21 September, 2026

Environmental claims in food supplements: Directive 2024/825 already applies and Spain has yet to transpose it

As of 27 September 2026, the new European rules against greenwashing are in full effect. Spain has not published its transposing legislation. Reading that delay as breathing room is a strategic choice — and one that carries regulatory risk that few companies have actually measured.

The mistake: treating Spain’s delay as a moratorium

Directive (EU) 2024/825 amends Directive 2005/29/EC on unfair commercial practices. The transposition deadline expired on 27 March 2026 and its rules apply from 27 September. Spain has not complied. The Draft Sustainable Consumption Act, passed at first reading in July 2025, has still not been published in the BOE. On 28 May 2026 the Commission included Spain among the twenty Member States to which it sent a letter of formal notice.

A quick conclusion circulates in the food supplement sector: no Spanish law means no new obligation. Formally, that is correct. A non-transposed directive does not produce direct effect between private parties — established case law of the Court of Justice since Marshall and Faccini Dori. No Spanish authority can sanction a company by directly invoking Directive 2024/825.

As a management criterion, however, it is a mistake — for three reasons set out below.

First: existing law already enables action

Spain’s Unfair Competition Act (Ley 3/1991 de Competencia Desleal) classifies as unfair any information that is false or likely to mislead about a product’s characteristics (Art. 5), and any omission of material information (Art. 7). Intent to deceive is not required. The General Advertising Act (Ley 34/1988) and the Consumer and User Protection Act (RDL 1/2007 — TRLGDCU) complete this framework. In food products, Article 7 of Regulation (EU) 1169/2011 also prohibits information that misleads about a product’s characteristics, including its production method.

Under the legislation currently in force in Spain, a competitor may bring a cease-and-desist action against another company today, or a regional consumer authority may open enforcement proceedings today, if they see a claim such as “Sustainable packaging” without supporting evidence.

Second: even if the Directive does not apply, it can inform interpretation

Once the transposition deadline has passed, Spanish courts must interpret domestic law, as far as possible, in the light of the Directive. In practice, the definitions in Directive 2024/825 become the benchmark against which what is misleading under Ley 3/1991 is measured.

Accordingly, definitions such as “generic environmental claim”, “recognised environmental excellence” and “certification scheme” may now be interpreted in conformity with the new Directive.

Third: the packaging is not sold in Spain alone

Germany, Italy and the Netherlands have already transposed this Directive. Shared packaging is held to the standard of the most demanding market in which it is sold, as we explain in our post on One packaging, multiple markets.

What the Directive sets as the standard

Practice	What the Directive requires	Reference
Generic claims (“green”, “eco”, “environmentally friendly”)	Prohibited unless recognised environmental excellence is demonstrated	Annex I, point 4a
Sustainability labels	Only permitted if based on a certification scheme verified by an independent third party or established by a public authority. A self-made label with a green leaf does not qualify	Annex I, point 2a
The part for the whole	Prohibited to present an entire product as environmentally beneficial when the characteristic applies only to one aspect of it	Annex I, point 4b
Offsets	Prohibited to claim a neutral, reduced or positive climate impact based on carbon offsets	Annex I, point 4c
Future commitments	Only permitted with a detailed and realistic implementation plan, measurable targets with deadlines, and periodic verification by an independent expert	Art. 6.2.d Directive 2005/29

Where the food supplement sector goes wrong

The food supplement sector is accustomed to a positive list: if a health claim is authorised, it can be used. Environmental claims have no positive list. Nobody authorises “recyclable packaging” — the company makes the assertion and bears the burden of proof. Applying the logic of Regulation 1924/2006 (“if it is not prohibited, it is permitted”) is the most common interpretive error we see.

“Natural” is not, by default, an environmental claim. In a food supplement it usually refers to the origin of the ingredient. However, it can become an environmental claim if it creates an environmental association for the average consumer — even when it appears in a brand name. For example, the word “Natural” alongside a leaf, a globe or “respects the planet” becomes a generic environmental claim with no recognised excellence to support it.

“Bio” and “eco” when referring to organic production are governed by Regulation (EU) 2018/848, which prevails. Organic certification of an ingredient does not make the packaging environmentally sustainable.

Stock already printed

The Directive provides no sell-through period. The Commission acknowledges practical corrections such as stickers or supplementary information at the point of sale. It also notes that authorities may consider whether a company made reasonable and proportionate efforts to change. In Spain, without transposition, this is regulatory risk management: documenting batches, print dates, markets of destination and the decision taken on each claim.

The right approach is to review all potential environmental claims across every communication channel — website, labels, social media — and to apply this new framework to all new content going forward.

The question is not when Spanish law will arrive. It is what regulatory standard the consumer inspector or the commercial court will apply when reading the packaging, and whether the company can back every word with documentation. Every print run today is a strategic decision with medium-term consequences. At LegaleGo we do not file paperwork — we decide: we define which environmental claims can be sustained, in which markets and with what evidence, before anyone asks.