A heated political row erupted this week in Brussels, pitting groupings within the European Parliament’s centrist coalition against one another, after the European Commission threatened to withdraw new legislation targeting greenwashing.
It marks another setback for the European Green Deal, following a shift to the right in last year’s European elections.
What happened in the last week?
The Green Claims Directive, which is proposing new rules requiring businesses to independently verify the environmental credentials of their products, is at the centre of the argument. It was entering the final phase of negotiations when the European People’s Party (EPP) sent a letter last week asking the European Commission to withdraw it, claiming it would cause unnecessary bureaucratic burdens on businesses.
Last Friday, the Commission spokesperson on environmental matters, Maciej Bereststeckisaid the EU executive would do just that as the “current discussions around the proposal” went against its “simplification agenda”.
Currently 30 million micro-enterprises, so all companies with fewer than ten employees and an annual turnover or balance sheet below 2 million Euro, – making up 96 percent of all firms – would be covered by the text, something the Commission did not like, Berestecki explained.
Commission President Ursula von der Leyenwho hails from the EPP, has pledged to make life easier for businesses in a bid to re-launch the European economy.
While the decision has not yet been formalised, the Polish Presidency of the EU then cancelled Monday’s trilogue, during which Parliament, Council and Commission would have come together for a final round of negotiations on the directive.
“There are too many doubts and we need clarity from the European Commission on its intentions: based on that, we will be able to decide on the next steps,” it said.
This request also prompted Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni to withdraw her support for the directive over the weekend, shifting the balance within the Council, so there is now no solid majority in favour of the directive.
The developments angered politicians from the Renew and the Socialists and Democrats (S&D) groupings, who together with the EPP are in a cooperation agreement in the European Parliament.
“Let’s call this what it is: a coordinated attack by the Commission and the EPP against green legislation,” Tiemo Wölkena German S&D MEP and co-rapporteur on the directive, said.
“Ursula von der Leyen as Commission chief is betraying her mandate and turning the Commission into the EPP’s headquarters. That’s an institutional scandal.”
He believes that if the negotiations had gone ahead a compromise would have been reached and “we would have made sure that micro-enterprises were not covered by the directive”.
“If there is a need to discuss specific issues, the best way is to go to the meeting, discuss at the meeting, not to cancel the meeting,” Sandro Gozian Italian Renew MEP and co-rapporteur on the file, said.
What is the Green Claims Directive?
The main goal of the legislation is to stop consumers from being misled about the environmental merits of the products they buy. This tactic of deception is also known as greenwashing. It would require companies to independently substantiate any voluntary green claims about what they sell.
According to a 2020 study by the Commission, more than half of the information about the eco-friendliness of goods was vague, misleading or unfounded.
In the proposal for the legislation put forward in 2023, it said that: “If a company decides, for instance, to make a claim on the environmental footprint of one of their products and chooses to conduct a study using the product environmental footprint method, it would cost around 8,000 Euro.”
Why all the controversy?
It’s this responsibility on businesses that has caused criticism. According to Swedish EPP MEP Arba Kokalari, the directive would bring “more administration for sustainable companies, which would have to apply for prior approval in order to declare that they are sustainable”.
In Bulgaria, the Bulgarian Industrial Association called for the postponement or withdrawal of the Green Claims Directive last week, citing vague requirements, high compliance costs, and legal uncertainty. It warned of overlaps with existing EU laws, inconsistent enforcement, and risks to business competitiveness, urging Bulgarian representatives to protect national and single market interests in upcoming talks.
Proponents of the legislation believe it gives consumers greater protection and can benefit companies.
“The Green Claims Directive only affects companies that advertise sustainability. They are not forced to do so,” said Ramona PopExecutive Director of the Federation of German Consumer Organisations. “But if they do, they need proof that it is not pure greenwashing. This will certainly lead to fewer green advertising promises on the market. Companies that actually act sustainably will also benefit from this.”
Aside from the merits of the legislation itself, there are issues with the way in which the Commission has acted.
The Commission’s move was poorly received by the Council, where the ambassadors of the 27 member states discussed the issue on Wednesday. Diplomatic sources told Spanish news agency EFE that Belgium, Cyprus, Spain, Slovenia, Estonia, France, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, and the Netherlands strongly criticised the executive’s decision.
“Friday and the situation that unfolded afterwards were very surprising, and some described it as disappointing and regrettable,” the sources said.
Several member states expressed concern that the Commission is turning into a trend, a practice previously sanctioned by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU): It has ruled that the Commission should not use its powers as a de facto veto. Others warned that the decision undermines institutional integrity.
This controversy follows a broader pattern of pushback against EU environmental policy: the relaxation of CO₂ targets for cars and vans, the delay in enforcing anti-deforestation rules, the weakening of the Nature Restoration Law and corporate due diligence requirements, the downgrading of wolf protections and looser restrictions on chemicals.
What will happen next?
While a parliamentary motion of censure – the EU equivalent of a vote of no confidence – appears unlikely for now, political fallout could surface elsewhere, particularly in the complex negotiations over the 2028–2034 multiannual budget, for example on funding for climate and agriculture.
Von der Leyen also faces potential criticism from the Executive Vice-President for a Clean, Just and Competitive Transition Teresa Riberawho has warned that Europe “cannot continue to water down its climate ambitions: flexibility is only acceptable if it does not compromise” the objectives.
On the right, however, the issue is being downplayed. “That’s democracy, baby,” said Italian MEP Nicola Procaccini of the eurosceptic European Conservatives and Reformists Group (ECR), dismissing the controversy as “politics, nothing more”.
The fate of the Green Claims Directive itself thus remains uncertain, with negotiations at a standstill.
This article is published twice a week. The content is based on news by agencies participating in the enr.
