Law No. 120 of 19 June 2026, titled “Provisions on the Allocation of Proceeds Deriving from the Sale of Products” and effective as of 21 July 2026, specifically regulates commercial campaigns that promise to devote all or part of the revenues from a product’s sale to charitable purposes (the “Charity Law”).
The Charity Law grew out of the so-called “Pandoro-gate” affair, specifically the proceedings that the Italian Competition Authority (“AGCM”) closed in December 2023 against two companies linked to the well-known influencer Chiara Ferragni and against Balocco S.p.A. Industria Dolciaria. The AGCM found that the companies had advertised the “Pandoro Pink Christmas” product in a way that led consumers to believe their purchase would contribute to a donation to the Regina Margherita Hospital in Turin, when in fact Balocco alone had already paid a fixed donation amount months before the initiative launched. In short, the AGCM concluded that this conduct breached the duty of professional diligence and constituted a misleading, and therefore unfair, commercial practice in violation of the Consumer Code (Legislative Decree No. 2026/2005). The AGCM imposed fines totalling EUR 1 million on Chiara Ferragni’s companies and EUR 420,000 on Balocco.
That episode exposed a gap in the Italian legal system: no rules specifically addressed this type of practice. It prompted the legislature to introduce a dedicated framework to counter so-called charity-washing, namely commercial communications that overstate the link between a purchase and a charitable cause in a way that can steer consumers’ choices without an adequate match between what is communicated and where the funds raised actually go.
The Charity Law applies to producers and professionals who promote, sell, or supply consumers with products whose proceeds are partly allocated to third-sector entities, NGOs, religious bodies, or equivalent entities operating abroad. It excludes non-commercial entities not directly or indirectly controlled by such producers or professionals, as well as fundraising activities already regulated under the Third Sector Code or carried out by religious denominations that have entered into agreements with the State.
The most significant innovation, which directly reflects the lesson of the Pandoro-gate affair, is the broadened definition of “professional” subject to the information obligations. Under Article 1, paragraph 4 of the Charity Law, “professional” means both the seller and the person who promotes the purchase. Article 2, paragraph 4 of the Charity Law further provides that producers and professionals must disclose the required information in their commercial practices generally and, in particular, in commercial communications, including product advertising. This obligation extends to anyone who advertises products, whether through traditional means or influencer marketing.
On the substantive side, the core of the legislation consists of information obligations designed to make consumers aware of the real economic and social impact of their purchase. Consumers have the right to know who receives the funds, what purpose the funds will serve, and what percentage of the sale price, or what fixed amount, is actually allocated to the donation for each unit sold. These obligations come with a requirement to notify the AGCM in advance: at least fifteen days before placing the relevant products on sale, the producer or professional must notify the Authority of the above information, along with the deadline by which the amount allocated to the beneficiary will be paid.
Under Article 4, paragraph 2 of the Charity Law, violating these communication obligations carries an administrative fine of between EUR 5,000 and EUR 50,000, unless the conduct amounts to a criminal offense or an unfair commercial practice, in which case the fine ranges from EUR 5,000 to EUR 10 million. This reservation clause deserves attention because it targets precisely the type of conduct for which Ferragni and Balocco were sanctioned: where the conduct meets the requirements of a genuine unfair commercial practice, as in the case that gave rise to the law, the stricter Consumer Code regime applies instead of the milder regime under the new Charity Law. The Charity Law thus operates on a residual basis, safeguarding only informational transparency rather than the prohibition on misleading consumers, consistent with the principle of ne bis in idem.
With the Charity Law, the legislature appears to have taken direct account of the lessons of the Pandoro-gate affair: anyone who promotes a product on social media by linking it to a charitable cause can no longer play a purely advertising role on the margins of informational responsibility. Such promoters now bear responsibility, on par with the producer, for the accuracy of the information they disclose about where the proceeds go, precisely because their influence over consumers is what actually drives the purchasing decision tied to the charitable component of the transaction.
