Competition Bureau Releases Guidelines on Environmental Claims

On June 5, 2025, the Competition Bureau (Bureau) released its highly anticipated final guidance on the new environmental claims provisions, also known as greenwashing, under the Competition Act (Act) (Guidelines).

As discussed in our previous bulletins Competition Bureau Launches Consultation on Greenwashing Enforcement Guidance and Canada’s New Greenwashing Laws Enacted, starting on June 20, 2025, the Competition Tribunal (Tribunal) will be able to grant private parties leave to bring applications for alleged breaches of certain provisions of the Act, including the new environmental claims provisions (and the civil misleading advertising provisions more generally), if it finds that it is in the public interest to do so.

The Guidelines set out the Bureau’s enforcement priorities relating to environmental claims under the new greenwashing provisions as well as under the longstanding general misleading advertising and performance claims provisions of the Act. For example, the Bureau will not be focused on policing securities filings and other non-promotional materials. While the Bureau cautions that private litigants and the Tribunal are not bound by its perspectives, the Bureau states the Guidelines will be its reference point when it makes submissions or intervenes in private litigation.

Bureau Clarification on Scope and Requirements of the New Greenwashing Provisions 

• Consistent with the plain meaning of the term “international,” the Bureau has taken the view that a methodology recognized in two or more countries will generally be considered an internationally recognized methodology. Such recognition can come from standard-setting bodies, regulatory authorities, or industries and businesses (the governments of those countries do not need to recognize the methodology).
  • It has been highlighted that, at times, a Canadian standard may be more appropriate than an international one. Moreover, the requirement for a standard to be “international” may hamper the ability of Canadian organizations to create and implement innovative methods of mitigating the environmental impacts of their businesses. The Guidelines do not resolve this issue, but note that the Bureau “will assume that methodologies required or recommended by federal, provincial or territorial government programs in Canada for the substantiation of environmental claims are consistent with internationally recognized methodologies.”
• The Guidelines require that parties ensure the internationally recognized methodology they select is “adequate and proper in the circumstances, including with regard to the Canadian context as appropriate, such as the geography and climate,” a requirement not present in the statutory language.
• The Guidelines attempt to address the concern that internationally recognized methodologies do not exist for all types of environmental claims. Specifically, the Guidelines recommend:
  • Where there is no single methodology for testing a specific claim (for example, because the international community has not caught up to technological innovation), the “advertiser may be able to rely on two or more internationally recognized methodologies that together can create substantiation for the claim, or that are used for substantiating similar claims.”
  • The Guidelines suggest that if an internationally recognized methodology for a claim does not exist, and there is not a collective or similar methodology to rely on, the party making the claim should simply not make the claim (and instead make claims that can be supported in accordance with the requirements).
• The Guidelines recognize that certain claims may not be subject to testing. As an example, the Guidelines state that while a claim that a product contains 20% recycled content must not be materially false or misleading, it does not need to be treated as a performance or environmental claim that would require testing.
• Concerns have been raised that small and medium-sized businesses are likely to be disadvantaged due to a lack of resources to meet the compliance burden. Despite this, the Bureau takes the view that the law applies equally to organizations of all sizes; accordingly, parties should not expect the Bureau to give a free pass to organizations with fewer resources for non-compliance with the greenwashing provisions.
• The Bureau takes the view that internationally recognized methodologies exist to adequately and properly substantiate net-zero claims, such that organizations with net-zero goals can comply with the new law.

Further, the Guidelines state that the new greenwashing provisions are intended to capture deceptive representations made to the public in marketing materials for the purpose of promoting a product or business, and that the Bureau “does not concern itself” with representations made under securities regulations, which “can include evolving frameworks for the voluntary and mandatory communication of certain environmental information to current and prospective securities investors.” That said, a “representation” is broadly defined and includes online and in-store advertisements, direct mail, social media messages, promotional emails and endorsements, such that representations originally made in securities filings that are subsequently made in a new context may result in such representations becoming a marketing representation subject to scrutiny.

Finally, the Guidelines confirm that the Act’s due diligence defence, which requires a party to demonstrate that it exercised due diligence to prevent the alleged deceptive marketing practice from occurring, applies to the new greenwashing provisions. They also confirm that businesses are not required to publicly disclose the underlying information that supports/substantiates their environmental claims.

Reminder of Greenwashing Compliance Principles 

The Guidelines reiterate six principles for businesses to assess whether environmental claims comply with the Act:

• Environmental claims must be truthful — both in terms of their literal meaning and the general impression they convey.
• The environmental benefit of a product and any performance claims should be adequately and properly tested, with testing conducted prior to making the claim.
• When making comparative environmental claims, businesses should be specific about what is being compared, and the extent of the difference between what is being compared.
• Businesses should avoid exaggeration or overstatements when making environmental claims.
• Environmental claims should not be vague: they should be clear and specific, and should clarify what aspects of the product, business or business activity the claim is referring to.
• Environmental claims that are made about the future or that include a prospective element should be substantiated and involve a clear plan.

Key Takeaways for Businesses

• Ensure that all marketing representations made or that are accessible to the public have been tested or substantiated, as required, before making the representation.
• Seek advice from legal counsel if you are unsure of the potential risks of environmental representations.
• Ensure that a comprehensive record of steps taken to comply with the greenwashing provisions is maintained, including the internationally recognized methodologies relied on to substantiate environmental claims.
• The Guidelines set out the Bureau’s enforcement approach, but they are not binding on the Tribunal or private litigants.

For more information, please contact any member of our Competition, Antitrust & Foreign Investment group.