🔗 Share this article

Widely celebrated as a landmark law that would curb the global crisis of forest loss.

However, the final version of the European Union's deforestation regulation, once heralded as the crown jewel of the Green Deal, has emerged in a significantly diluted state, leading to criticism from its initial author and green lawmakers.

"It has been gutted," stated the law's original author, citing the exclusion of crucial requirements for later-stage companies to check the origin of products like palm oil, soy, wood, beef, rubber, cocoa and coffee.

Schally cautioned that fewer obligated actors, less information collected, and less precise origin data would hinder monitoring and legal action.

A Watered-Down Law

Green party vice-president Marie Toussaint went further, labeling the delays, loopholes and exemptions – such as one for printed products – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This final text is a far cry from the hopes of more than a million EU 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 trumpeted it as "the toughest law proposed to fight forest loss."

From Ambition to Compromise

The law's unravelling is seen by critics as the European Union retreating from its environmental promises. It faced two major postponements, ostensibly over IT issues, which sparked criticism.

"By revisiting the legislation rather than fixing a simple IT problem, the commission opened Pandora’s box," commented the Green MEP.

Originally, the law mandated that firms to track commodities back to their specific geographic origin using GPS coordinates, holding them accountable for forest loss along their supply lines with penalties and large financial penalties.

"It wasn't bureaucracy for its own sake," the former official said. "It was the mechanism that ensured enforcement, established traceability, and stopped companies from hiding behind opaque production networks."

Intense Lobbying

However, the strict due diligence provoked opposition in Brussels from large companies, producer countries, conservative political groups and member states with forestry industries.

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

"The other pressure has come from major export markets like the United States," said expert Andreas Rasche, implying the commission gave in to some requests during negotiations.

Key Loopholes Introduced

In the final legislation features key dilutions:

• Downstream operators were largely freed from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new exemption for small operators was introduced.
• 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 rolled them back," lamented Schally. "By shifting responsibilities upstream, 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 invested significant resources into complying," stated Xavier Rombouts. "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, stating: "The commission has responded to concerns and acted to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient application."

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