deforestation

Reading Time: 4 minutes

LVMH-owned Italian leather maker lobbied to weaken EU anti-deforestation law while importing hides linked to forest destruction, NGO says

Greenwashing has become so pervasive that the connection between LVMH and deforestation rarely springs to mind when thinking of the luxury giant. But a new investigation by environmental NGO Global Witness suggests it should. The findings, shared exclusively with POLITICO, reveal fresh links between LVMH’s supply chain and forest destruction in South America. They also raise uncomfortable questions about who really pays the price for luxury leather.

LVMH and deforestation: The Global Witness investigation

Global Witness has uncovered evidence that Nuti Ivo — an Italian tannery group owned by LVMH — imported hides from Paraguay through suppliers allegedly tied to large-scale deforestation in the Gran Chaco forest, one of South America’s most threatened ecosystems.

The timing is critical. The EU’s anti-deforestation regulation (EUDR), approved in 2023, is designed to keep products linked to recently cleared land out of European markets. Beef, cocoa, soy, palm oil, and cattle-related products are all covered. But parts of the leather industry are now lobbying for leather to be excluded from the regulation. Their argument is that leather is only a byproduct of the meat industry and therefore should not be considered a driver of deforestation.

One of the most vocal advocates in this debate has been Fabrizio Nuti, CEO of Nuti Ivo and president of Italy’s tannery association. During discussions in the European Parliament, Nuti argued that stricter traceability requirements could become impossible for the sector to manage, especially regarding imports from South America.  

Traceability gaps and deforestation links

Yet according to Global Witness, companies connected to Nuti Ivo sourced hides from Paraguayan suppliers linked to over 100,000 hectares of deforestation. Including land claimed by Indigenous communities. Trade records show that in 2025 alone, the Nuti Ivo Group imported thousands of tons of leather from Paraguay. Moreover, traceability remains alarmingly thin: the group can track only part of its hides back to individual slaughterhouses, leaving significant blind spots within the supply chain.

LVMH responded by stating that it is committed to ending deforestation across its operations and supply chains by 2025. The group also said it has never lobbied to weaken the EU deforestation regulation. After being confronted with trade data showing imports from Paraguay, the company described the quantities as “very small” and linked them to contracts that predated its acquisition of Nuti Ivo in 2023. LVMH added that discussions were underway to phase out those remaining agreements.

But environmental organisations disagree with attempts to exempt leather from the EUDR. In a joint letter to the European Commission, groups including Human Rights Watch and ClientEarth argued that excluding leather would undermine the logic of the law: if meat from cattle raised on deforested land is banned, they say, the animal’s skin should not be treated as an innocent byproduct.

Source: POLITICO, reporting on an investigation by NGO Global Witness (published April 27, 2026)

From green certifications to greenwashing: a familiar pattern

This is not an isolated case. In This is Greenwashing, when we tried to find sustainable options to print, we realised how tricky the situation is. Specifically, we acknowledged a global scandal of green labels: companies accused or convicted of environmental crimes continued to obtain and trade under “green” certifications.

“Over a 25-year period (1998–2023), at least 347 companies received sustainability certifications despite being publicly accused of illegal logging, deforestation, or fraudulent environmental practices” (ICIJ, Deforestation Inc., 2023).

In our eBook, we explore how sustainability language can sometimes coexist with business practices that tell a very different story. Especially in industries where supply chains are long, fragmented, and difficult to monitor.

📘 Download This is Greenwashing — here

Final thoughts

The luxury industry has long sold itself on an idea of perfection. Flawless products, pristine images, and increasingly, unassailable sustainability pledges. But the case of LVMH and deforestation reveals a less polished reality. One where legal loopholes, opaque supply chains, and quiet lobbying efforts can undermine even the most well-intentioned green laws.

If leather is truly a byproduct, then it inherits the environmental cost of the meat it accompanies — not a free pass. The EUDR exists precisely to close that kind of accounting trick. Exempting leather wouldn’t just weaken the regulation; it would signal that luxury, once again, plays by different rules.

For LVMH, the path forward is clear but not easy. Promises to end deforestation by 2025 mean little if supply chains in 2025 are still tied to Paraguay’s disappearing Gran Chaco. The industry needs less lobbying and more traceability. Fewer claims of “very small” quantities and a full accounting of every hide.

Because in the end, green laws don’t fail in Brussels. They fail in the gap between a CEO’s testimony and a forest on fire. And that gap is where luxury must finally choose a side.