🔗 Share this article

Originally hailed as a groundbreaking regulation that would combat the worldwide scourge of forest loss.

However, the final version of the EU's anti-deforestation law, once touted as the flagship policy of the Green Deal, has emerged in a significantly diluted state, prompting criticism from its original architect and green lawmakers.

"It has been hollowed out," stated Hugo Schally, pointing to the removal of key obligations for later-stage companies to check the provenance of commodities like palm oil, soy, wood, beef, rubber, cocoa and coffee.

He warned that fewer obligated actors, less information collected, and less precise origin data would complicate the task of authorities.

Political Dismantling

Environmental vice-president a leading green politician went further, describing the delays, loopholes and exemptions – including 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 supported an initiative in 2020 demanding a prohibition of deforestation-linked products.

When launched in 2021, the EU's climate chief Frans Timmermans trumpeted it as "the most ambitious law proposed to combat forest loss."

From Ambition to Compromise

The law's unravelling is seen by critics as the EU walking back its green talk. The proposal encountered significant delays, reportedly over IT issues, which sparked criticism.

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

In its first draft, the regulation mandated that firms to track commodities back to their specific geographic origin using geolocation data, making them liable for forest loss along their supply lines with penalties and hefty fines.

"This was not red tape for its own sake," the former official explained. "These rules were the tool that ensured enforcement, established traceability, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind opaque production networks."

Mounting Pressure

However, the strict due diligence triggered a backlash in Brussels from large companies, exporting nations, conservative political groups and member states with forestry industries.

Analysts point to last year's European Parliament elections as a decisive moment, creating a new political majority more skeptical of green regulations.

"Additional intense pressure has come from big trading partners outside the EU," noted expert Andreas Rasche, suggesting the EU yielded to some requests during negotiations.

Key Loopholes Introduced

In the final legislation includes several critical weakenings:

• Retailers and traders were mostly exempted from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new exemption for small operators was introduced.
• A option for more reductions was established for next spring.
• Only a handful of nations – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face “high risk” scrutiny.

"Instead of tightening rules for companies, it rolled them back," said the law's author. "Moving obligations upstream, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Business Frustration

The delays and changes have also caused frustration for companies that prepared in advance.

"We feel very annoyed because we invested significant resources into preparing," 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 big frustration."

Official Defense

A commission spokesperson supported the final law, saying: "We have listened to concerns and taken action to ensure a pragmatic and balanced implementation."

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