🔗 Share this article

It was a pioneering regulation that would combat the global crisis of forest loss.

But, the revised version of the EU's anti-deforestation law, previously touted as the crown jewel of the European Green Deal, has emerged in a significantly diluted state, leading to criticism from its original architect and environmental politicians.

"It has been gutted," said Hugo Schally, pointing to the removal of crucial requirements for downstream traders to check the origin 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 make enforcement and prosecution more difficult.

A Watered-Down Law

Green party MEP a leading green politician was more blunt, labeling the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – including one for printed products – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This final text is a far cry from the demands of more than a million EU citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 calling for a ban on deforestation-linked products.

When launched in 2021, then-Green Deal commissioner the European commissioner called it "the most ambitious legislation ever put forward to fight forest loss."

A Story of Dilution

The regulation's dilution has been interpreted as the EU walking back its environmental promises. It faced two major postponements, ostensibly over technical problems, which sparked criticism.

"By revisiting the legislation instead of solving a technical issue, the commission opened Pandora’s box," remarked the Green MEP.

Originally, the regulation mandated that firms to trace commodities to their exact plot of land using GPS coordinates, making them liable for deforestation in their supply chains with criminal charges and large financial penalties.

"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 complex supply chains."

Mounting Pressure

However, the strict due diligence provoked opposition in Brussels from large companies, producer countries, conservative political groups and EU logging states.

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

"Additional intense pressure has come from major export markets outside the EU," said corporate sustainability professor, implying the commission gave in to some requests during negotiations.

The Weakened Final Text

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 opened for next spring.
• Only a handful of nations – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Rather than strengthening downstream obligations, it rolled them back," lamented the law's author. "By shifting responsibilities to producers, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Uncertainty for Companies

The delays and changes have also created annoyance for companies that prepared in advance.

"It is very frustrating 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 may be changed. It’s a major letdown."

Official Defense

An EU representative supported the final law, saying: "The commission has responded to feedback and taken action to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient implementation."

"The revised regulation provides for predictability, which is crucial for companies and competent authorities to successfully implement this vitally important law."