The encyclopedia · Advertising & PR · Marketing decision · 2024
Australia fined Vanguard AU$12.9M and Mercer AU$11.3M for greenwashing funds
Vanguard's 'Ethically Conscious' fund didn't screen securities. Mercer's 'Sustainable Plus' held 15 fossil fuel firms. ASIC set records with its first cases.
Vanguard Investments Australia · Mercer Superannuation
What happened
In August 2024, Australia's federal court fined Mercer Superannuation AU$11.3 million (US$7.2M) for its 'Sustainable Plus' fund, promoted as excluding companies profiting from fossil fuels, alcohol, or gambling. The fund was invested in 15 fossil fuel firms, plus gambling and alcohol stocks. Mercer was also ordered to publish a correction notice on its website. It was ASIC's first greenwashing case brought to court.
One month later, the same court fined Vanguard Investments Australia AU$12.9 million (US$8.2M) — the highest greenwashing penalty in Australian history. Vanguard's 'Ethically Conscious' bond fund claimed to screen securities against ESG criteria. It did not. ASIC found the marketing misled investors who believed their money was being managed according to ethical standards.
The two cases marked Australia's regulatory arrival in greenwashing enforcement. ASIC had warned fund managers for years that ESG labeling would face scrutiny. The combined AU$24.2 million in fines, correction notices, and the legal precedent signalled that 'ethically conscious' and 'sustainable' are claims that carry legal weight — not marketing decoration.
Why it happened
- The fund names were the claims: 'Ethically Conscious' and 'Sustainable Plus' are absolute statements — when the holdings contradict the name, the marketing is the fraud.
- The screening did not exist: Vanguard claimed ESG screening but did not properly screen — the process was not broken, it was absent.
- The fines set the precedent: AU$24.2M combined told every Australian fund manager that greenwashing penalties had graduated from warning letters to material financial consequences.
- The correction notice was the humiliation: being court-ordered to publish that your 'sustainable' fund held fossil fuels is a public record that outlives the fine.
The lesson
Naming a fund 'Ethically Conscious' while not screening holdings is a marketing claim waiting for a regulator. When ASIC's first greenwashing cases set records, the fines are the signal.
Sources
spotted an error? The club wants to know.
More like this
Harvey Norman advertised interest-free payments while hiding the credit card
Livestreamer Xu Jingwan (许静婉) hid income in private accounts and lost ¥6.3m to fines
Scoupy's 'Extra cashback €30' health-switch ad upheld for hiding the deal had ended
Somewhere, someone solved the problem this company failed at. 2nd Opinion →
Comments · 0
Sign in to join the comments.