Mitigating Risk Under the DMCC: 7 Marketing Red Flags for Food Businesses
Guidance to keep your marketing claims safe from violations under the new Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act (DMCC).
The Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act (DMCC) has raised the bar for sustainability marketing. For food businesses, commonly used terms like “plant-based,” “sustainable,” or “biodegradable” now come with added legal risk — especially when claims are vague or unsubstantiated.
To learn more about the DMCC, check out our first blog post here.
Recent ASA rulings, coupled with new enforcement powers for the CMA, mean that even visual cues (like green colour schemes or nature imagery) can reinforce a misleading impression.
Here are seven red flags food brands should watch for — drawn from CMA and ASA casework and tailored to common food-sector claims.
✅ Absolute Claims
Words like “sustainable,” “carbon neutral,” or “eco-friendly” must be backed by full life cycle assessments — not just individual improvements like packaging or ingredient swaps.
✅ Comparative Claims
You can’t claim something is "better" without proving it — with side-by-side LCAs using the same system boundaries and scope.
▶ Example: Tesco's Plant Chef burger ad was banned after the ASA ruled it was misleading — the ad claimed a specific environmental benefit from swapping to their plant-based burger, but Tesco couldn't provide a full life cycle comparison to a meat equivalent.
In contrast, Sainsbury’s “Half-est” campaign encouraged a general shift toward plant-based eating without naming products, and was allowed because it made no specific or absolute claims.
✅ Packaging Claims
Claims like "less plastic", "recyclable", “compostable” or "biodegradable" need clear context — especially if the packaging has limitations (e.g. refill pouches not widely recyclable).
▶ E.g. “Recyclable where facilities exist” is safer than implying packaging is widely recycled if that’s not the case.
✅ Ingredient Claims (e.g. regenerative, plant-based)
Even recognised terms must be backed by product-level data. You can’t imply net benefit without lifecycle evidence — and must disclose emissions from packaging, transport, and broader sourcing.
✅ Omission of Material Information
You must consider disclosing your business's broader portfolio impact.
▶ E.g. marketing a regenerative flour product may require disclosing the high-emission beef products in your range, especially if the ad implies wider impact.
✅ Vague Timelines or Impact Scope
Claims like “doing your bit” or “small changes make a big difference” may still mislead if they don’t explain the scale or timeframe of impact.
✅ Visual Impressions
Green colour schemes, leaf icons, or nature imagery can reinforce a misleading message — even when the wording seems cautious.
Want to learn more? Our full guide on the DMCC and the Green Claims Code is coming soon.
