🔗 Share this article

Originally hailed as a landmark regulation that would combat the worldwide crisis of deforestation.

However, the revised version of the European Union's deforestation regulation, once heralded 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," stated the law's original author, pointing to the removal of crucial requirements for downstream traders to check the provenance of commodities like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber.

Schally cautioned 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

Green party vice-president Marie Toussaint was more blunt, labeling the delays, loopholes and exemptions – including 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 signed a petition in 2020 demanding a prohibition of goods linked to forest destruction.

When launched in 2021, then-Green Deal commissioner the European commissioner called it "the most ambitious law ever put forward to combat forest loss."

A Story of Dilution

The law's unravelling has been interpreted as the European Union retreating from its green talk. The proposal encountered significant delays, reportedly over IT issues, which drew condemnation.

"By revisiting the legislation instead of solving a simple IT problem, authorities invited political interference," remarked the Green MEP.

Originally, the law mandated that firms to trace commodities back to their specific geographic origin using GPS coordinates, making them liable for forest loss along their supply lines with criminal charges and hefty fines.

"It wasn't bureaucracy for its own sake," the former official explained. "These rules were the tool that ensured enforcement, established traceability, and stopped companies from hiding behind complex supply chains."

Mounting Pressure

Yet, the strict due diligence provoked opposition in Brussels from large companies, producer countries, rightwing parties 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.

"Additional intense pressure came from major export markets like the United States," said expert Andreas Rasche, suggesting the commission gave in to some demands in trade talks.

Key Loopholes Introduced

The passed law features key dilutions:

• Retailers and traders were mostly exempted from conducting rigorous checks.
• A new “low risk” category was introduced.
• A window for further "simplifications" was opened for next spring.
• Only a handful of nations – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Instead of tightening downstream obligations, it rolled them back," said the law's author. "By shifting responsibilities upstream, it reduced accountability."

Uncertainty for Companies

The protracted process and revisions have also created annoyance for businesses that complied early.

"It is very frustrating 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 major letdown."

The Commission's Stance

A commission spokesperson defended the outcome, stating: "The commission has responded to concerns and acted to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient application."

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