🔗 Share this article

It was a pioneering law that would combat the global scourge of deforestation.

However, the final version of the EU's anti-deforestation law, once heralded as the flagship policy of the European Green Deal, has emerged in a significantly diluted state, leading to alarm from its initial author and green lawmakers.

"It has been gutted," said the law's original author, citing the exclusion of crucial requirements for downstream traders to check the provenance of commodities 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 hinder monitoring and legal action.

A Watered-Down Law

Green party MEP Marie Toussaint was more blunt, describing the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – such as one for printed products – as the "political dismantling" of the law.

This final text is a far cry from the hopes of more than a million European citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 calling for a ban on goods linked to forest destruction.

When launched in 2021, then-Green Deal commissioner Frans Timmermans called it "the most ambitious legislation ever put forward to combat deforestation."

A Story of Dilution

The regulation's dilution is seen by critics as the European Union retreating from its green talk. The proposal encountered two major postponements, reportedly over technical problems, which drew condemnation.

"By reopening this file instead of solving a simple IT problem, the commission opened Pandora’s box," commented Toussaint.

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

"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 prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind complex supply chains."

Intense Lobbying

However, the rigorous checks triggered a backlash in Brussels from large companies, producer countries, conservative political groups and member states with forestry industries.

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 came from big trading partners like the United States," said expert Andreas Rasche, implying the EU yielded to some requests during negotiations.

The Weakened Final Text

In the final legislation features several critical weakenings:

• Downstream operators 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 four countries – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Instead of tightening rules for companies, it rolled them back," lamented Schally. "Moving obligations to producers, it reduced accountability."

Business Frustration

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

"We feel very annoyed because we put a lot of effort into preparing," said a coffee company executive. "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 supported the final law, saying: "The commission has responded to concerns and taken action to ensure a pragmatic and balanced implementation."

"The new text provides for predictability, which is key for business and national regulators to successfully implement this very important regulation."