🔗 Share this article EU Anti-Deforestation Law Effectively 'Watered Down' Despite High Hopes Originally hailed as a groundbreaking law that would help stop the worldwide crisis of deforestation. But, the final version of the European Union's anti-deforestation law, once touted as the flagship policy of the European Green Deal, has been passed in a significantly diluted state, prompting criticism from its initial author and environmental politicians. "The regulation was stripped," said the law's original author, citing the removal of key obligations for later-stage companies to check the provenance of products like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber. He warned that fewer obligated actors, fewer data points, and less precise origin data would hinder monitoring and legal action. A Watered-Down Law Green party vice-president a leading green politician was more blunt, describing the delays, loopholes and exemptions – including one for paper goods – as the "systematic weakening" of the law. This outcome 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 deforestation-linked products. When launched in 2021, the EU's climate chief the European commissioner called it "the most ambitious law ever put forward to combat forest loss." From Ambition to Compromise The law's unravelling has been interpreted as the European Union retreating from its environmental promises. The proposal encountered two major postponements, reportedly over IT issues, which drew condemnation. "By reopening this file rather than fixing a technical issue, authorities invited political interference," remarked the Green MEP. In its first draft, the regulation required companies to track goods to their exact plot of land using GPS coordinates, holding them accountable 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, established traceability, and stopped companies from hiding behind complex supply chains." Intense Lobbying Yet, the strict due diligence provoked opposition in Brussels from large companies, exporting nations, rightwing parties and EU logging states. Analysts point to last year's EU elections as a decisive moment, shifting the balance of power more skeptical of green regulations. "The other pressure came from major export markets like the United States," said corporate sustainability professor, implying the EU yielded to some requests during negotiations. The Weakened Final Text The passed law features key dilutions: Retailers and traders were largely freed from conducting rigorous checks. A new exemption for small operators was introduced. A option for more reductions was established for next spring. Only a handful of nations – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face “high risk” scrutiny. "Instead of tightening rules for companies, it rolled them back," lamented Schally. "By shifting responsibilities to producers, it reduced accountability." Uncertainty for Companies The delays and changes have also caused frustration for businesses that complied early. "We feel very annoyed because we put a lot of effort into complying," stated Xavier Rombouts. "We invested in software, followed seminars and built a team... now they’re saying it could be altered again. It’s a big frustration." The Commission's Stance An EU representative supported the final law, saying: "We have listened to feedback and acted to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient application." "The revised regulation provides for predictability, which is crucial for companies and competent authorities to effectively enforce this very important regulation."