On 22 January 2026, the Competition & Markets Authority (CMA) published new guidance Making Green Claims: Getting It Right Across the Supply Chain, on how consumer protection law applies to environmental (“green”) claims made by businesses across the supply chain. The guidance also clarifies who is responsible for ensuring that environmental claims are accurate, substantiated and not misleading, at each stage of the supply chain.

 

Why this guidance is important

The latest guidance was adopted in response to requests from stakeholders seeking greater clarity around supply chain liability for environmental claims, where different parties may hold information needed to substantiate those claims.  The guidance is designed to be read alongside the CMA’s Green Claims Code, offering more detail on liability, evidence and enforcement expectations. It is in addition to the CMA’s guidance on its Approach to Direct Consumer Protection.

 

The guidance recognises that supply chains are complex and can vary widely across business and sectors. In recent years, consumer demand for sustainable products and responsible production has increased significantly[1], reinforcing the need for a clear, robust regulatory framework. However, the guidance is not just a reminder of existing law. It signals a more assertive enforcement posture, backed by the CMA’s new ability to impose fines and consumer redress orders without the need for court proceedings.

 

Who is responsible for a Green Claim

The guidance defines “making” an environmental claim as “what businesses do, how they present it and what they do not say”. Examples include what a business says on its website, marketing or branding material or product packaging, use of “green” logos, and any omission of information a consumer would need to make an informed decision.

 

Responsibility for green claims lies with the business making the claim to consumers. This can be any business at any stage of the supply chain (eg, retailer, manufacturer, distributor, etc.). Multiple parties to the supply chain can be held liable for misleading green claims. If a manufacturer makes an environmental claim as part of their marketing strategy, and a retailer promotes that product and its accompanying claim, both parties can be held liable. The CMA guidance urges businesses to “consider your trading relationships” to assess risk, particularly if accuracy of green claims proves difficult to verify.

 

What the CMA expects in practice

One of the core considerations of this guidance is that potential liability exists at every stage of the supply chain life cycle. From a consumer’s perspective, it can often be tempting to look to the final commercial exchange of a product when it comes to legitimacy of green claims. Consumers will look straight to the brand and its market identity when environmental claims are thrown into question. With this updated guidance, the CMA identifies the complex nature of production and maps how liability travels or stays put. 

 

The CMA expects businesses to take steps to verify any relevant green claims (made by them or businesses they are in commercial relationship with) are verified and backed up by evidence; the guidance provides a checklist for retailers to ensure correct evidence is obtained. The claims may also be found to be misleading even if this was not intentional, and civil action cannot be defended on the basis that reasonable steps were taken and/or due diligence was exercised.

 

Under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024, the CMA can decide whether consumer protection laws have been infringed, order redress for affected customers, and give directions on business conduct. The aforementioned “approach to consumer protection” document outlines how the CMA’S powers under this legislation will be used and the relevant pillar framework (eg, pace, proportionality, predictability and process).

 

How will the CMA prioritise enforcement

The CMA is set to prioritise cases of strategic significance, meaning where enforcement action is likely to have a successful outcome.  Another consideration will be the wider impact on consumers, businesses and the economy. The CMA notes the difference between direct impact (e.g., changes to business practice as a result of enforcement) and indirect impact (e.g., deterring poor practice and creating a level playing field) when it comes to enforcement.

 

The guidance suggests a strategic approach to enforcement, rather than wholesale intervention. The CMA will take a harsher view of practices where business should already be clear about their consumer obligations and/or do not have appropriate internal processes in place to help ensure their environmental claims are accurate and do not mislead consumers (or fail to properly follow these processes).

 

Illustrative scenarios: where liability falls

The guidance provides several illustrative examples to aid in understanding how these requirements apply in practice. A checklist for brands selling through third party retailers and suppliers and manufacturers is also provided.

 

The first example provides a straightforward supply chain. A camping and outdoor activities retailer that sells its own products (in this case, tents), produced in its own factories. The supplies for the product are globally sourced. A supplier states that the material they have provided is “green as it is recycled” without any certification. The retailer then sells the tents claiming they are made of “recycled polyester”. The reality is that not all tents stocked by the retailer contain recycled content, and none contain above 50% recycled content. The retailer, In this example, in addition to not verifying the suppliers claim, the retailer did not have a policy on making environmental claims for its products, or a process to verify them. Its staff were also not trained on how to make accurate environmental claims.

 

Taking this example, the CMA notes it would expect verification and evidence of green claims from suppliers, accurate claims about marketed products, internal processes for identifying and verifying green claims, and staff protocols. The supplier and retailer would be found liable in this instance. For specific guidance on the retail sector, the CMA points to its guidance: Complying with consumer law when making environmental claims in the fashion retail sector.

 

Next steps for businesses

Businesses will need to ensure they are taking proactive steps to verify claims at each stage of the supply chain. Evidence to substantiate green claims must be made available upon request, and the evidence must be credible, relevant and verifiable. For retailers in particular, the CMA expects proactive scrutiny of supplier claims, not blind reliance.

 

Business must also regularly review and update their processes and stay informed on industry and regulatory guidance. Businesses are expected to review and improve internal governance and protocols; the CMA has made clear their standards and willingness to investigate. The new guidance might result in some businesses needing to conduct a comprehensive review and audit of existing claims across all product profiles. Staff training, particularly those who work in marketing, product development and/or compliance is key. Staff should understand the legal risks of misleading green claims, the CMA’s guidance and how to apply it. The CMA’s guidance is a clear signal that environmental marketing is entering a more regulated era.

 

The CMA appears ready to shape future enforcement action to ensure consumer protection and transparency.

 

[1] Recent survey from BearingPoint found that 62% of UK consumers take sustainability criteria into account when making a purchasing decision.

 

This article has been written by Maria Cronin, Partner and Cara Haslam, Legal Researcher.