The Global Greenwashing Report
- John Pabon
- Sep 5
- 6 min read
Welcome to the inagural edition of The Global Greenwashing Report. Each week I'll bring you the latest news, views, and trends in the world of greenwashing.
Here's a reality check that should concern every Australian executive. In 2023, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) found 57% of Australian businesses made potentially misleading environmental or sustainability claims warranting further scrutiny. But that's just the tip of the iceberg.
The ACCC and ASIC have made environmental and sustainability issues a key compliance and enforcement policy priority since 2022, with focus ramping up over time. This goes beyond regulatory posturing, too. This is the systematic dismantling of Australia’s culture of consequence-free misleading claims. We’ve seen it with hefty fines for companies like Vanguard and Mercer, court cases for Woodside and Santos, as well as pressure to apologise to customers for Energy Australia. Is it perfect? Not even close. But these are certainly moves in the right direction.
This past winter, more dominoes have been set to fall with proceedings against Australian Gas Networks, Banana Boat, and Google. We’re also seeing movements with the EU Green Claims Directive and individual greenwashing actions around the world.
Read on to learn more.
This Week’s Greenwashing Big Three
1. Winter is Coming (or The ACCC's Winter of Discontent)
The Situation: Likely emboldened by their work in 2024, the ACCC has spent the winter months fighting greenwashing on all fronts. Major court cases against the country’s largest gas distributor, one of the world’s most popular sunscreens, and a tech powerhouse shows the Commission has no intention of letting up the pressure.
Australian Gas Networks were in Court for making false or misleading claims in their “Love Gas” advertising campaign. The ACCC alleged that, “…even though Australian Gas Networks knew the future of renewable gas was uncertain, it made an unqualified representation to consumers that it would distribute renewable gas to households within a generation.”
Edgewell Personal Care, and their Hawaiian Tropic and Banana Boat range of sunscreens, were brought in front of Federal Court in July. The ACCC alleged claims around products being “reef friendly” were not true. In fact, many of the ingredients in the products are known to harm reefs, coral, and marine life.
Google has admitted to anti-competitive behaviour, copping themselves a A$55 million penalty, for pre-installation of Google Search on Android phones. This restricted access for millions of Australian consumers to other search options.
John's Take: This is unprecedented. The ACCC is simultaneously prosecuting Australia's largest gas distributor for future environmental promises, a household name for potentially destroying one of the country’s most beloved natural wonders, and a global tech behemoth. What we're witnessing is systematic enforcement designed to send a message that no company, regardless of size or market dominance, is untouchable.
Business Impact: Those in the C-Suite might look at this and say, “we better keep quiet about any sustainability work.” Legal teams are guessing, “we’re compliant, so there’s nothing to worry about.” Both lines of thought are badly mistaken. Not only will greenhushing push away millions in potential opportunities, but compliance doesn’t necessarily translate to effective communications. Woe to the company that tries to hide from, lie to, or confuse their customers.
2. The Great EU Green Claims Directive Plot Twist
The Situation: Despite some great initial pomp and excitement, passage of the EU’s Green Claims Directive has stalled due to concerns about complexity and being a burden on companies. Introduced in 2024 as a way to prevent businesses from engaging in deceptive marketing, push back from these same business lobbies and anti-green sentiment mean the future of the Directive is uncertain.
John’s Take: The directive's potential demise isn't the victory lap some companies think it is. Firstly, there is still a big push by the Danish presidency to keep the Directive alive (so don’t count your chickens just yet). More importantly, the EU doesn't need a unified directive when individual member states are already wielding the enforcement hammer. Just consider these moves.
Italy's €5.6 million fine in 2019, and subsequent court cases, against Eni for marketing "green" diesel show intent (even if the ultimate results were lacklustre).
The Netherlands saw the national carrier, KLM, in court for advertising greenwashing last year. In a landmark case, the court ruled the airline had given an “overly rosy picture” and “mistaken impression” flying could be sustainable.
Most recently, Germany’s 3 September draft consumer protection bill, called the Empowering Consumers Directive, goes beyond the EU Directive in terms of scope and potential impact.
In short, national regulators aren't just waiting around for Brussels to take action.
Business Impact: Companies banking on regulatory confusion to buy time are miscalculating badly. The enforcement patchwork is actually more dangerous than a unified system because it's less predictable and more difficult to create a strategy around.
3. People Around the World…Join Hands
The Situation: Even with the dire political environment and constant barrage of panic-inducing headlines, there continues to be momentum in fighting greenwashing. While Australia and the EU may be leading the way, this is no doubt a global fight.
14 August. New Zealand’s Commerce Commission has issued warnings to Kmart over misleading environmental claims. RNZ notes, “the commission said the national retailer might have breached the Fair Trading Act in making unsubstantiated claims in its ‘100% sustainably sourced cotton’ advertising.”
2 September. The Organic Trade Association in the US has launched its Seal Makes It Simple campaign to educate consumers on agricultural sustainability terminology. The goal is to help shoppers decipher phrases like organic, non-GMO, and regenerative, as well as grow the country’s organic market.
3 September. The UK Advertising Standards Authority found four major cruise lines had all made exaggerated environmental claims, ordering them to cease their campaigns. These included unfounded claims on being eco-friendly as well as those around natural gas.
3 September. Bermuda’s Monetary Authority aims to crack down on greenwashing amongst all Bermudian-registered and authorised funds. Draft consultation includes new rules to require clearer sustainability disclosures, ban misleading fund names, and substantiate ESG claims.
5 September. Canada’s largest public transit system will vote next week on updating its advertising policy for fossil fuel companies. The Toronto Transit Commission aims to require any ads by fossil fuel groups to have adequate and proper testing for environmental claims.
Business Impact: Even without a crystal ball, it should be readily apparent where this is all headed. Regulatory bodies are pushing top-down action. Consumers are doing the same from the bottom up. Those caught in the middle unaware will face the consequences.
Educational Spotlight: The "Future Promise" Trap That Caught Australian Gas Networks
The Australian Gas Networks’ case provides a perfect teaching moment about one of the most dangerous forms of greenwashing: future-tense environmental promises.
What the company claimed: Gas distributed to homes would be renewable "within a generation." That equates to approximately 20-25 years.
Why this is problematic: According to the ACCC, the Australian Gas Networks’ “Love Gas” campaign engaged in multiple forms of greenwashing.
Overstated claims. “The ads overstated the likelihood of Australian Gas Networks overcoming significant technical and economic barriers to distribute renewable gas to households within a generation.”
Economic viability. “It is not currently possible to distribute renewable gas at scale and at an economically viable price.”
Misrepresentation. “Even though Australian Gas Networks knew the future of renewable gas was uncertain, it made an unqualified representation to consumers that it would distribute renewable gas to households within a generation.”
Misleading impression. “The ads were intended to encourage consumers to connect to, or remain connected to, Australian Gas Networks’ distribution network and to purchase gas appliances for their homes, based on the misleading impression they would receive ‘renewable gas’ within a generation.”
Informed choice. “Consumers were deprived of the opportunity to make fully informed choices.”
The legal test: Australian courts will now determine what constitutes "reasonable grounds" for future environmental claims. This precedent will reshape how every Australian company can discuss sustainability commitments.
Red flags for your business:
Promises beyond current technology capabilities
Emotional manipulation in advertising (the "growing up with gas" narrative)
Vague timelines without specific milestones
No evidence of concrete transition pathways
Actionable advice: Before making any future-tense green claim, ask: "could this stand up to deep scrutiny in Federal Court?" If there's any hesitation, don't make the claim.
What's Next?
Decisions on the horizon
The Australian Senate Select Committee on Information Integrity on Climate Change and Energy closing date for submissions is 12 September 2025.
EFRAG's revised European Sustainability Reporting Standards public consultation period closes on 29 September 2025.
Also keep an eye on movements from the Danish Presidency of the EU on the Green Claims Directive’s future, as well as release of Australia’s 2035 climate action plan.
Companies to watch: Any major consumer brand that hasn't updated their green claims in the past six months is a prime candidate for enforcement action. Those in the fashion, materials, and food space are most likely next in line.
Your competitive advantage: While your competitors scramble to avoid penalties, this is your opportunity to build genuine sustainability credentials that don't just avoid fines but build lasting competitive advantage. Any company making long-term sustainability commitments without bulletproof evidence trails is now squarely in crosshairs.
Ready to bulletproof your organisation against the new enforcement reality? I help companies navigate this rapidly evolving landscape while building authentic sustainability strategies that actually work. Schedule a time to talk or book in a complimentary 30-minute risk assessment here.
Found this analysis valuable? Share it with your network! The business leaders who act on this intelligence now will be the ones still standing when the dust settles.
Comments