Would your green claims survive a CMA check?
Paste your marketing and packaging copy. Get back every environmental claim that is high-risk under the CMA Green Claims Code — the exact principle each one fails, and what to say instead. This isn't a future deadline: since 6 April 2025 the CMA can decide a claim is misleading and fine up to 10% of global turnover, without going to court. Even the leaf on your label can count.
The CMA can fine you directly now — no court needed.
The Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 (DMCCA) has been in force since 6 April 2025. It gives the CMA the power to decide for itself that a business has broken consumer law with a misleading environmental claim, and to impose a fine of up to 10% of worldwide turnover — without first going to court. That is the sharp change from the old regime, where the CMA had to litigate. A misleading green claim on your pack today is enforceable today.
Is one of your claims high-risk?
Type a phrase from your packaging or marketing. This is a screening against the Code's common problem-claims — not legal advice, and only a court can decide a breach.
This is a screening against the Code's common problem-claims, not a ruling — verify before you rely on it. The full check reads your whole copy in context against all six principles.
The CMA Green Claims Code — six principles.
The CMA's Green Claims Code sets out how environmental claims must be made. Every claim you keep has to pass all six. Read together with the DMCCA's misleading-practices regime, a claim that fails them is a claim the CMA can act on now.
Be truthful and accurate
The claim must be true and not create a false impression. An offset-based "carbon neutral" fails here because it implies a reduction that hasn't happened at product level.
Be clear and unambiguous
Vague words like "green" or "eco" leave the consumer guessing what benefit you mean — which is exactly what the CMA expects you to make specific.
Not omit or hide important information
Leaving out that a claim rests on offsets, or that "biodegradable" only works in industrial conditions, misleads by omission.
Only make fair and meaningful comparisons
Comparisons ("greener than", "better for the planet than") need equivalent, verifiable methodology across the things being compared.
Consider the full life cycle
A claim true of one stage but not the whole product or its packaging — recycled content but landfill packaging, say — overstates the real benefit.
Be substantiated
Every claim needs clear, accessible evidence a consumer could reach — an LCA, test data, or independent verification. No evidence, no claim.
Paste, screen, fix.
Paste your copy
Marketing lines, packaging text, a claim list — whatever carries an environmental message. Tell us any certifications you hold and whether it runs in ads. No account.
We screen every claim
Each claim is scored against the Code's six principles and the DMCCA misleading-practices regime — with the specific principle it fails, never a vibe.
Get the verdict + the fix
A claim-by-claim PDF: high-risk, needs-substantiation or fine-as-written — each with the principle it engages, a compliant rewrite, and the evidence it would need.
Paste your claims
The report screens exactly what you paste. The more real copy, the more useful it is.
What you're buying
Is this legal advice?
No. It's a structured screening of your claims against the CMA Green Claims Code and the DMCCA 2024, with each flagged claim tied to the principle it fails and a compliant rewrite. Only a court can decide whether a specific claim actually breaches the law. Anything the report flags as high-risk should go to counsel before you spend money relabelling — the report is the fast, cited starting point.
Is "carbon neutral" really a problem now?
The CMA treats neutrality claims built on carbon offsetting as high-risk: they imply a reduction that hasn't happened at product level, omit the reliance on offsets, and are hard to substantiate — engaging Code principles 1, 3 and 6 at once. The CMA and the ASA have both moved against offset-based "carbon neutral" claims. A claim built on a genuine, evidenced reduction is different; the report separates the two and flags any offset-based claim you've pasted.
Do brand names and logos count?
Yes — the Code is clear that a brand name, product name or visual identity (a leaf, a green palette, an in-house seal) can itself be an environmental claim that needs substantiating. The report prompts you to check your labels and imagery, not just your sentences.
Is there a grace period for stock already on shelves?
No. The DMCCA regime is already live, so there's no switch-on date to prepare for. For claims already printed on packs, on shelf-edge or online that you can't change immediately, the practical corrective measures are on-pack corrective stickers, shelf notices and updated product pages — the claim must be corrected wherever the consumer sees it.
What about the ASA and advertising?
If your claims also run in ads, the ASA enforces the CAP/BCAP Code's environmental-claims rules on top of the Code and the DMCCA — and it has ruled against vague and offset-based green claims. Tell us on the form if your claims run in advertising and the report adds an ASA/CAP note; the rewrites are written to satisfy both.
I sell in the EU too — is this the same as your EU tool?
No. The UK and EU regimes are different laws with different tests and timing. This edition covers UK law (the CMA Code + the DMCCA, live now). If you also sell to EU consumers, use our EU edition for the Empowering Consumers Directive that switches on in September 2026.