🔗 Share this article

Originally hailed as a groundbreaking law that would combat the worldwide crisis of forest loss.

But, the revised version of the EU's anti-deforestation law, once touted as the crown jewel of the Green Deal, has been passed in a significantly diluted state, prompting criticism from its original architect and environmental politicians.

"The regulation was hollowed out," stated Hugo Schally, citing the exclusion of key obligations for later-stage companies to verify the origin of commodities like palm oil, soy, wood, beef, rubber, cocoa and coffee.

He warned that a reduced number of responsible companies, less information collected, and less precise origin data would complicate the task of authorities.

A Watered-Down Law

Green party MEP Marie Toussaint was more blunt, labeling the delays, loopholes and exemptions – such as one for printed products – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This outcome stands in stark contrast to the demands of over 1.2 million European citizens who signed a petition in 2020 calling for a ban on goods linked to forest destruction.

When launched in 2021, the EU's climate chief the European commissioner trumpeted it as "the toughest legislation proposed to fight deforestation."

From Ambition to Compromise

The regulation's dilution has been interpreted as the EU walking back its green talk. The proposal encountered two major postponements, reportedly over IT issues, which sparked criticism.

"By reopening this file rather than fixing a technical issue, authorities invited political interference," remarked Toussaint.

In its first draft, the law required companies to trace goods back to their exact plot of land using GPS coordinates, holding them accountable for deforestation in their supply chains with penalties and large financial penalties.

"It wasn't bureaucracy for its own sake," Schally said. "It was the mechanism that made the rules enforceable, created a verifiable paper trail, and stopped companies from hiding behind opaque production networks."

Intense Lobbying

Yet, the rigorous checks provoked opposition in the EU capital from large companies, producer countries, conservative political groups and EU logging states.

Experts cite last year's European Parliament elections as a decisive moment, shifting the balance of power less favorable toward environmental rules.

"Additional intense pressure came from major export markets outside the EU," noted expert Andreas Rasche, implying the commission gave in to some requests during negotiations.

The Weakened Final Text

The passed law features key dilutions:

• Retailers and traders were mostly exempted from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new “low risk” category was introduced.
• A window for further "simplifications" was established for next spring.
• Only four countries – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face “high risk” scrutiny.

"Rather than strengthening rules for companies, it stripped them back," lamented the law's author. "Moving obligations to producers, it reduced accountability."

Business Frustration

The delays and changes have also created annoyance for businesses that complied early.

"We feel very annoyed because we put a lot of effort into complying," stated a coffee company executive. "We purchased systems, trained staff and established procedures... now they’re saying it could be altered again. It’s a major letdown."

The Commission's Stance

A commission spokesperson supported the final law, stating: "The commission has responded to concerns and taken action to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient application."

"The revised regulation ensures stability, which is crucial for companies and national regulators to successfully implement this very important law."