EU Regulations 2026: how the EU is keeping businesses on track

What you can expect from this article

For many companies, nothing works without rules when it comes to sustainability. On the contrary: wherever possible, many companies resort to tricks, cheating and evasion. It is therefore hardly surprising that the EU is constantly drawing new boundaries with new regulations and directives. On the weekly programme „hsp live at 11“, Dr Steve Waitschat, an expert and consultant on sustainability reporting at the law firm Clostermann & Jasper, and hsp Managing Director Paul Liese discussed current EU directives and regulations.

Why EU regulations affect German companies

Sustainability reporting, CSRD, Omnibus, ESRS: In recent months, much of the focus has been on reporting obligations. And there is still a great deal to be done in this area. For example, the final transposition of the CSRD into national law is still pending in Germany. At EU level, work has also been carried out on deadlines and dates of application through the „stop-the-clock“ mechanism. Understandably, this is leading many companies to adopt a wait-and-see approach. However, Dr Steve Waitschat explicitly warns against this.

In his view, the issues have not disappeared, but have simply been redistributed. Consequently, German companies face a number of regulations. Turning a blind eye to this could become a major problem. This is because not all of these regulations are linked to the well-known CSRD thresholds. So it is not always a question of having 1,000 employees or a turnover of 450 million euros. In some cases, it is simply a matter of whether a company uses packaging, imports batteries, places products on the market or advertises using sustainability claims.

Anti-greenwashing: EU to require rock-solid evidence in future

A particularly clear example is the Directive on Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition, often referred to as „Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition“ or „EmpCo“ for short. Directive (EU) 2024/825 is already in force and aims to better protect consumers from unfair practices and misleading sustainability claims. For businesses, this means they must provide evidence to back up claims such as „climate-neutral“, „environmentally friendly“, ‘sustainable’ or similar green promises.

In the interview, Steve makes it clear that this can extend right down to the smallest details, such as websites, packaging and advertising claims. Anyone promoting sustainability needs evidence – and it must be such that it can be produced in the event of any doubt. This applies not only to manufacturing companies, but also to service providers. For example, anyone advertising „Green IT“, climate-neutral services or sustainable processes should be able to substantiate the basis for these claims. Companies must certainly draw one clear conclusion from this: marketing, senior management, sustainability officers and the legal department must work closely together. After all, when it comes to sustainability, it is no longer gut feeling that counts, but facts.

PPWR: It is not just manufacturers who are affected

The new EU Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR) is yet another example of sustainability becoming a very tangible reality. Regulation (EU) 2025/40 replaces the previous Packaging Directive and, according to the European Commission, will come into force from mid-2026. It essentially covers packaging and packaging waste; less stringent rules are provided for micro-enterprises. In our conversation, Steve emphasises that it is not just traditional packaging manufacturers who are affected. Importers, retailers and e-commerce companies must also take a close look.

This is because packaging is not just the product packaging on the shelf, but also shipping boxes, outer packaging and other packaging materials. In future, companies will need to pay much closer attention to packaging volumes, types of material, recyclability, the proportion of recycled content and the rate of reusable packaging. At first glance, this sounds like a task primarily for large retail or manufacturing companies. In practice, however, its scope can quickly become much broader. Anyone who dispatches, imports, repackages or places goods on the market should check exactly what obligations apply to them.

EU Battery Regulation puts pressure on the throwaway culture

The EU Battery Regulation (EU) 2023/1542 has been in force since 2023 and is being phased in gradually. It covers batteries and waste batteries and applies, amongst others, to manufacturers, importers and distributors. In this context, Steve highlights an important practical issue: when it comes to batteries, many companies initially think of battery manufacturers. But that may be too narrow a view.

For example, a company that manufactures a product containing batteries and imports those batteries from a third country may suddenly find itself in a regulatory role that it had not previously even considered. It is then no longer just a matter of technical specifications. Issues such as carbon footprint, recycled content, durability, due diligence in raw material sourcing and human rights also become important.

Digital product passport makes product data a prerequisite for market entry

The digital product passport is particularly exciting. It is a key element of the EU Ecodesign Regulation for sustainable products, Regulation (EU) 2024/1781. This regulation establishes a framework for ecodesign requirements and digital product passports. The European Commission describes the digital product passport as a tool for storing and making accessible relevant data on a product’s sustainability, durability and environmental aspects. Steve regards the digital product passport as one of the most important topics, about which, in his view, there is still surprisingly little discussion.

After all, the requirements can be far-reaching. Companies must adapt to product data that, until now, has often not been systematically available: material origin, CO₂ figures at product level, reparability, recyclability and other information. All of this is of a different nature to a sustainability report at company level. A corporate carbon footprint does not automatically answer the question of what a single product’s carbon footprint is. This requires different data, different calculations and, often, different processes. For German companies, this means that anyone who develops, imports or places products on the market should not dismiss the digital product passport as a distant prospect. It is an indication of the direction in which regulation is moving: away from general declarations of intent, towards product-specific, verifiable data.

Banks, too, will be taking an even closer look in future

Another point raised during the discussion is particularly relevant in practice: even if a company is not currently subject to direct reporting requirements, obligations may arise through other channels. Steve, for instance, mentions companies where banks are suddenly requesting more sustainability information. Not out of idealism, but from a risk perspective. After all, banks assess credit risks. And this increasingly includes climate risks, regulatory risks and transformation risks. Is a company located in an area at risk of flooding? Are CO₂ costs rising particularly sharply in a particular sector? Is a business model under regulatory pressure? All of these factors can influence the risk assessment.

The key message to take away from the discussion is that German companies should start now to systematically review their own areas of interaction with EU regulations. This involves simple but crucial questions:

• Which sustainability statements do we publish?
• What types of packaging do we use or supply?
• Do we import or manufacture batteries?
• What product data do we already have?
• What information would we need to receive from suppliers?
• What evidence could we provide in case of doubt?

This is precisely where it will be decided whether sustainability regulation remains manageable or later becomes a frantic chore. After all, many of the new requirements have one thing in common: they do not call for fine words, but for robust processes, clear documentation and traceable data.