Crackdown on Greenwashing Claims

Summary#

This bill aims to stop “greenwashing” in British Columbia. It amends the consumer protection law to set clear rules for climate-related claims made to consumers, like “carbon neutral,” “net zero,” or “low-emission.” It requires proof and public disclosure for these claims and sets strong penalties for misleading the public.

• Misleading statements about a product’s or company’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, or about emissions reductions or offsets, are treated as deceptive practices.
• Companies that make climate-related claims must post the basis for those claims on a public website and follow government-set standards.
• If a claim relies on carbon offsets, the offset program must meet set standards for methods, monitoring, reporting, and verification.
• The regulator can issue higher administrative penalties and must consider any environmental harm when setting them.
• The consumer protection authority must publish inspections and enforcement actions about environmental and climate claims online.
• New offences include fines per day (up to $200,000 for individuals and $1,000,000 for companies), possible jail for individuals, and extra penalties tied to profits or company revenues.
• The law will take effect on a date set by the provincial cabinet (not immediately).

What it means for you#

• Consumers

  • You should see clearer and more reliable green claims on ads, labels, and websites.
  • You can check a company’s website for details that back up climate-related claims.
  • You can see public reports about inspections and enforcement for misleading environmental claims.

• Businesses and marketers

  • If you claim a product or your business is low-carbon, carbon neutral, net zero, or similar, you must:
    • Post the basis for the claim on your public website.
    • Use methods and standards set by the government (which may reference Canadian or international rules).
    • Ensure any carbon offsets you cite meet approved standards.
  • Claims that are “misleading in effect,” even if not literally false, can lead to penalties.
  • Penalties can be significant:
    • Administrative penalties up to $100,000 for individuals and $1,000,000 for corporations in serious cases.
    • Offence fines up to $200,000 per day for individuals (and up to 12 months in jail) and up to $1,000,000 per day for corporations.
    • Courts can add, for the first day of an offence, up to 3 times the estimated financial gain, or for corporations 3% of annual worldwide revenues if the gain cannot be measured.
  • Plan for record-keeping and internal review of climate claims in advertising, packaging, and sales materials.

• Small businesses

  • Expect added work to gather data and document claims.
  • You may need help from accountants, sustainability advisers, or certifiers, especially for life‑cycle emissions or offsets.

• Providers of carbon offsets

  • Programs used in consumer-facing claims must meet set standards for methodology, monitoring, reporting, and verification.

Expenses#

No publicly available information.

Proponents' View#

• Protects consumers from misleading green claims and improves trust in the marketplace.
• Levels the playing field so honest businesses are not undercut by competitors who exaggerate environmental benefits.
• Strong penalties tied to financial gains or company revenue deter false or sloppy claims.
• Public disclosure and reporting make enforcement visible and increase accountability.
• Clear standards for offsets reduce low-quality or double-counted credits and support real emissions reductions.
• Supports the province’s climate goals by curbing claims that could undermine genuine action.

Opponents' View#

• Compliance may be costly and complex, especially for small businesses that lack in-house experts.
• Many details will come later by regulation, creating uncertainty about what methods or proofs are acceptable.
• Risk of punishing good‑faith mistakes, since measuring full life‑cycle emissions can be hard and data can change.
• Fear of large fines or jail could chill useful communication about sustainability efforts.
• May overlap with existing advertising and competition rules on environmental claims, adding duplication and red tape.
• Businesses might pass compliance costs to consumers through higher prices.