Greenwashing has had a busy few days.

After a number of high-profile cases in recent years against companies alleged to have fallen foul of rules — and after new legal measures were introduced to govern levels of proof required — businesses and brands have to scrutinise their claims carefully to ensure they didn’t overstep the mark unintentionally, let alone deliberately.

Now one of the biggest corporate investigations has been dropped, as have some of the most central rules in ESG disclosures.

Deutsche Bank-owned asset manager DWS was fined $27m two months ago after German prosecutors found it guilty of greenwashing — or making misleading statements about — its environmental and social investing credentials. This week a parallel case against the firm’s CEO was suddenly dropped after the authorities decided not to press those charges.

It leaves the company having had a firm slap on the wrist, in the shape of a significant but not eye-watering fine, but having avoided one person being found ultimately responsible.

DWS has been in the greenwashing headlines for several years, with an original complaint dating back to 2021 and having already paid a $19m settlement to the US Securities and Exchange Commission, which at that time was the highest SEC penalty levied over ESG criteria against an investment adviser.

The SEC has created its own story this week too though, with news that its proposed anti-greenwashing fund disclosure requirements — which would have run the rule over the way in which much corporate investment is classified as sustainable — have been scrapped. Most media reporting on the decision have pinned it on the SEC’s change of mood music over ESG matters since Donald Trump was re-elected.

The obvious question now is whether companies that have walked the line on how they badge investment opportunities or market products will feel emboldened to push the limits, or whether there is more value in actively demonstrating that they’re not greenwashing.

Despite these latest developments, cases against companies continue. Energy Australia recently apologised to customers and settled a legal case, while TotalEnergies is involved in an ongoing trial about certain alleged practices.

Most companies — and moreover, most lawyers — expect scrutiny to increase once two new European Union directives are finalised, measures from which may also set the tone for the UK approach. This summary from a law firm covers the ground well, concluding that “companies will need to ensure that any environmental claims they make are supported by independent, peer-reviewed and verifiable scientific evidence. It is expected that companies will need to carry out an assessment to substantiate environmental claims using robust, science-based and verifiable methods and by taking a life-cycle assessment approach.”

It also notes that while in the UK greenwashing has historically been left to the court of public opinions, the Competition and Markets Authority is now turning up the heat having gained stronger enforcement powers.

The SEC may be loosening the reins and prosecutors may not always pursue every charge. But the case against greenwashing, and the financial and reputational consequences of abusing trust by overstating matters, continue to grow.