🔗 Share this article EU Deforestation Law Effectively 'Dismantled' Despite Initial Fanfare Widely celebrated as a pioneering regulation that would curb the global crisis of deforestation. However, the revised version of the European Union's deforestation regulation, once touted as the crown jewel of the Green Deal, has been passed in a significantly diluted state, leading to criticism from its initial author and environmental politicians. "It has been stripped," stated Hugo Schally, citing the removal of crucial requirements for later-stage companies to verify the provenance of commodities like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber. He warned that a reduced number of responsible companies, fewer data points, and imprecise sourcing details would hinder monitoring and legal action. A Watered-Down Law Environmental MEP Marie Toussaint went further, labeling 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 hopes of more than a million EU citizens who signed a petition in 2020 demanding a ban on deforestation-linked products. At its launch in 2021, the EU's climate chief Frans Timmermans called it "the most ambitious law ever put forward to fight forest loss." A Story of Dilution The regulation's dilution is seen by critics as the European Union retreating from its green talk. It faced two major postponements, reportedly over IT issues, which drew condemnation. "By revisiting the legislation instead of solving a simple IT problem, the commission opened Pandora’s box," commented Toussaint. In its first draft, the regulation mandated that firms to trace goods to their specific geographic origin using geolocation data, making them liable for deforestation in their supply chains with penalties and large financial penalties. "It wasn't bureaucracy for its own sake," Schally said. "These rules were the tool that made the rules enforceable, created a verifiable paper trail, and stopped companies from hiding behind opaque production networks." Intense Lobbying However, the strict due diligence triggered a backlash in the EU capital from large companies, producer countries, conservative political groups and member states with forestry industries. Analysts point to last year's European Parliament elections as a decisive moment, creating a new political majority more skeptical of environmental rules. "Additional intense pressure came from big trading partners outside the EU," noted corporate sustainability professor, suggesting the commission gave in to some demands in trade talks. The Weakened Final Text The passed law features several critical weakenings: Retailers and traders were largely freed from conducting rigorous checks. A new “low risk” category was created. A option for more reductions was established 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. "Moving obligations to producers, it reduced accountability." Uncertainty for Companies The protracted process and revisions have also created annoyance for companies that prepared in advance. "It is very frustrating because we invested significant resources into complying," 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 big frustration." The Commission's Stance An EU representative defended the outcome, stating: "The commission has responded to concerns and acted to ensure a pragmatic and balanced application." "The revised regulation ensures stability, which is crucial for companies and national regulators to effectively enforce this vitally important law."