What is the risk of not publishing environmental labelling? Penalties and consequences

1No fine, so nothing to fear? Wrong.

No direct criminal or administrative penalty currently applies for failing to publish environmental labelling. No DGCCRF offence report, no set fine. This leads many brands to believe the subject can wait.

The current framework is voluntary: the Climate and Resilience Act provides for administrative fines only for a future labelling requirement. Meanwhile, three market mechanisms operate, triggering neither an official letter nor a court hearing, but hitting where it hurts: the score displayed on the shelf, the distributor account, the public reputation. These mechanisms are not hypothetical. The first has been open to any third party since 1 October 2026; the other two stem from commercial pressure.

2Mechanism 1: the default score published in your place

The Decree of 6 September 2025 allows anyone, since 1 October 2026, to calculate and publish a garment's environmental cost without the brand's agreement. If it has not published its own score on the national environmental labelling portal, the third party calculates using the method's default values, deliberately set higher (meaning penalising). In practice, optional parameters left blank take unfavourable values: spinning in an unknown country, a high share of air transport outside Europe and Türkiye, a durability coefficient close to the minimum of 0.67. Weaving, finishing and garment-making countries remain mandatory. The displayed score is automatically worse than reality.

This mechanism does not operate through the portal, which calculates no score for brands: it follows from Article D. 541-244 of the Environmental Code, created by the Decree, and has operated without any further legislation since 1 October 2026. If the brand has published its own environmental cost, any third party must use that value. The legislator's message is clear: failing to publish offers no protection, and ultimately exposes you more than openly publishing an average score.

3Mechanism 2: losing a distributor listing

This is the most immediate and measurable consequence. Several large retailers have begun requiring the environmental score in their supplier specifications even before the regulatory requirement applies to the sector. This is true in premium cosmetics, DIY and furniture, and certain premium e-commerce channels.

An example from practice: in 2025, we supported a furniture brand with 40 employees, one of whose distributors accounts for 22% of turnover. The distributor gave 3 months' notice of a score requirement for the products it listed. The brand had to complete its scoring urgently for 6 products: €18,000 excl. VAT instead of €11,000 had it planned calmly. The hidden cost of delay is rarely considered in the initial decision.

For upstream B2B brands (suppliers of fabrics, components or ingredients to brands subject to the requirements), the cascading effect is even more automatic: the end client needs the data for its own scoring, and refusing means losing the account. See the textile eco-design guide for supplier implications.

4Mechanism 3: someone else publishes your score in your place

The national portal is public, but textile scoring input data are accessible to anyone through Ecobalyse. A product's composition visible on the label, origin declared on the retail website, processes inferred from the price segment: a journalist, NGO, competitor or consumer comparison service can calculate your score without asking you, and publish it.

This calculation will not use your detailed data. It will use average assumptions, so will probably be less favourable than your actual score. But it will be there, indexed on Google, shared on LinkedIn, picked up by the trade press. Third-party scoring that portrays your brand poorly commits you publicly, and refuting it requires publication of your actual figures, which you should have done at your own pace. Control of the timetable slips away.

Article D. 541-244 of the Environmental Code makes this publication conditional on the brand's agreement (or publication of its cost on the portal) only until 1 October 2026: after that date, a textile NGO, comparison service or competitor can publish the score of a brand that has not yet communicated. The only way to retain control is to publish yourself, using your own data and narrative. The details of the mechanism on 1 October 2026 specify what the third party may do and what it must submit for its publication to comply.

5What to do this week, rather than next month

This week: if your sector already has a framework (textiles) or is about to (furniture, sectors with an approaching ESPR delegated act), take stock of what you already have in your organisation: composition, origin, identified suppliers, certifications. One hour of mapping is enough to know where you stand.

Within 30 days: launch pilot scoring on 1 to 3 representative products to gauge the actual effort and identify eco-design opportunities. Typical budget: €5,000 to €10,000 excl. VAT, or an 18-day Bpifrance Diag Écoconception funded at 60 or 70%. This investment defuses the panic as the deadline approaches, and prevents the three punitive mechanisms from being triggered.

Within 6 months: deploy in sequence across the 30% of the catalogue accounting for 80% of turnover (the Pareto principle). Not everything at once. A brand publishing 30% of its range with reliable scores and an openly owned narrative is better positioned than one publishing 100% with fragile data, which will have to correct them under pressure in 6 months, in more expensive and stressful circumstances.

The cost of inaction. A furniture brand with 40 employees that waits another 12 months risks losing a listing (mechanism 2), an unfavourable score requiring correction (mechanism 1) and negative press coverage (mechanism 3). The amount depends mainly on the distributor's share of turnover, and should be compared with scoring planned calmly for €11,000 to €18,000 excl. VAT.

6Frequently asked questions

7Key takeaways

• No criminal penalty provided for in 2026, but three market mechanisms already active or available that hit where it hurts.
• Mechanism 1: since 1 October 2026, a third party can publish a score in your place, calculated using penalising default values, if you have not published your own.
• Mechanism 2: demanding distributors suspend listings in the absence of a score, already observed in cosmetics, furniture and premium e-commerce.
• Mechanism 3: journalists, NGOs and competitors can calculate your score from public data and publish it without you.
• The cost of inaction: a lost listing, a score to correct and negative press soon weigh more heavily than scoring planned calmly, at €11,000 to €18,000 excl. VAT for a brand with 40 employees.

You lose control of the timetable as soon as one of these three mechanisms is triggered. The only way to retain control is to score before others do it in your place, starting with a pilot on 1 to 3 representative products. This investment defuses the panic as the deadline approaches and turns an imposed requirement into a commercial approach you own. Typical pilot budget: €5,000 to €10,000 excl. VAT, or Diag Écoconception at €5,400 or €7,200 excl. VAT payable by the company.

Sources: Decree No. 2025-957 of 6 September 2025 (textiles), Article D. 541-244 of the Environmental Code (publication by third parties), Order of 6 September 2025 (calculation method), national environmental labelling portal, Celsius engagement experience 2024-2026.

Further resources

Frequently asked questions

1Are there no fines for failing to display environmental labelling in 2026?

No direct administrative fine applies in 2026 for failing to publish. The law provides for fines only for a future labelling requirement: while labelling remains voluntary, the pressure is commercial. This could change within the next 24 months if publication rates remain low, but currently the penalty operates through mechanisms (default values, loss of listings, reputational risk) rather than criminal law.

2Is publishing an average or poor score worse than publishing nothing?

No, almost always the opposite. Openly owning an average score with a narrative of ongoing improvement protects the brand. No visible score, or an unfavourable third-party score published in your place, puts you permanently on the defensive. The right timing is to score, then optimise the worst-rated products, then publish, in that order.

3Can an NGO publish my score without asking me?

Yes, since 1 October 2026: Article D. 541-244 of the Environmental Code allows anyone to calculate and publish a garment's environmental cost without the brand's agreement. Some data are public (composition on the label, garment-making country), but the third party must also provide the mass and weaving and finishing countries, then submit its calculation on the portal before publishing. Before that date, the brand's agreement was required, or it had to have published its cost on the portal already. The only way to retain control is to publish your detailed data first.

4How long before the default-value mechanism is activated?

No further legislation is needed: Article D. 541-244, created by the September 2025 Decree, has allowed any third party to calculate and publish a garment's environmental cost without the brand's agreement since 1 October 2026. The national portal calculates no scores for brands: third parties apply the method's default values when your data are missing.

5What is the B2B commercial risk of not publishing a score?

The main risk is losing distributor listings. Several retailers already require environmental scores in their supplier specifications, in premium cosmetics, DIY, furniture and certain e-commerce channels, before any sector requirement. A furniture brand with 40 employees, one of whose distributors accounted for 22% of turnover, received 3 months' notice: urgently scoring 6 products cost €18,000 excl. VAT instead of €11,000. For upstream suppliers (fabrics, components), refusing to provide data to the client means losing the account.

6What should you do if you are already behind on environmental labelling?

Proceed in stages, starting this week with an inventory of what already exists: composition, origin, identified suppliers, certifications. Within 30 days, launch pilot scoring on 1 to 3 representative products, for a typical budget of €5,000 to €10,000 excl. VAT. Within 6 months, deploy across the 30% of the catalogue accounting for 80% of turnover, using reliable data, rather than publishing everything at once on fragile foundations. For textiles, Ecobalyse can calculate an initial score using default values, to be refined later with supplier data.

Ask Sébastien your questionA personal reply within 24 working hours

Send my questionor: [email protected]