🔗 Share this article

Widely celebrated as a landmark law that would help stop the worldwide scourge of forest loss.

But, the final 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 criticism from its initial author and green lawmakers.

"The regulation was gutted," said the law's original author, citing the exclusion of key obligations for downstream traders to verify the origin of products like palm oil, soy, wood, beef, rubber, cocoa and coffee.

He warned that fewer obligated actors, less information collected, and imprecise sourcing details would hinder monitoring and legal action.

A Watered-Down Law

Green party MEP a leading green politician was more blunt, labeling the delays, loopholes and exemptions – such as one for paper goods – as the "systematic weakening" of the law.

This final text stands in stark contrast to the hopes of over 1.2 million European citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 calling for a ban on goods linked to forest destruction.

At its launch in 2021, then-Green Deal commissioner the European commissioner called it "the toughest legislation ever put forward to fight forest loss."

From Ambition to Compromise

The law's unravelling has been interpreted as the EU walking back its green talk. It faced two major postponements, reportedly over IT issues, which drew condemnation.

"By revisiting the legislation instead of solving a technical issue, the commission opened Pandora’s box," commented Toussaint.

Originally, the law mandated that firms to track commodities to their specific geographic origin using geolocation data, making them liable for deforestation in their supply chains with criminal charges and hefty fines.

"It wasn't bureaucracy 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 opaque production networks."

Mounting Pressure

However, the strict due diligence triggered a backlash in Brussels from multinational corporations, exporting nations, rightwing parties and EU logging states.

Analysts point to last year's European Parliament elections as a decisive moment, creating a new political majority more skeptical of green regulations.

"Additional intense pressure came from big trading partners like the United States," said expert Andreas Rasche, implying the commission gave in to some demands in trade talks.

The Weakened Final Text

In the final legislation features several critical weakenings:

• Retailers and traders were mostly exempted from submitting due diligence statements.
• A new “low risk” category was created.
• A window for further "simplifications" was opened for next spring.
• Only four countries – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face “high risk” scrutiny.

"Instead of tightening downstream obligations, it rolled them back," lamented Schally. "Moving obligations upstream, it lessened the number of responsible firms."

Uncertainty for Companies

The delays and changes have also caused frustration for companies that prepared in advance.

"We feel very annoyed because we invested significant resources into preparing," stated a coffee company executive. "We purchased systems, trained staff and established procedures... now they’re saying it could be altered again. It’s a major letdown."

Official Defense

A commission spokesperson defended the outcome, stating: "We have listened to concerns and taken action to ensure a pragmatic and balanced application."

"The revised regulation provides for predictability, which is key for business and national regulators to successfully implement this vitally important law."