How do I check whether my supplier's data is correct?

Verification revolves around the test methods in Article 39

Verifying supplier data comes down in practice to checking whether that data was generated according to a recognised test, measurement or calculation method, and whether there are no indications that a product behaves differently during a test than in use. Article 39 of the ESPR (Regulation (EU) 2024/1781) describes how the Commission establishes methods per product category to which test and measurement results must comply: reliable, accurate and reproducible, with tolerance margins and where possible based on harmonised standards. Article 40 addresses something different but related: preventing circumvention, where a product or the software in it is designed to recognise a test situation and adapt to it, or where performance deteriorates after sale without that being visible in the stated data. For those receiving supplier data to process in a digital product passport, these are the two anchor points: is a value determined according to an established method, and are there signals that the product behaves differently than the figures suggest.

What this does and does not apply to

Articles 39 and 40 concern data falling under the ESPR ecodesign requirements: performance, durability and environmental data determined by test, measurement or calculation, such as energy consumption, lifespan or repairability scores. They do not apply to commercial data such as price, warranty conditions or delivery times, nor to general product information that is not a test or measurement result. Article 40 is further specifically directed at design choices in the product or associated software that can recognise a test or cause performance to deteriorate later — it does not apply to incidental errors in a spreadsheet or a wrongly copied figure. For such errors, the text of these two articles provides no basis; those fall rather under general diligence in submitting data.

The methods have not yet been established per category

For electronics and ICT equipment, the delegated acts laying down the concrete test, measurement and calculation methods per subcategory have not yet been published. According to the ESPR work programme 2025-2030, these are expected from 2027 onwards, per subcategory separately. There is no fixed date for electronics and ICT. Until a delegated act for a category is established, Articles 39 and 40 apply as a general framework — the principle that methods must be reliable, accurate and reproducible, and that circumvention is not permitted — but without a specific, mandatory test method for that category yet in place to measure data against exactly.

How to tackle verification in practice

The first step is to check whether a delegated act with an established method or a harmonised standard has already been published for the product category. If so, the supplier can be asked to indicate according to which method or standard a value has been determined — this makes the data traceable and comparable with what the act prescribes. If no delegated act has yet been published, that is in itself already relevant information: the data cannot then be assessed against a mandatory method, and it is useful to record which method the supplier has used, so that this can be compared later once the official method appears. A second step is to watch for signals that align with Article 40: data that appear unusually favourable compared to comparable products, performance that seems to depend on specific test conditions, or software updates that can affect the operation of the product without this being reflected in the stated data. These are not matters that can themselves be "proven" from a digital product passport platform, but they are signals to record and, where necessary, discuss with the supplier or submit to a supervisory authority. Finally, it is practical to document for each data point who it comes from, when it was supplied and on the basis of which method or standard — so that when a later delegated act is published, it is quickly clear which data still align and which require an update.

The legal basis: Articles 39 and 40 of the ESPR

That test and measurement results must comply with an established method follows from Article 39 of the ESPR (Regulation (EU) 2024/1781), which empowers the Commission to establish methods per product or product group and refers to harmonised standards as a basis for a presumption of conformity. That circumvention of those methods is not permitted follows from Article 40 of the same regulation, which concerns design or software that recognises a test situation or allows performance to deteriorate after sale.

Anyone collecting supplier data now would be well advised to record which method or standard underlies that data and review this once the delegated act for the relevant product subcategory is published; this publication can be tracked via the ESPR Work Plan.