🔗 Share this article

Originally hailed as a groundbreaking law that would help stop the worldwide scourge of forest loss.

However, the revised version of the EU's deforestation regulation, previously heralded as the flagship policy of the Green Deal, has been passed in a severely weakened state, leading to criticism from its initial author and green lawmakers.

"It has been hollowed out," stated Hugo Schally, pointing to the exclusion of crucial requirements for later-stage companies to check the origin 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.

Political Dismantling

Green party MEP Marie Toussaint was more blunt, describing the delays, loopholes and exemptions – including one for paper goods – as the "political dismantling" of the law.

This final text is a far cry from the demands of over 1.2 million European citizens who signed a petition in 2020 calling for a prohibition of 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 forest loss."

A Story of Dilution

The law's unravelling has been interpreted as the EU walking back its green talk. It faced significant delays, ostensibly over technical problems, which sparked criticism.

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

Originally, the law mandated that firms to trace goods back to their specific geographic origin using GPS coordinates, making them liable for deforestation in their supply chains with criminal charges and hefty fines.

"This was not red tape for its own sake," the former official explained. "It was the mechanism that made the rules enforceable, established traceability, and stopped companies from hiding behind complex supply chains."

Intense Lobbying

Yet, the strict due diligence triggered a backlash in Brussels 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 came from big trading partners like the United States," noted corporate sustainability professor, suggesting the EU yielded to some requests during negotiations.

Key Loopholes Introduced

The passed law includes several critical weakenings:

• Retailers and traders were mostly exempted from submitting due diligence statements.
• A new “low risk” category 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.

"Instead of tightening downstream obligations, it rolled them back," said the law's author. "Moving obligations upstream, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Uncertainty for Companies

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 complying," stated a coffee company executive. "We invested in software, followed seminars and built a team... now they’re saying it could be altered again. It’s a major letdown."

Official Defense

An EU representative defended the outcome, saying: "We have listened to concerns and taken action to ensure a pragmatic and balanced implementation."

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