🔗 Share this article EU Anti-Deforestation Regulation Effectively 'Gutted' After Initial Fanfare Originally hailed as a groundbreaking regulation that would combat the worldwide crisis of forest loss. However, the revised version of the EU's deforestation regulation, previously heralded as the flagship policy of the European Green Deal, has emerged in a significantly diluted state, prompting alarm from its initial author and green lawmakers. "The regulation was stripped," said Hugo Schally, pointing to the exclusion of crucial requirements for later-stage companies to check the provenance of products like palm oil, soy, wood, beef, rubber, cocoa and coffee. He warned that a reduced number of responsible companies, less information collected, and imprecise sourcing details would make enforcement and prosecution more difficult. Political Dismantling Green party MEP Marie Toussaint was more blunt, describing the postponements, exceptions and new loopholes – such as 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 prohibition of goods linked to forest destruction. When launched in 2021, then-Green Deal commissioner the European commissioner called it "the most ambitious legislation ever put forward to fight forest loss." A Story of Dilution The law's unravelling has been interpreted as the European Union retreating from its environmental promises. It faced significant delays, reportedly over technical problems, which sparked criticism. "By revisiting the legislation instead of solving a simple IT problem, authorities invited political interference," remarked Toussaint. In its first draft, the regulation required companies to track goods to their exact plot of land using geolocation data, holding them accountable for forest loss along their supply lines with penalties and large financial penalties. "It wasn't bureaucracy for its own sake," the former official explained. "These rules were the tool that made the rules enforceable, established traceability, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind complex supply chains." Mounting Pressure However, the strict due diligence triggered a backlash in the EU capital from multinational corporations, producer countries, rightwing parties and member states with forestry industries. Analysts point to last year's European Parliament elections as a turning point, shifting the balance of power more skeptical of environmental rules. "Additional intense pressure came from major export markets like the United States," noted corporate sustainability professor, implying the EU yielded to some demands in trade talks. The Weakened Final Text 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 – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face “high risk” scrutiny. "Rather than strengthening rules for companies, it stripped them back," said the law's author. "Moving obligations to producers, it lessened the number of responsible firms." Uncertainty for Companies The delays and changes 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 supported the final law, saying: "The commission has responded to concerns and taken action to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient application." "The new text provides for predictability, which is crucial for companies and national regulators to effectively enforce this very important law."