See leht on masintõlgitud ja seda ei ole sõltumatult üle vaadatud. Õigusmõisted, direktiivide numbrid ja tsiteeritud seadusetekst jäävad algsel kujul. Kahtluse korral kehtib ingliskeelne versioon. English
Riigijuhend
A small, highly digital market with an active regulator and an unusual penalty structure: there is no fixed euro ceiling at all. The Finnish Competition and Consumer Authority can seek a penalty payment of up to 4% of turnover, so exposure scales with the size of the business rather than with the number of claims.
Riigiandmed allpool — järelevalveasutus, seadus, trahvilagi, kohtupraktika ja kohalikud sõnastused — jäävad inglise keelde. Nad tsiteerivad siseriiklikku õigust ning nimetavad asutusi ja lahendeid; masintõlge oleks täpselt see ebatäpsus, mille eest see tööriist hoiatab. Kahtluse korral kehtib ingliskeelne sõnastus, ja otsustav on niikuinii sinu turu seadus.
Kilpailu- ja kuluttajavirasto (KKV)
The Finnish Competition and Consumer Authority supervises marketing under the Consumer Protection Act. The Consumer Ombudsman sits within KKV and can negotiate, prohibit a practice, and apply to the Market Court for a penalty payment. Decisions and guidance are published in Finnish and Swedish.
Kuluttajansuojalaki (38/1978) chapter 2 on marketing, implementing the UCPD. Penalty payments are governed separately by Laki kuluttajansuojaviranomaisten eräistä toimivaltuuksista (566/2020), which is where the amounts live.
There is no fixed euro ceiling. Under section 18 of Act 566/2020 the penalty payment on a trader may be up to 4% of the turnover of the year before the infringement ended — verbatim: "Elinkeinonharjoittajalle määrättävä seuraamusmaksu saa olla enintään neljä prosenttia kyseisen rikkomuksen päättymistä edeltäneen vuoden liikevaihdosta." For a natural person the cap is 4% of income and at most EUR 40,000. In coordinated cross-border cases where turnover cannot be established, the cap is EUR 2 million. The penalty is imposed by the Market Court on the Consumer Ombudsman's application, not by the authority itself. Verified against finlex.fi on 24 August 2026.
Kontrollitud algallika vastu — finlex.fi, Act 566/2020 § 18 and Kuluttajansuojalaki 38/1978 ch. 2, 2026-08-24 (34 päeva tagasi).
Turg
Praktiline
Kohalik sõnastus
Tõlgitud teksti hinnatakse kohalikus keeles, ja riigisisene kohtupraktika on konkreetsetele terminitele juba tähenduse külge pannud.
| Kohalik termin | Inglise keeles | Miks see siin loeb |
|---|---|---|
| kestävä | Sustainable | Sustainability is a whole-lifecycle property. Used as an adjective for a product it asserts excellence across every impact category, which needs lifecycle evidence almost no seller holds. |
| vihreä | Green | “Green” is the textbook generic claim: no scope, no metric, no verification. It is also a colour and a common proper noun, so a match here is a prompt to look, not a conclusion — check whether the word is doing any environmental work in the sentence. |
| luonnollinen | Natural | "Natural" reads as an environmental and safety benefit but has no legal definition outside food and cosmetics standards. Natural origin also does not make a substance harmless. |
| ympäristöystävällinen | Environmentally friendly | Same defect as "eco-friendly" in longer form. It claims net benefit to the environment as a whole while every physical product carries a footprint. |
| ekologinen | Ecological | Presented as a quality mark, it asserts general environmental soundness. In several member states it is also treated as implying organic certification. |
| ekoystävällinen | Eco-friendly | A blanket friendliness claim tells the buyer nothing measurable. It is only allowed where you can demonstrate recognised excellent environmental performance covering the whole product, which in practice means an EU Ecolabel or an equivalent Type I scheme. |
| ilmastoystävällinen | Climate friendly | Suggests a positive or neutral climate effect for a product that still emits. Where the basis is offsetting it also breaches the offsetting ban. |
| ilmastoneutraali | Climate neutral | The most litigated term in this list. Beyond point 4c, German case law (BGH klimaneutral, 2024) held the term ambiguous and misleading unless the basis is explained in the advertisement itself. |
| hiilineutraali | Carbon neutral | Prohibited where it rests on offsetting, which is how virtually all such claims are built. The German Federal Court of Justice (BGH, I ZR 98/23) additionally requires the meaning of the term to be explained at the point of the claim. |
| CO2-neutraali | CO2 neutral | Identical in substance to "climate neutral" and caught by the same prohibition and case law. |
| biohajoava | Biodegradable | Everything degrades eventually. Without the conditions, the timeframe and the test method the word promises disappearance that does not happen in a landfill or the sea. |
| kompostoituva | Compostable | Industrial and home composting are different capabilities, and most consumers have access only to the latter. Unqualified, the claim misdirects disposal behaviour. |
| kierrätettävä | Recyclable | Technically recyclable is not the same as actually collected. If no separate collection stream exists in the markets you sell to, the claim misleads. |
| kierrätetty | Recycled | The trap is scope: "recycled packaging" on a product with a virgin plastic bottle and a recycled outer sleeve is a partial benefit presented as a whole-product one. |
| muoviton | Plastic-free | Frequently false at component level: adhesives, liners, coatings and labels usually contain polymers. It also implies an overall environmental benefit that a heavier alternative may not deliver. |
| kemikaaliton | Chemical-free | Scientifically impossible — all matter is chemical. It plays on chemophobia and cannot be substantiated in any form. |
| uusiutuva | Renewable | "Renewable" says the input regrows, not that the product is better. Without the share, the source and the certification it carries the weight of an environmental benefit it has not demonstrated — and for energy it needs a supplier-specific figure, not a national grid average. |
| kestävyys | Sustainability | Used as a product or badge label (“Sustainability score”, “Sustainability choice”) it is a generic claim and has to be substantiated. The word also has a legitimate use as the title of a real report or policy page — we cannot tell the two apart from the wording alone, so we flag it and leave the judgement to you. If this instance is a report title, mark it and move on. |
| vastuullinen | Responsible | "Responsibly made" or "responsible sourcing" asserts ethical and environmental diligence without naming the standard the diligence is measured against. |
| myrkytön | Non-toxic | Toxicity is dose-dependent and substance-specific, so a blanket "non-toxic" is not demonstrable. It also implies competitors are toxic. |
| päästötön | Zero emissions | Absolute and almost always false for a physical product across its lifecycle. It is defensible only for a narrowly defined stage that genuinely emits nothing, and the stage must be named. |
| vähähiilinen | Low carbon | "Low" is implicitly comparative and therefore needs a disclosed benchmark. Low compared to what, measured how? |
| nettonolla | Net zero | As a present-tense product claim it is an offsetting claim. As a target it is a future-performance claim needing verifiable commitments and independent monitoring. |
| biopohjainen | Bio-based | Bio-based says where the carbon came from, not that the product is compostable, recyclable or lower impact — yet consumers read all three into it. |
| ilmastopositiivinen | Carbon positive | Claims a net beneficial climate effect. In practice it always rests on purchased credits, which point 4c rules out as a basis for any neutrality, reduction or positive-impact claim. |
| CO2-vähennetty | CO2 reduced | A reduction claim is only meaningful against a stated baseline, scope and period. Without them the buyer cannot tell what was reduced or from what. |
| hiilinegatiivinen | Carbon negative | An even stronger version of the neutrality claim, and equally dependent on credits. Point 4c covers neutral, reduced and positive impact claims based on offsetting. |
| vihreämpi kuin | Greener than... | A comparison is only fair if the buyer can see what was compared, on which impacts, using which data. "Greener" discloses none of it. |
| kestävämpi | More sustainable | Combines the generic-claim problem with an undisclosed benchmark — vague on both the metric and the comparison set. |
| ympäristöystävällisempi | Eco-friendlier | Comparative form of a term that is already too vague in its base form. |
| BPA-vapaa | BPA-free | BPA has been banned in food contact materials in the EU since Regulation (EU) 2024/3190. Advertising its absence as a benefit presents compliance as a distinguishing feature. |
| eläinkokeeton | No animal testing | Animal testing of cosmetics and their ingredients has been prohibited in the EU since 2013 under Regulation 1223/2009. For cosmetics sold in the EU this is compliance, not a differentiator. |
| CE-sertifioitu | CE certified | CE marking is mandatory for the product categories that require it, and it is a manufacturer's declaration, not a certification. Marketing it as a quality feature is doubly misleading. |
| ftalaatiton | Phthalate-free | The main phthalates are restricted or authorisation-only under REACH Annex XVII and XIV, so for most consumer goods absence is the legal baseline. |
| maapalloystävällinen | Earth-friendly | A planetary-scale benefit claim with no scope, no metric and no possible substantiation for an individual product. |
| luonnonystävällinen | Nature's friend | A figurative benefit claim. Regulators read implied environmental claims the same way as explicit ones, and the figurative framing makes it harder, not easier, to substantiate. |
| hiiliystävällinen | Carbon friendly | Implies emissions are benign. Combines the generic-claim problem with an unquantified climate assertion. |
| vastuullisuusarvosana | Own sustainability score | A self-calculated score is a sustainability label under the Directive. Self-issued rating systems are exactly what point 2a targets. |
| kiertotalous | Circular | Without a real take-back route this is an intention, not a property of the product. |
| ilmastonsuojelu | Climate protection | Johdanto-osan 9 kappale mainitsee juuri tämän sanaperheen. |
| myönteinen vaikutus ympäristöön | Positive impact | Nettopositiivinen väite — yleisen ympäristöväitteen vahvin muoto. |
| sopusoinnussa luonnon kanssa | In harmony with nature | Ei mitattavissa; luetaan ympäristöhyötynä ilman sitoumusta. |
| vähentää ympäristövaikutuksia | Lower environmental impact | Vertailu ilman lähtötasoa, laajuutta ja suuruutta. |
| säästää luonnonvaroja | Resource-saving | Mitä luonnonvaraa, mihin verrattuna, kuinka paljon. |
| regeneratiivinen maatalous, uudistava maatalous | Regenerative | Matched as a phrase, not as a bare adjective. The adjective alone is ordinary vocabulary in technical and medical Finnish and carries no environmental claim. |
Levinud leiud
Sildid
Joutsenmerkki (Nordic Swan)
The Nordic Type I ecolabel and by far the most recognised environmental mark in Finland. A strong defence against a generic-claim allegation.
EU Ecolabel
Recognised in Finland as everywhere in the EU, though less familiar to consumers here than the Swan.
Luomu (EU organic leaf)
Organic certification under Regulation (EU) 2018/848, supervised by Ruokavirasto.
PEFC / FSC
Forest certification. Finland is heavily forested and PEFC in particular is close to universal for domestic wood, which makes it weak as a differentiator.
Kohtupraktika
Jõustamise ajalugu on parim olemasolev juhis selle kohta, kuidas väidet loetakse.
Consumer Ombudsman practice
The Ombudsman's published guidance on environmental marketing predates Directive 2024/825 but already required that a general claim be substantiated and that the substantiation be available on request. Enforcement has favoured negotiated undertakings over penalty applications.
Market Court
Penalty payments are imposed by the Market Court, not by KKV, which makes the published caseload small and slow-moving. A shop should not read the small number of decisions as a low risk of enforcement action; prohibition decisions are far more common than fines.
Directive 2024/825 transposition
Finland transposes through amendments to the Consumer Protection Act. Check the current consolidated text in Finlex before relying on any specific provision — this entry has not been re-verified since 24 August 2026.
Juhtumite kokkuvõtted on orientiiriks ümber jutustatud ja seetõttu lihtsustatud. Kontrolli otsust ennast, enne kui millelegi sellest tugined.
Mujal
Saksamaa
Wettbewerbszentrale, consumer associations and competitors
Prantsusmaa
DGCCRF
Holland
ACM (Autoriteit Consument & Markt)
Hispaania
Regional consumer authorities and the Ministry of Consumer Affairs
Itaalia
AGCM (Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato)
Eesti
Tarbijakaitse ja Tehnilise Järelevalve Amet (TTJA)
Rootsi
Konsumentverket / Konsumentombudsmannen (KO)
Vali skanneris turg ja riskihinnang kasutab selle ülempiiri.