🔗 Share this article European Union Deforestation Regulation Largely 'Watered Down' Despite Initial Fanfare It was a landmark piece of legislation that would curb the worldwide crisis of forest loss. However, the revised version of the European Union's anti-deforestation law, once heralded as the flagship policy of the Green Deal, has emerged in a severely weakened state, prompting criticism from its initial author and environmental politicians. "It has been stripped," said Hugo Schally, citing the removal of key obligations for later-stage companies to verify the origin of commodities like coffee, cocoa, beef, soy, palm oil, rubber and timber. Schally cautioned that fewer obligated actors, less information collected, and less precise origin data would hinder monitoring and legal action. 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 "systematic weakening" of the law. This final text is a far cry from the demands of more than a million European citizens who signed a petition in 2020 calling for a ban on deforestation-linked products. At its launch in 2021, the EU's climate chief Frans Timmermans trumpeted it as "the toughest law proposed to fight deforestation." A Story of Dilution The law's unravelling has been interpreted as the EU walking back its environmental promises. It faced two major postponements, ostensibly over technical problems, which sparked criticism. "By revisiting the legislation instead of solving a technical issue, the commission opened Pandora’s box," commented Toussaint. In its first draft, the regulation mandated that firms to track commodities back to their exact plot of land using geolocation data, holding them accountable for deforestation in their supply chains with criminal charges and hefty fines. "It wasn't bureaucracy for its own sake," the former official said. "These rules were the tool that ensured enforcement, established traceability, and prevented firms from obscuring their activities behind opaque production networks." Mounting Pressure Yet, the strict due diligence triggered a backlash in the EU capital from multinational corporations, producer countries, conservative political groups and member states with forestry industries. Experts cite last year's EU elections as a turning point, shifting the balance of power less favorable toward green regulations. "The other pressure came from major export markets outside the EU," said corporate sustainability professor, suggesting the EU yielded to some demands in trade talks. Key Loopholes Introduced The passed law features several critical weakenings: Downstream operators were mostly exempted from conducting rigorous checks. A new “low risk” category was created. A window for further "simplifications" was established for next spring. Only four countries – Russia, Belarus, North Korea and Myanmar – will face “high risk” scrutiny. "Instead of tightening downstream obligations, it rolled them back," said Schally. "Moving obligations upstream, it reduced accountability." Business Frustration The delays and changes have also created annoyance for companies that prepared in advance. "We feel very annoyed because we invested significant resources into complying," stated a coffee company executive. "We purchased systems, trained staff and established procedures... now they’re saying it could be altered again. It’s a big frustration." The Commission's Stance A commission spokesperson defended the outcome, 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 key for business and national regulators to successfully implement this very important regulation."