🔗 Share this article

Originally hailed as a pioneering law that would help stop the global scourge of deforestation.

But, the final version of the European Union's anti-deforestation law, previously heralded as the crown jewel of the Green Deal, has emerged in a significantly diluted state, leading to alarm from its initial author and environmental politicians.

"It has been gutted," said Hugo Schally, citing the exclusion of key obligations for later-stage companies to check the provenance of commodities like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber.

Schally cautioned 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 Marie Toussaint went further, describing the delays, loopholes and exemptions – including one for paper goods – as the "political dismantling" of the law.

This final text stands in stark contrast to the demands of over 1.2 million EU citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 calling for a ban on deforestation-linked products.

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

A Story of Dilution

The regulation's dilution is seen by critics as the EU walking back its green talk. It faced significant delays, reportedly over technical problems, which sparked criticism.

"By reopening this file instead of solving a simple IT problem, authorities invited political interference," commented Toussaint.

In its first draft, the law mandated that firms to track goods back to their specific geographic origin using geolocation data, making them liable 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 explained. "These rules were the tool that made the rules enforceable, established traceability, and stopped companies from hiding behind complex supply chains."

Intense Lobbying

Yet, the rigorous checks provoked opposition in Brussels from multinational corporations, exporting nations, rightwing parties and EU logging states.

Experts cite last year's EU elections as a turning point, creating a new political majority more skeptical of green regulations.

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

The Weakened Final Text

The passed law includes several critical weakenings:

• Downstream operators were largely freed from submitting due diligence statements.
• A new exemption for small operators was introduced.
• A window for further "simplifications" was established for next spring.
• Only four countries – 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. "By shifting responsibilities upstream, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Uncertainty for Companies

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

"We feel very annoyed because we invested significant resources into preparing," stated Xavier Rombouts. "We purchased systems, trained staff and established procedures... now they’re saying it may be changed. It’s a major letdown."

The Commission's Stance

An EU representative supported the final law, stating: "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 national regulators to successfully implement this vitally important law."