Regulator bans misleading ads from Eurowings and Qatar Airways

ASA bans Eurowings and Qatar Airways offset advertisements

The Advertising Standards Authority has banned advertisements from Eurowings and Qatar Airways for making misleading claims about carbon offsetting. The ruling, announced on 15 July 2025, found that both airlines falsely suggested passengers could fully offset the carbon emissions from their flights by paying a small additional fee. Neither airline provided sufficient evidence to support these claims.

This decision forms part of a broader regulatory crackdown on greenwashing in the aviation sector. The ASA has now banned similar advertisements from multiple airlines, including Air France, Etihad Airways and Lufthansa. Meanwhile, the European Union is preparing to prohibit the use of offsetting schemes to substantiate environmental claims entirely by September 2026.

For UK businesses that use air travel regularly, the ruling has practical implications. Companies making their own environmental claims about business travel will need to ensure they can substantiate those statements with robust evidence. Furthermore, procurement teams may face questions about how they assess and report the environmental impact of corporate travel.

What the ASA found in the airline advertisements

The ASA investigated advertisements from both airlines that offered customers the option to pay extra to make their flights carbon neutral. Eurowings promoted a carbon offsetting option during the booking process, whilst Qatar Airways made similar claims in its advertising materials. Both suggested that purchasing offsets would fully neutralize the emissions from a specific flight.

The regulator concluded that these advertisements breached the CAP Code rules on misleading advertising, substantiation and environmental claims. Specifically, the ASA found that consumers were given a false impression that flying could be made carbon neutral simply by purchasing a small offset fee. Neither airline could demonstrate that their offsetting schemes were effective enough to justify these claims.

The ASA ruling stated that the advertisements must not appear again in the form investigated. In addition, Eurowigs received explicit instructions not to imply in future advertisements that consumers can pay to fully offset emissions from a specific flight unless the airline holds suitably robust evidence to support such claims.

The decision reflects the ASA’s position that carbon offsetting does not equate to carbon elimination. Offset projects typically involve activities such as tree planting or renewable energy investments. However, these initiatives cannot match the immediate and long-term atmospheric impact of aviation emissions released during a flight.

Scientific basis for rejecting offsetting claims

Aviation emissions create an immediate warming effect when released into the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide from aircraft remains in the atmosphere for centuries, contributing to long-term climate change. In contrast, most carbon offset projects deliver their claimed benefits over much longer timeframes, if at all.

Forest-based offsetting projects face particular scrutiny. Trees absorb carbon dioxide as they grow, but this carbon storage is temporary and reversible. Forests can be destroyed by fire, disease, logging or land use changes. When this happens, the stored carbon returns to the atmosphere. Therefore, forest projects cannot provide the permanent carbon removal needed to compensate for aviation emissions.

A German court reached a similar conclusion in March 2024 when it prohibited Eurowings from advertising flights as carbon neutral through offsetting. The Cologne Regional Court ruled that forest offsetting projects are unsuitable for carbon compensation because forests cannot be maintained for the same duration that carbon dioxide remains in the atmosphere. This ruling was subsequently upheld by the Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf in 2025.

Consequently, airlines cannot provide the robust substantiation required to claim that purchasing an offset makes a specific flight carbon neutral. The scientific evidence does not support equivalence between aviation emissions and the offset schemes currently used by the airline industry.

Airlines face coordinated regulatory enforcement across Europe

The UK ruling forms part of coordinated regulatory action across Europe. The European Commission and national consumer protection authorities have already warned 71 airlines that their environmental claims may be unlawful. This enforcement action targeted claims about sustainable aviation fuels, carbon offsetting and net zero commitments.

Airlines named in the European Commission action include Qatar Airways, Ryanair and Lufthansa. The regulators concluded that these claims lacked the precise evidence required under EU consumer protection law. Consequently, airlines were instructed to review and modify their marketing materials to ensure compliance with the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive.

Moreover, the European Union is implementing comprehensive new rules through the Green Claims Directive. From September 2026, businesses will be completely prohibited from using carbon offsetting schemes to substantiate claims such as climate neutral or climate positive. This ban will apply across all sectors, not just aviation.

The directive requires companies to provide clear, verifiable evidence for any environmental claim made in advertising. Generic statements about sustainability or environmental benefits will no longer be permitted without specific supporting data. This represents a significant tightening of the rules compared to current practice.

The ASA has already banned advertisements from Air France, Etihad Airways and Lufthansa for similar misleading environmental claims. This pattern of enforcement indicates that regulators are systematically targeting carbon offset advertising across the airline industry. Companies can expect continued scrutiny of environmental claims in the coming months.

Commercial implications for UK businesses using air travel

Many UK businesses purchase carbon offsets as part of their corporate sustainability programs. Companies often report these offset purchases in annual reports, tender responses or environmental disclosures. However, the ASA ruling suggests that describing these purchases as carbon neutralization may constitute a misleading claim.

Procurement teams need to reconsider how they assess the environmental impact of business travel. If offsetting cannot be described as neutralizing emissions, then companies need alternative approaches to reporting and managing travel-related carbon footprints. This may require more detailed emissions reporting without offset deductions.

For businesses responding to public sector tenders, the implications are particularly significant. Procurement Policy Note 06/21 requires suppliers bidding for central government contracts above certain thresholds to publish a carbon reduction plan. Many companies have included offset purchases in these plans as part of their commitment to net zero. Consequently, these plans may need revision to ensure compliance with advertising standards.

Companies making environmental claims in their own marketing materials face similar constraints. If your business advertises carbon neutral delivery, climate positive products or offset services, you need robust evidence to substantiate those statements. The ASA has indicated it will apply the same standards to all sectors, not just airlines.

Additionally, businesses should review their corporate travel policies. Some companies allow employees to purchase offsets for work trips and describe this as reducing environmental impact. Based on the ASA ruling, such descriptions may be inaccurate and could create reputational risks if challenged. Therefore, travel policies should describe offsetting accurately without overstating its effectiveness.

Supply chain due diligence also requires attention. If your suppliers make environmental claims about their services, including logistics or travel, you may want to verify those claims meet the ASA standards. Relying on supplier environmental claims that subsequently prove misleading could create compliance issues for your own reporting.

Five essential points about the offset advertising ban

• The ASA banned Eurowings and Qatar Airways advertisements on 15 July 2025 for falsely implying that passengers could fully offset flight emissions through small additional payments.
• Scientific evidence shows that carbon offset projects, particularly forest schemes, cannot match the immediate and long-term atmospheric impact of aviation emissions.
• The European Commission has warned 71 airlines that environmental claims about sustainable fuels, offsetting and net zero likely breach EU consumer protection law without precise supporting evidence.
• From September 2026, EU businesses will be completely prohibited from using offsetting schemes to substantiate climate neutral or climate positive claims under the Green Claims Directive.
• UK companies must review their own environmental claims about business travel and ensure carbon reporting does not overstate the effectiveness of offset purchases.

How businesses should respond to stricter enforcement

UK businesses should audit all environmental claims in their marketing materials, websites and corporate communications. Any statement suggesting that purchasing offsets makes products, services or activities carbon neutral requires immediate review. Unless you hold scientific evidence demonstrating equivalence between emissions and offsets, these claims should be removed or modified.

For carbon reporting purposes, businesses should separate emissions reduction from offset purchases. Report your actual emissions clearly, then show any offset purchases as a separate item without claiming they neutralize your footprint. This approach provides transparency whilst avoiding potentially misleading statements about the effectiveness of offsets.

Companies subject to carbon reporting requirements under PPN 06/21 should ensure their carbon reduction plans focus on genuine emissions reduction rather than offsetting. The ASA ruling suggests that regulators view offsetting as insufficient to demonstrate credible climate action. Therefore, procurement responses should emphasize operational changes that reduce emissions at source.

Businesses purchasing carbon offsets should review the terms under which those offsets are sold. If suppliers describe offsets as neutralizing or eliminating emissions, those descriptions may not align with ASA standards. Consequently, you may need to adjust how you communicate about these purchases to stakeholders, investors or customers.

Training for marketing and communications teams is essential. Staff responsible for environmental messaging need to understand the distinction between emissions reduction and offsetting. They should also recognize that vague claims about sustainability or environmental friendliness now carry significant regulatory risk. Our SBS Academy training programs cover compliant environmental communications for UK businesses.

Looking ahead, businesses should anticipate that advertising standards will continue to tighten. The EU Green Claims Directive represents a fundamental shift in how environmental claims are regulated. Companies that adapt their messaging now will be better positioned when the new rules take effect in September 2026. Those that continue making unsubstantiated claims face potential enforcement action, fines and reputational damage.

For businesses working towards net zero commitments, the ruling reinforces the need to focus on actual emissions reduction rather than offsetting. Investment in energy efficiency, renewable energy, fleet electrification and operational changes will be more credible than offset purchases. These tangible actions provide the robust evidence that regulators now require for environmental claims.

Regulatory guidance and further information

The Advertising Standards Authority publishes detailed guidance on environmental claims in advertising. The ASA website includes the CAP Code rules on misleading advertising and substantiation requirements. Businesses making environmental claims should review these standards to ensure compliance.

The European Commission provides information about the Green Claims Directive and enforcement actions against airlines. The European Commission website includes details of the September 2026 implementation deadline and prohibited claims under the new directive.

For UK businesses responding to government tenders, the Cabinet Office publishes guidance on Procurement Policy Note 06/21. This guidance explains carbon reduction plan requirements for suppliers. The PPN 06/21 guidance on GOV.UK sets out what must be included in compliant carbon reduction plans.

Companies seeking support with carbon reporting compliance and net zero planning can access detailed resources about emissions measurement and reduction strategies. Understanding the distinction between credible climate action and misleading offset claims is now essential for UK businesses operating in regulated sectors or bidding for public contracts.