Claims assessment · Target claim
Reduce Scope 3 FLAG emissions 45% by 2030
Typical treatment across 5 reviewed regimes. Every verdict below is tied to a stated legal hook.
Market comparison
How this claim is typically treated
5 reviewed markets · one comparison
| Market | Typical treatment | Legal basis | What is required |
|---|---|---|---|
| European UnionEU | Conditional | Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD)Official text ↗Empowering Consumers Directive (EmpCo)Official text ↗ View legal reasoningEmpCo/CSRD consistency | FLAG inventory per Dictionary termSBTi FLAG GuidanceThe Science Based Targets initiative's sector guidance requiring land-intensive companies to set separate targets for land-based emissions and removals, with a no-deforestation commitment.Read the full definition ; land-use and removals accounting separated; dairy/livestock intervention evidence. |
| United KingdomUK | Conditional | View legal reasoningCMA Code | FLAG methodology disclosed. |
| United StatesUS | Conditional | View legal reasoningFTC Act s.5 | Inventory and intervention data. |
| CanadaCA | Conditional | View legal reasoningCompetition Act s.74.01(1)(b.2) | Dictionary termGHG ProtocolThe global standard framework for measuring and reporting greenhouse gas emissions, created by WRI and WBCSD, whose Scope 1, 2, and 3 structure underpins virtually all corporate carbon accounting.Read the full definition Land Sector guidance basis. |
| AustraliaAU | Conditional | A direct source link has not yet been added for this assessment. View legal reasoningACL s.18 | Methodology + progress. |
Review your exact wording
Next, add your wording, evidence and market context for a guided review.
Review your exact wordingEvidence context
Standards and schemes relevant to this claim
These relationships are conditional. A listed standard does not automatically prove every use of the claim.