What changed between the plenary report and the adopted text

Removed:Article 1 – paragraph 2 a (new): 2a. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 18 to amend the list referred to in paragraph 2 to delete or add new or revised legislation where they provide a level of requirements that can be considered equivalent to those provided by this Directive. The requirements that shall be required to be equivalent include: / (a) level of disclosure of information; / (b) the requirements on third-party verification prior to the claim being put on the market; / (c) the level of enforcement.

Added:(36) Consumers should have easy access to the information on the product or the trader that is the subject of the explicit environmental claim, including directly on the product or accompanying the product, and regarding information substantiating thatthe claim applicable to the product. This information should also consider needs of older consumers. For that purpose, traders should either provide this information in a physical form or provide a weblink, QR code, digital product passport or equivalent leading to a website where more detailed information on the substantiation of the explicit environmental claim is made available in at least one of the official languages of the Member State where the claim is made. In order to facilitate the enforcement of this Directive, the weblink, QR code or equivalent should also ensure easy access to the certificate of conformity regarding the substantiation of the explicit environmental claim and the contact information of the verifier who drew up that certificate. The underlying studies, assessments, methodologies or calculations should be made publicly available, unless the information is a trade secret in line with Article 2, paragraph 1 of Directive (EU) 2016/943. [Am. 24]

Removed:Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 8: (8) ‘environmental label’ means a sustainability label covering one or more environmental aspects of a product, a process or a trader;

Added:(37) In order to avoid potential disproportionate impacts on the microenterprises, thethese smallest companies should be exempted from the requirements of Article 5 linked to information on the substantiation of explicit environmental claims unless these enterprises wish to obtain a certificate of conformity of explicit environmental claim that will be recognised by the competent authorities across the Union. [Am. 25]

Removed:Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 12: (12) ‘value chain’ means all activities and processes that are part of the life cycle of a product or activity of a trader, including remanufacturing, reuse, recycling and end-of-life;

Added:(38) When the Commission adopts delegated acts to supplement the provisions on substantiation of explicit environmental claims it may be necessary to also supplement the provisions on communication of such claims. For example, in case specific life-cycle-based rules on substantiation of explicit environmental claims for certain products group or sector are established, it may be necessary to add supplementary rules on presentation of environmental impacts assessed based on these rules by requiring that three main environmental impacts are presented next to the aggregated indicator of overall environmental performance. To this end the Commission should be empowered to adopt delegated acts to supplement the provisions on communication of explicit environmental claims.

Removed:Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 15: (15) ‘secondary information’ means information that is based on other sources than primary information including peer-reviewed literature studies, engineering studies and patents.

Added:(39) Currently, more than 200 environmental labels are used on the Union market. They present important differences in how they operate as regards for example the transparency and comprehensiveness of the standards or methods used, the frequency of revisions, or the level of auditing or verification. These differences have an impact on how reliable the information communicated on the environmental labels is. While claims based on the EU Ecolabel or its national equivalents follow a solid scientific basis, have a transparent development of criteria, require testing and third-party verification and foresee regular monitoring, evidence suggests that many environmental labels currently on the EU market are misleading. In particular, many environmental labels lack sufficient verification procedures. Therefore, explicit environmental claims made on environmental labels should be based on a certification scheme.

Removed:Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 19: (19) ‘environmental impact’ means any measurable change to the environment, whether positive or negative, that wholly or partially results from a trader’s or sector’s activities or from a product or product group during its life cycle.

Added:(40) In cases where an environmental label involves a commercial communication to consumers that suggests or creates the impression that a product has a positive or no impact on the environment, or is less damaging to the environment than competing products without the label, that environmental label also constitutes an explicit environmental claim. The content of such environmental label is therefore subject to the requirements on substantiation and communication of explicit environmental claims.

Removed:Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 19 a (new): (19a) ‘environmental labelling scheme’ means a certification scheme which certifies that a product, a process or a trader complies with the requirements for an environmental label.

Added:(41) The environmental labels often aim at providing consumers with an aggregated scoring presenting a cumulative environmental impact of products or traders to allow for direct comparisons between products or traders. Such aggregated scoring however presents risks of misleading consumers as the aggregated indicator may dilute negative environmental impacts of certain aspects of the product with more positive environmental impacts of other aspects of the product. In addition, when developed by different operators, such labels usually differ in terms of specific methodology underlying the aggregated score such as the environmental impacts considered or the weighting attributed to these environmental impacts. This may result in the same product receiving different score or rating depending on the scheme. This concern arises in relation to schemes established in the Union and in third countries. This is contributing to the fragmentation of the internal market, risks putting smaller companies at a disadvantage, and is likely to further mislead consumers and undermine their trust in environmental labels. In order to avoid this risk and ensure better harmonisation within the single market, the explicit environmental claims, including environmental labels, based on an aggregated score representing a cumulative environmental impact of products or traders should not be deemed to be sufficiently substantiated, unless those aggregated scores stem from Union rulesmeet requirements ensuring the reliability of the underlying environmental labelling schemes, including the delegated acts that the Commission is empowered to adopt under this Directive, resulting in Union-wide harmonised schemes for all products or per specific product group based on a single methodology to ensure coherence and comparabilitywith respect to their assessment methods and governance. [Am. 26]

Removed:Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a: (a) specify if the claim is related to the whole product, part of a product, part of a life-cycle of a product, or certain aspects of a product, or to all activities of a trader or a certain part or aspect of these activities, as relevant to the claim;

Added:(42) In accordance with the proposal for a Directive on empowering consumers for the green transition, which amends Directive 2005/29/EC, displaying a sustainability label which is not based on a certification scheme or not established by public authorities constitutes an unfair commercial practice in all circumstances. This means that the ‘self-certified’ sustainability labels, where no third-party verification and regular monitoring takes place as regards compliance with the underlying requirements of the sustainability label are prohibited.

Removed:Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b: (b) rely on independent, peer-reviewed, widely recognised, robust and verifiable scientific evidence, use accurate information and take into account relevant Union or international standards;

Added:(43) In order to combat misleading explicit environmental claims communicated in the form of environmental labels and increase consumer trust in environmental labels, including trademarks and logos of certification schemes, this Directive should establish governance criteria that all environmental labelling schemes are to comply with, complementing thus the requirements set in the said proposal amending Directive 2005/29/EC. [Am. 27]

Removed:Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d: (d) where a claim is made on environmental performance, take into account all environmental aspects or environmental impacts which are significant to assessing the environmental performance, including from a life-cycle perspective;

Added:(44) In order to avoid further proliferation of national or regional officially recognised EN ISO 14024 type I environmental labelling (‘ecolabelling’) schemes, and other environmental labelling schemes, and to ensure more harmonisation in the internal market, new national or regional environmental labelling schemes should be developed only under the Union law. Nevertheless, Member States can request the Commission to consider developing public labelling schemes at the Union level for product groups or sectors where such labels do not yet exist in Union law and where harmonisation would bring added value to achieve the sustainability and internal market objectives in an efficient manner. [Am. 28]

Removed:Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point g: (g) identify whether improving environmental impacts, environmental aspects or environmental performance subject to the claim leads to negative trade-offs in relation to the environment and to specific environmental impacts, including on climate change resource consumption and circularity, sustainable use and protection of water and marine resources, pollution, biodiversity, animal welfare and ecosystems;

Added:(45) In order not to create unnecessary barriers to international trade and to ensure equal treatment with the public schemes established in the Union, the public authorities outside of the Union setting up new labelling schemes should be allowed to request approval from the Commission for use of the label on the Union market. This approval should be conditional on the scheme’s contribution to reaching the objectives of this Directive and provided that the schemes demonstrate added value in terms of environmental ambition, coverage of environmental impacts, product group or sector and meet all the requirements of this Directive.

Removed:Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point h: (h) separate any carbon credits used from greenhouse gas emissions as additional environmental information, specify whether those offsets relate to emission reductions or removals;

Added:(46) Environmental labelling schemes established by private operators, if too many and overlapping in terms of scope, may create confusion in consumers or undermine their trust in environmental labels. Therefore, Member States should only allow thatexisting environmental labelling schemes to be depicted in business-to-consumer commercial practice after this Directive has entered into application and when such schemes are in compliance with the obligations set in this Directive, and should only allow new environmental labelling schemes to be are established by private operators provided that they offer significant added value as compared to the existing national or regional schemes, in compliance with this Directive, in terms of environmental ambition of the criteria to award the label, coverage of relevant environmental impacts, and completeness of the underlying assessment. Member States should set up a procedure for the approval of new environmental labelling schemes based on a certificate of conformity drawn up by the independent verifier, and assess the claims made by existing environmental and sustainability labelling and certification schemes. This should apply to schemes established in the Union and outside of the Union, including existing schemes. [Am. 29]

Removed:Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new): (ha) for use of carbon credits in accordance with paragraph 3b, indicate the share of residual emissions within total emissions, the share of biogenic and fossil emissions within these residual emissions and the quantity and type of activity (biogenic emission reductions or sequestration or permanent removals) underlying the credits used, providing evidence that the credits have been appropriately retired from the registry of the certification scheme, in order to avoid double counting;

Added:(47) In order to provide legal certainty and facilitate enforcement of the provisions on new national and regional officially recognised environmental labelling schemes and new private labelling schemes, the Commission should publish a list of such schemes that may either continue to apply on the Union market or enter the Union market. [Am. 30]

Removed:Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point i: (i) include primary information for environmental impacts, environmental aspects or environmental performance, which are subject to the claim that is accessible or obtainable by the trader, including through possession, research or procurement;

Added:(48) In order to ensure a harmonised approach by the Member States to the assessment and approval of environmental labelling schemes developed by private operators, and to establish an approval procedure by the Commission for proposed schemes established by public authorities outside of the Union, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts setting out common rules specifying detailed requirements for approval of such environmental labelling schemes, the format and content of supporting documents and rules of procedure to approve such schemes. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council. [Am. 31]

Removed:Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point j: (j) include as a supplement to primary information, relevant secondary information for environmental impacts, environmental aspects, or environmental performance which is representative of the specific value chain of the product or the trader on which a claim is made, in cases where no primary information is available, accompanied with a justification of why secondary information has been used.

Added:(49) It is essential that explicit environmental claims and environmental labelling schemes reflect correctly the environmental performance and environmental impacts covered by the claim both directly on the product and accompanying the product, and consider the latest scientific evidence. Member States should therefore ensure that the trader making the claim reviews and updates and environmental labelling schemes review and update the substantiation and communication of the claims at least every 5 years to ensure compliance with the requirements of this Directive. [Am. 32]

Removed:Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point j a (new): (ja) for use of carbon credits for contribution claims, ensure no financial contribution is used to claim an improved climate or environmental impact of the product or trader, and separate any financial contributions from the climate or environmental impact of the product or trader as additional environmental information.

Added:(49a) Article 13(1)e of the EU Tobacco Products Directive 2014/40/EU prohibits environmental claims on tobacco products and packaging, however it does not prohibit tobacco industry entities from making green claims about their activities as a whole, particularly through advertising campaigns on their environmental performance which could mislead consumers; therefore no environmental claims on tobacco industry activities should be allowed. [Am. 33]

Removed:Article 3 – paragraph 3 a (new): 3a. Explicit environmental claims claiming that a product has a neutral, reduced or positive environmental impact based on the use of carbon credits shall be prohibited, in accordance with Directive 2005/29/EC as amended by Directive (EU) .../... of the European Parliament and of the Council [Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition].

Added:(50) To ensure that explicit environmental claims are reliable, it is necessary that Member States set up procedure for verifying that the substantiation and communication of explicit environmental claims, including environmental labels, or the environmental labelling schemes, comply with the requirements set out in this Directive.

Removed:Article 3 – paragraph 3 b (new): 3b. Climate-related compensation and emission reduction claims based on carbon credits can only be used for residual emissions of a trader in accordance with Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/2772 through carbon credits certified under the proposed Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Union certification framework for carbon removals. Compensation and reduction claims relating to fossil emissions may only be made using permanent removals as defined in the proposed Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Union certification framework for carbon removals.

Added:(51) In order to allow the competent authorities to control more efficiently the implementation of the provisions of this Directive and to prevent as much as possible unsubstantiated explicit environmental claims, including environmental labels, from appearing on the market, verifiers complying with the harmonised requirements set up by the Directive should check that both the information used for the substantiation and communication of explicit environmental claims meet the requirements of this Directive. In order to avoid misleading consumers, the verification should in any case take place before the environmental claims are made public or environmental labels are displayed. However, in order to avoid waste of products or packaging which have already been printed prior to the entry into force of this Directive, Member States may introduce a transitional period between the date of entry into force and the date of application of this Directive, during which time existing environmental claims submitted for verification can be used. Member States may prioritise the verification of claims made prior to the entry into force of this Directive. The verifier can, if appropriate, indicate several ways of communicating the explicit environmental claim that comply with the requirements of this Directive to avoid the need for continuous re-certification in case the way of communication is slightly modified without affecting the compliance with the requirements of this Directive. To facilitate the traders compliance with the rules on substantiation and communication of explicit environmental claims, including the environmental labels, the verification should take into account the nature and content of the claim or the environmental label, including whether they appear to be unfair in the light of Directive 2005/29/EC. [Am. 34]

Removed:Article 3 – paragraph 3 c (new): 3c. Carbon credits other than those certified under [Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Union certification framework for carbon removals] may be used in duly justified cases where those schemes are recognised by the Commission as part of the list of compliant schemes corresponding to equivalent requirements to those provided by [Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Union certification framework for carbon removals], in particular with regard to monitoring, reporting, verification and liability requirements, and ensuring no double counting. The Commission is empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 18 to list recognised carbon credit schemes that are considered to comply with such equivalent requirements.

Added:(52) In order to provide traders with legal certainty across the internal market as regards compliance of the explicit environmental claims with the requirements of this Directive, the certificate of conformity should be recognised by the competent authorities across the Union. Microenterprises as well as small enterprises that make use of the transitional phase should be allowed to request such certificate if they wish to certify their claims in line with the requirements of this Directive and benefit from the certificate’s recognition across the Union. The certificate of conformity should however not prejudge the assessment of the environmental claim by the public authorities or courts which enforce Directive 2005/29/EC. [Am. 35]

Removed:Article 3 – paragraph 3 d (new): 3d. By ..[18 months after the entry into force of this Directive], the Commission shall provide a report on the use of explicit environmental claims on products or product groups containing substances or preparations/mixtures meeting the criteria for classification as toxic, hazardous to the environment, carcinogenic, mutagenic or toxic for reproduction (CMR), causing endocrine disruption to human health or the environment, persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic (PBT), very persistent, very bioaccumulative (vPvB), persistent, mobile and toxic (PMT), or very persistent, very mobile (vPvM) properties as defined in Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures, and substances referred to in Article 57 of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency. That report shall evaluate for which products or product groups the use of explicit environmental claims is misleading and assess the need for restrictions or prohibitions on the use of explicit environmental claims for these products or product groups in view of preventing misleading claims and contributing to the protection of human health and the environment. / Where the report concludes that the use of explicit environmental claims i…

Added:(53) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the provisions on verification of explicit environmental claims and environmental labelling schemes and to facilitate the enforcement of the provisions on verification of this Directive, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission to adopt a common form for certificates of conformity and the technical means for issuing such certificates. This common form should facilitate the recognition of certificates of conformity by the competent authorities across the Union. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council. [Am. 36]

Removed:Article 3 – paragraph 4 – introductory part: 4. When the regular monitoring of the evolution of explicit environmental claims referred to in Article 20 reveals differences in the application of the requirements laid down in paragraph 1 for specific claims and such differences may have an adverse impact on the functioning of the internal market, or where the Commission identifies that the absence of requirements for specific claims may lead to widespread misleading of consumers, the Commission shall adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 18 to supplement the requirements for substantiation of explicit environmental claims laid down in paragraph 1 by:

Added:(54) Micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) should be able to benefit from the opportunities provided by the market for more sustainable products but they could face proportionately higher costs and difficulties with some of the requirements on substantiation and verification of explicit environmental claims. The Member States and the Commission should provide adequate information and raise awareness of the ways to comply with the requirements of this Directive, ensure targeted and specialised training, and provide specific assistance and support, including financial, to SMEs wishing to make explicit environmental claims on their products or as regards their activities. Member States actions should be taken in respect of applicable State aid rules. To ensure a level playing field for micro, small and medium-sized enterprises across the Union, Member States should engage in regular dialogue regarding support measures for micro, small and medium-sized enterprises that are in place on regional and national levels respectively. In addition, and to ensure micro, small and medium-sized enterprises do not face disproportionately higher costs and difficulties with respect to the requirements of this Directive, the Commission should consider some initiatives within the framework of financial programmes dedicated to micro, small and medium-sized enterprises, for cases where they wish to make explicit environmental claims with regard to their products or activities. [Am. 37]

Removed:Article 3 – paragraph 4 – point -a (new): (-a) determining the relevant environmental impacts that shall be covered by the substantiation;

Added:(55) In order to ensure a level-playing field on the Union market, where claims about the environmental performance of a product or a trader are based on reliable, comparable and verifiable information, it is necessary to establish common rules on enforcement and compliance.

Removed:Article 3 – paragraph 4 – point c: (c) establishing specific life-cycle-based rules on substantiation of explicit environmental claims for certain product groups and sectors, including where appropriate on the basis of the Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules and Organisation Environmental Footprint Sectorial Rules where those rules cover all environmental impacts or aspects relevant for the product category or trader.

Added:(56) In order to ensure that the objectives of this Directive are achieved and the requirements are enforced effectively, Member States should designate their own competent authorities responsible for the application and enforcement of this Directive. However, in view of the close complementarity of Articles 5 and 6 of this Directive with the provisions of Directive 2005/29/EC, Member States should also be allowed to designate for their enforcement the same competent authorities as those responsible for the enforcement of Directive 2005/29/EC. For the sake of consistency, when Member States make that choice, they should be able to rely on the means and powers of enforcement that they have established in accordance with Article 11 of Directive 2005/29/EC, in derogation from the rules on enforcement laid down in this Directive. In cases where there is more than one designated competent authority in their territory and to ensure effective exercise of the duties of the competent authorities, Member State should ensure a close cooperation between all designated competent authorities. [Am. 38]

Removed:Article 3 – paragraph 4 a (new): 4a. By ... [1 year from the date of entry into force of this Directive], the Commission shall identify the most common explicit environmental claims made on the Union market and publish a working plan listing the claims that the Commission intends to supplement with the delegated act referred to in paragraph 4. That working plan shall be updated at least every 3 years.

Added:(57) Without prejudice to the powers already conferred by Regulation (EU) 2017/2394 to consumer protection authorities, competent authorities should have a minimum set of investigation and enforcement powers in order to ensure compliance with this Directive, to cooperate with each other more quickly and more efficiently, and to deter market actors from infringing this Directive. Those powers should be sufficient to tackle the enforcement challenges of e-commerce and the digital environment effectively and to prevent non-compliant market actors from exploiting gaps in the enforcement system by relocating to Member States whose competent authorities may be less equipped to tackle unlawful practices.

Removed:Article 3 – paragraph 4 b (new): 4b. By ... [1 year from the date of entry into force of this Directive], the Commission shall adopt guidelines to facilitate the interpretation of Article 3(1) point (b).

Added:(58) Competent authorities should be able to use all facts and circumstances of the case as evidence for the purpose of their investigation.

Removed:Article 3 – paragraph 5 – point a a (new): (aa) existing Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules and Organisation Environmental Footprint Sectorial Rules;

Added:(59) In order to prevent the occurrence of misleading and unsubstantiated explicit environmental claims on the Union market, competent authorities should carry out regular checks of explicit environmental claims made, and the environmental labelling schemes applied, to verify that the requirements laid down in this Directive are fulfilled.

Removed:Article 3 – paragraph 5 – point d: (d) ease of access to information and data for the assessment and use of this information and data by micro enterprises and small and medium-sized enterprises (‘SMEs’).

Added:(60) When competent authorities detect an infringement of requirements of this Directive they should carry out an evaluation and based on its results notify the trader about the infringement detected and require that corrective actions are taken by the trader. To minimise the misleading effect on consumers of the non-compliant explicit environmental claim or non-compliant environmental labelling scheme, the trader should be required by the competent authorities to take an effective and rapid action to remediate that infringement. The corrective action required should be proportionate to the infringement detected and its expected harmful effects on the consumers.

Removed:Article 3 – paragraph 5 a (new): 5a. Where there is no recognised scientific method or insufficient evidence to assess environmental impacts and aspects, the exclusion of these impacts shall be transparent and efforts shall be made to develop methods and accumulate evidence to enable the assessment of the respective impact. Until the method meeting the requirements set out in the first paragraph is developed, claims referring to such environmental impacts shall not be made.

Added:(61) Where an infringement is not restricted to their national territory, and the explicit environmental claim has been advanced between traders, competent authorities should inform the other Member States of the results of evaluation they have carried out and of any action that they have required the trader responsible to take.

Removed:Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a: (a) the information, data and methods used for assessing the environmental impacts, environmental aspects or environmental performance of the products or traders against which the comparison is made, are equivalent to the information, data and methods used for assessing the environmental impacts, environmental aspects or environmental performance of the product or trader which is subject to the claim;

Added:(62) Competent authorities should also carry out checks of explicit environmental claims on the Union market when in possession of and based on relevant information, including substantiated concerns submitted by third parties. Third parties submitting a concern should be able to demonstrate a sufficient interest or maintain the impairment of a right.

Removed:Article 5 – paragraph 3: 3. Where the explicit environmental claim is related to a final product, and the use or end-of-life phase is among the most relevant life-cycle stages of that product, the claim shall include information on how the consumer should use or dispose of the product in order to achieve the expected environmental performance of that product. That information shall be made clearly visible and available together with the claim.

Added:(63) In order to ensure that traders are effectively dissuaded from non-compliance with the requirements of this Directive, Member States should lay down rules on penalties applicable to infringements of this Directive and ensure that those rules are implemented. The penalties provided for should be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. To facilitate a more consistent application of penalties, it is necessary to establish common non-exhaustive criteria for determining the types and levels of penalties to be imposed in case of infringements. That criteria should include, inter alia, the nature and gravity of the infringement as well as the economic benefits derived from the infringement in order to ensure that those responsible are deprived of those benefits.

Removed:Article 5 – paragraph 4: 4. Where the explicit environmental claim is related to future environmental performance of a trader, the trader shall: / (a) include a time-bound, science-based and measurable commitment for improvements inside own operations and value chains, / (b) include an implementation plan containing measurable and verifiable interim targets and other relevant elements necessary to support implementation, such as allocation of resources, a monitoring plan and a reporting plan based on reporting and verifications at regular intervals, / (c) make publicly available the information referred to in points (a) and (b), including the results of reporting.

Added:(64) When setting penalties and measures for infringements, the Member States should foresee that, based on the gravity of the infringement, the level of fines should effectively deprive the non-compliant trader from the economic benefit derived from using the misleading or unsubstantiated explicit environmental claim or non-compliant environmental labelling scheme, including in cases of repeated infringements. The measures for infringements foreseen by the Member States should therefore also include confiscation of the relevant product from the trader or revenues gained from the transactions affected by this infringement or a temporary exclusions or prohibitions from placing products or making available services on the Union market. The gravity of the infringement should be the leading criterion for the measures taken by the enforcement authorities. The maximum amount of fines should be dissuasive and set at least at the level of 4% of the trader’s total annual turnover in the Member State or Member States concerned in case of widespread infringements with a Union dimension that are subject to coordinated investigation and enforcement measures in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2017/2394.