Greenwashing: The gap between what your company communicates and what its financial statements report now comes with a regulatory cost

Some organizations build compelling sustainability narratives across their communication channels, while their financial statements paint a different picture. This gap is no longer just a reputational issue: it is a concrete legal and financial exposure. This already has a legal name: it is called greenwashing, or eco-marketing. The Colombian Financial Superintendency (SFC) defines it as the misrepresentation—whether intentional or due to gross negligence—of the sustainability characteristics of a financial product, or of an issuer’s sustainability commitments and achievements.

Since 2025, the SFC has been actively monitoring these practices in the financial sector. However, the Superintendency of Industry and Commerce (SIC) is the competent authority responsible for sanctioning misleading environmental advertising: fines exceeding 2,000 times the current legal monthly minimum wage (SMLMV), partial or permanent closures, and liability for violations of the Consumer Protection Statute, environmental advertising regulations, and the Unfair Competition Law. 

The principle of consistency is not optional: what an organization communicates publicly about its environmental commitments must be consistent with what it reports in its financial statements. For example, if an emissions reduction target is announced, that target must be reflected in the financial statements and in the useful life of the assets. Otherwise, the organization is treading on dangerous ground. I

t’s not censorship. It’s consistency. And inconsistency, in the new regulatory environment, comes at a direct financial cost. 

Transparency as a competitive advantage: true transparency is a competitive advantage. In 2025, more than 2,000 Colombian companies voluntarily reported their sustainability data—an 83% increase from the previous year. This growth is not just a sign of corporate culture; it is a rational response to a market that has learned to distinguish between organizations that communicate and organizations that demonstrate. Investors, capital funds, and business partners are incorporating this distinction into their decisions. 

Communicating sustainability without technical backing is no longer just a reputational risk. It is a measurable financial risk.

The question every board of directors should be asking right now: Is what the organization publishes on its communication channels consistent with its financial and operational information? Would it withstand regulatory scrutiny or an external audit? 

Communicating sustainability without technical and accounting backing is no longer a marketing decision. It is a risk management decision. 

RSM supports you in implementing best business practices in sustainability, integrating ESG criteria, and preparing sustainability reports, using established methodologies and tools that enable you to identify and address emerging risks and challenges; we promote innovative, profitable, and sustainable solutions in accordance with national government guidelines and international standards.  

Key Contact