🔗 Share this article

Originally hailed as a landmark regulation that would help stop the global crisis 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, leading to alarm from its original architect and green lawmakers.

"It has been gutted," said Hugo Schally, pointing to the exclusion of crucial requirements for downstream traders to verify the origin 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 imprecise sourcing details would complicate the task of authorities.

A Watered-Down Law

Green party MEP a leading green politician was more blunt, describing the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – including one for paper goods – as the "political dismantling" 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 demanding a ban on goods linked to forest destruction.

At its launch in 2021, the EU's climate chief the European commissioner called it "the most ambitious legislation ever put forward to combat deforestation."

From Ambition to Compromise

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

"By revisiting the legislation instead of solving a technical issue, authorities invited political interference," remarked Toussaint.

In its first draft, the law mandated that firms to track commodities back to their specific geographic origin 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 said. "It was the mechanism that made the rules enforceable, created a verifiable paper trail, and stopped companies from hiding behind complex supply chains."

Intense Lobbying

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

Experts cite last year's European Parliament elections as a turning point, shifting the balance of power more skeptical of green regulations.

"The other pressure has come from big trading partners like the United States," said corporate sustainability professor, suggesting the commission gave in to some demands in trade talks.

Key Loopholes Introduced

The passed law includes several critical weakenings:

• Retailers and traders were largely freed from submitting due diligence statements.
• 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 the strictest monitoring.

"Instead of tightening rules for companies, it rolled them back," said the law's author. "Moving obligations to producers, it reduced accountability."

Uncertainty for Companies

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

"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 big frustration."

Official Defense

An EU representative defended the outcome, stating: "We have listened to concerns and acted to ensure a pragmatic and balanced application."

"The new text ensures stability, which is key for business and national regulators to effectively enforce this very important law."