🔗 Share this article European Union Deforestation Law Largely 'Watered Down' After Initial Fanfare It was a landmark regulation that would help stop the worldwide scourge of forest loss. But, the final version of the European Union'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 original architect and green lawmakers. "The regulation was hollowed out," said Hugo Schally, 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, fewer data points, and imprecise sourcing details would hinder monitoring and legal action. Political Dismantling Green party vice-president a leading green politician went further, labeling the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – including one for paper goods – as the "political dismantling" of the law. This outcome stands in stark contrast to the hopes of more than a million EU citizens who signed a petition in 2020 demanding a ban on goods linked to forest destruction. When launched in 2021, then-Green Deal commissioner the European commissioner called it "the toughest law proposed to combat forest loss." A Story of Dilution The regulation's dilution is seen by critics as the European Union retreating from its green talk. The proposal encountered significant delays, ostensibly over technical problems, which sparked criticism. "By revisiting the legislation instead of solving a technical issue, the commission opened Pandora’s box," remarked Toussaint. Originally, the law mandated that firms to track commodities back 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," Schally said. "These rules were the tool that ensured enforcement, created a verifiable paper trail, and stopped companies from hiding behind opaque production networks." Mounting Pressure However, the rigorous checks provoked opposition in the EU capital from multinational corporations, producer countries, rightwing parties and EU logging states. Experts cite last year's European Parliament elections as a decisive moment, shifting the balance of power less favorable toward green regulations. "The other pressure has come from major export markets outside the EU," noted expert Andreas Rasche, implying the commission gave in to some requests during negotiations. Key Loopholes Introduced The passed law includes key dilutions: Downstream operators were largely freed from submitting due diligence statements. A new exemption for small operators was introduced. A option for more reductions was opened for next spring. Only four countries – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face “high risk” scrutiny. "Rather than strengthening downstream obligations, it rolled them back," lamented the law's author. "By shifting responsibilities upstream, it lessened the number of responsible firms." Uncertainty for Companies The protracted process and revisions have also created annoyance for companies that prepared in advance. "We feel very annoyed because we invested significant resources into complying," said a coffee company executive. "We purchased systems, trained staff and established procedures... now they’re saying it may be changed. It’s a big frustration." The Commission's Stance A commission spokesperson supported the final law, saying: "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 law."