🔗 Share this article EU Deforestation Law Largely 'Gutted' Despite High Hopes It was a landmark law that would curb the global crisis of forest loss. However, the final version of the EU's deforestation regulation, previously touted as the crown jewel of the European Green Deal, has emerged in a severely weakened state, prompting criticism from its initial author and environmental politicians. "The regulation was stripped," stated Hugo Schally, pointing to the exclusion of key obligations for later-stage companies to check the origin 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 make enforcement and prosecution more difficult. Political Dismantling Green party vice-president a leading green politician went further, describing the delays, loopholes and exemptions – such as one for paper goods – as the "political dismantling" of the law. This outcome is a far cry from the hopes of more than a million European citizens who supported an initiative 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 toughest legislation proposed to combat deforestation." From Ambition to Compromise The law's unravelling is seen by critics as the European Union retreating from its environmental promises. The proposal encountered significant delays, ostensibly over IT issues, which drew condemnation. "By revisiting the legislation rather than fixing a simple IT problem, authorities invited political interference," remarked the Green MEP. Originally, the law mandated that firms to trace commodities to their specific geographic origin using GPS coordinates, holding them accountable for deforestation in their supply chains with penalties and hefty fines. "This was not red tape for its own sake," the former official said. "These rules were the tool that made the rules enforceable, established traceability, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind complex supply chains." Intense Lobbying However, the rigorous checks provoked opposition in the EU capital from multinational corporations, exporting nations, rightwing parties and EU logging states. Analysts point to last year's EU elections as a turning point, creating a new political majority more skeptical of environmental rules. "Additional intense pressure has come from major export markets like the United States," said expert Andreas Rasche, implying the EU yielded to some demands in trade talks. The Weakened Final Text In the final legislation features key dilutions: Retailers and traders were mostly exempted from conducting rigorous checks. A new exemption for small operators was created. A option for more reductions was opened for next spring. Only a handful of nations – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face the strictest monitoring. "Instead of tightening rules for companies, it stripped them back," said Schally. "Moving obligations to producers, it lessened the number of responsible firms." 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 preparing," stated 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 major letdown." Official Defense A commission spokesperson defended the outcome, saying: "The commission has responded to feedback and taken action to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient application." "The new text ensures stability, which is crucial for companies and competent authorities to successfully implement this vitally important law."