🔗 Share this article

It was a landmark regulation that would curb the global crisis of forest loss.

However, the revised version of the EU's anti-deforestation law, once heralded as the crown jewel of the Green Deal, has been passed in a significantly diluted state, leading to criticism from its initial author and environmental politicians.

"The regulation was stripped," said the law's original author, citing the exclusion of crucial requirements for later-stage companies to verify the provenance of products like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber.

He warned that a reduced number of responsible companies, less information collected, and less precise origin data would make enforcement and prosecution more difficult.

A Watered-Down Law

Environmental MEP Marie Toussaint was more blunt, labeling the delays, loopholes and exemptions – such as one for paper goods – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This outcome is a far cry from the demands of over 1.2 million EU citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 demanding a prohibition of goods linked to forest destruction.

When launched in 2021, then-Green Deal commissioner the European commissioner trumpeted it as "the most ambitious legislation proposed to fight deforestation."

From Ambition to Compromise

The regulation's dilution has been interpreted as the European Union retreating from its green talk. It faced two major postponements, ostensibly over technical problems, which sparked criticism.

"By reopening this file rather than fixing a technical issue, the commission opened Pandora’s box," commented the Green MEP.

Originally, the regulation mandated that firms to trace goods to their exact plot of land using GPS coordinates, holding them accountable for forest loss along their supply lines with criminal charges and large financial penalties.

"This was not red tape for its own sake," the former official said. "It was the mechanism that made the rules enforceable, established traceability, and stopped companies from hiding behind complex supply chains."

Mounting Pressure

However, the strict due diligence triggered a backlash in the EU capital from large companies, producer countries, rightwing parties and member states with forestry industries.

Experts cite last year's EU elections as a decisive moment, creating a new political majority less favorable toward green regulations.

"The other pressure has come from big trading partners outside the EU," said corporate sustainability professor, implying the EU yielded to some demands in trade talks.

Key Loopholes Introduced

The passed law features key dilutions:

• Downstream operators were mostly exempted from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new exemption for small operators was created.
• A window for further "simplifications" was established for next spring.
• Only a handful of nations – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face “high risk” scrutiny.

"Rather than strengthening downstream obligations, it stripped them back," said Schally. "Moving obligations to producers, it reduced accountability."

Business Frustration

The delays and changes have also caused frustration for businesses that complied early.

"It is very frustrating because we put a lot of effort into complying," stated Xavier Rombouts. "We invested in software, followed seminars and built a team... now they’re saying it may be changed. It’s a major letdown."

Official Defense

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

"The new text ensures stability, which is key for business and competent authorities to effectively enforce this vitally important law."