Greenwashing u Globalnom Pravu: Tri Ključna Rizika Vrijedna Milijarde za Multinacionalne Kompanije
From "Eco-Friendly" to a Global Legal Battlefield
The era of soft, non-committal "green" claims is over. Today, every word a company utters about sustainability—on packaging in Berlin, in an ad in New York, or in an annual report in London—represents a legal liability.
At the core of the global fight against Greenwashing are Consumer Protection Laws, which serve as the primary mechanism for sanctioning misleading advertising. Unlike regional fines, the global market risks sanctions measured as a percentage of annual revenue (turnover).
What are the three key risks facing multinational companies in this new global legal landscape?
The Global Regulatory Framework: The Threat of Coordinated Action
Global oversight of Greenwashing is no longer fragmented. It is enforced through powerful, mutually aligned regulations:
🇪🇺 EU (Green Claims Directive / Empowering Consumers Directive): Foresees penalties of up to 4% of annual EU turnover for misleading claims.
🇬🇧 UK (CMA Green Claims Code): The UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) threatens fines of up to 10% of global annual turnover for the most serious infringements, following the adoption of new legislation.
🇺🇸 US (FTC Green Guides): The US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) uses its guidelines (Green Guides) to initiate lawsuits aimed at reclaiming the total profit gained from unfair marketing (Disgorgement).
This regulatory power creates three key global risks of Greenwashing in the Global Market:
- Financial Collapse Through a Percentage of Global Turnover
The largest and newest threat comes from regulators empowered to impose fines proportional to a company's financial strength.
Abandoning the Fixed Tariff: Regulators in key jurisdictions (EU, UK) have moved away from fixed monetary fines to a "penalty as a percentage of turnover" system. For global corporations, 4% or 10% of global annual turnover can mean billions of dollars.
Recouping Profits (Disgorgement): In the US, the FTC and civil lawsuits target the "benefit" derived from the deception, demanding that the company return all profits gained from the sale of products based on the disputed "green" claim. This directly threatens balance sheets.
The financial risk has transformed from an operational cost into a potential existential threat to profit. - Arbitration and Consumer Class Actions
Global consumer protection laws empower not just government agencies, but consumers themselves, especially in North America.
"Litigation Wave": Greenwashing has become fertile ground for Collective Lawsuits (Class Actions). Once a large company is found to have misled consumers (e.g., with incorrect claims about recyclability or carbon neutrality), thousands or millions of customers join lawsuits seeking damages.
Risk of "Self-Declaration": Companies that do not align their claims with rigorous standards like the UK Green Claims Code or the future EU GCD are effectively "self-declaring" themselves as targets for lawsuits, as they lack irrefutable, independently verified proof.
Courts are becoming a second, and often more dangerous, regulatory body for Greenwashing. - The "Double Gate" of Regulatory Pre-Approval
The latest EU directive (GCD) mandates a fundamental operational change: it requires compulsory pre-verification of green claims by an independent, accredited body before the product can even reach the market.
Operational Paralysis: If the verification process fails, the company not only risks a fine but is barred from using the disputed claim in the EU market. This slows product launches, increases Time-to-Market, and creates inconsistencies in marketing materials worldwide.
Lack of Standardization: Although the goals are similar (FTC, CMA, EU), the details of substantiation differ. A claim that is "good enough" for one regulatory framework (e.g., less focus on Life-Cycle Assessment in some countries) may be insufficiently substantiated for the strict requirements of the EU.
Companies must create a "Global Proof Package" that satisfies the strictest standards (EU) to avoid a sales block in key markets.
The Imperative of "Defensive Sustainability"
Global Greenwashing regulation has moved from gentle advice to compulsory, multi-million-dollar financial risks. Companies can no longer afford to rely on creative marketing agencies; rigorous, legally-driven transparency is essential.
Utilizing Legal Design Thinking and Legal Tech is the only path towards sustainable global compliance. These tools allow complex scientific evidence to be converted into a unified, globally applicable "Verification Document"that can pass inspection in London, San Francisco, and Brussels.
In global law, it is no longer enough to be "green"—you must be able to prove your "greenness" without a single flaw in the evidence chain.
Other blogs
The Era of Deepfake - Designing a Legal Protocol for Authenticating Corporate Communications
The advent of generative AI has enabled the mass production of Deepfake (AI-generated) audio…
Ownership in the Age of Autonomous AI – How to Design a Visual Attribution Protocol for Agents
Generative artificial intelligence has brought the first wave of disruption to the Intellectual…