as scheme owner: it writes the rulebook, sets the standards, and ensures the framework is open and transparent. Klimato is an active member and is contributing directly to the scheme's design. The ESFC scheme is methodology-neutral, meaning Klimato's existing approach can be certified as a recognized pathway within it.

Two separate levels exist. Provider-level certification—Klimato's responsibility—covers the methodology, the database, and the calculation system. Trader-level certification—the operator's responsibility—covers how the claim is displayed and communicated: the language used, the disclosures provided, and the processes for keeping the label up to date. Klimato certifies the science; the trader certifies the communication. Klimato will support operators through the trader-level process, including preparing much of the evidence package.

The full cost structure has not yet been confirmed by ESFC. There will be two components: a scheme-use fee paid to ESFC and a fee for the independent certification body. ESFC is committed to keeping both proportionate for food service operators. The scheme uses a sample-based approach—the certifier reviews a representative sample of claims, not every individual product or dish—which is specifically designed to keep the process scalable and the costs accessible. Full cost guidance will be issued by Klimato by summer 2026.

No—removing the label is the wrong response and does not improve compliance. EmpCo targets vague, unsubstantiated claims, not specific, methodology-backed carbon disclosures. Keep the label in place. Review any generic sustainability language—phrases like 'sustainable food' or 'eco-friendly'—in your menus and marketing, as this is where the real EmpCo risk sits. Make sure Klimato has your current contact details so that certification guidance reaches the right person when it is issued. If you are interested in joining the pilot phase of the ESFC scheme, contact Klimato to express your interest—early involvement gives you direct input into how the process is designed.

The EmpCo Directive and Food Sustainability Claims