🔗 Share this article

Widely celebrated as a groundbreaking piece of legislation that would curb the worldwide crisis of deforestation.

However, the final version of the EU's anti-deforestation law, once heralded as the crown jewel of the Green Deal, has emerged in a significantly diluted state, prompting alarm from its original architect and green lawmakers.

"It has been hollowed out," said the law's original author, pointing to the exclusion of crucial requirements for later-stage companies to verify the origin of products like palm oil, soy, wood, beef, rubber, cocoa and coffee.

He warned that a reduced number of responsible companies, less information collected, and less precise origin data would hinder monitoring and legal action.

A Watered-Down Law

Environmental vice-president Marie Toussaint went further, describing the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – including one for paper goods – as the "political dismantling" of the law.

This final text is a far cry from the demands of more than a million European citizens who signed a petition in 2020 calling for a prohibition of deforestation-linked products.

When launched in 2021, then-Green Deal commissioner the European commissioner trumpeted it as "the toughest law ever put forward to fight deforestation."

From Ambition to Compromise

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

"By reopening this file rather than fixing a simple IT problem, 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 forest loss along their supply lines with penalties and hefty fines.

"This was not red tape for its own sake," Schally said. "It was the mechanism that made the rules enforceable, created a verifiable paper trail, and stopped companies from hiding behind opaque production networks."

Intense Lobbying

Yet, the strict due diligence triggered a backlash in the EU capital from multinational corporations, exporting nations, 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 big trading partners like the United States," said expert Andreas Rasche, implying the EU yielded to some requests during negotiations.

Key Loopholes Introduced

The passed law features several critical weakenings:

• Downstream operators were largely freed from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new exemption for small operators was introduced.
• A window for further "simplifications" was opened for next spring.
• Only four countries – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Rather than strengthening rules for companies, it rolled them back," said Schally. "By shifting responsibilities to producers, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Business Frustration

The protracted process and revisions have also caused frustration for companies that prepared in advance.

"We feel very annoyed because we put a lot of effort into preparing," stated Xavier Rombouts. "We invested in software, followed seminars and built a team... now they’re saying it could be altered again. It’s a big frustration."

Official Defense

An EU representative supported the final law, saying: "The commission has responded to feedback and acted to ensure a pragmatic and balanced implementation."

"The new text ensures stability, which is crucial for companies and competent authorities to successfully implement this very important regulation."