The root of the protest: cuts and rising costs in agriculture and logistics

The current protests are primarily a reaction to cuts in so-called "diesel subsidies," which are actually tax refunds. Farmers mainly operate on agricultural land and private roads, which is why they can receive a refund for their share of the subsidies, intended for the maintenance of transport infrastructure. Both parties—farmers and logistics companies—face the problem of high diesel prices. Farmers can apply for a partial tax refund. However, transport companies receive no refunds and are additionally burdened by doubled highway tolls and the new CO₂ emissions pricing system. These additional costs inevitably lead to higher transport prices, and thus also to rising prices for services and products. This, in turn, further fuels inflation. There are also concerns that retailers will exploit this situation to disproportionately increase supermarket prices, placing an additional burden on consumers.

Burden on agriculture due to bureaucratic hurdles

The farmers' protests aren't just about cost pressures, but also about the flood of bureaucratic obligations that seem designed to turn every farmer into a part-time bureaucrat. From meticulous documentation of herbicide use to detailed reporting requirements for fertilization and animal husbandry, farmers are increasingly confronted with regulations that lead to excessive red tape. Added to this are regulations on the use of fertilizers and pesticides, as well as instructions on how agricultural land must be managed, including the obligation to set aside 4% of the land for environmental protection measures. All this while they simply want to do their actual job: produce food locally. These demands, combined with the pressure to achieve the same yield despite reduced acreage and to meet the price demands of discount supermarkets, create an almost Kafkaesque situation. Because, especially compared to international competitors who face fewer regulatory hurdles and lower labor costs, German farmers are increasingly disadvantaged thanks to government policies.

The bureaucratic burden in the logistics industry

German logistics companies are also affected by the bureaucratic burden, which has steadily increased in recent years. This is due in no small part to the regulations of Mobility Package II, which was actually intended to provide the German transport sector with better competitive conditions. How well these regulations are (or can be) monitored by the authorities in Germany is another matter entirely. In addition to the retention requirements for transport documents, the GDPR, further administrative work without any added value. A document containing personal data cannot simply be archived for 10 years, as required by the principles of proper accounting. At this point, a business owner might even be able to get creative, as complying with such contradictory regulations can sometimes be quite frustrating.
Since 2023, freight forwarders have also been required to meticulously record working hours, and drivers' driving and rest times have been documented for some time now. Furthermore, data from driver cards, which are only stored for 28 days, must be regularly read and archived. To top it all off, there are a multitude of other documentation and retention periods to consider, from transport insurance documents to general employee records. It almost seems as if, in addition to transporting goods, the transport industry has to master a completely different discipline: an Olympic-level bureaucratic obstacle course.
German haulage companies caught in a dilemma between ecology and economy.
In line with the political ambition to make Germany climate-neutral by 2045 , the stated goal is to significantly reduce CO2 emissions in freight transport by 2030. In a price-sensitive market like logistics, this political ambition seems almost farcical. German haulage companies are fighting for every cent to compete with Eastern European rivals, while politicians expect them to convert their fleets to expensive electric trucks. These vehicles cost three times as much as a conventional truck, and as if that weren't enough, the government is also cutting subsidies for climate-neutral trucks . Logistics companies in Germany face a dilemma: environmental protection without sufficient support versus competitiveness. Meanwhile, Eastern European companies, subject to less stringent government environmental regulations, are increasingly gaining market share – a paradoxical scenario that undermines both environmental protection and the domestic logistics sector. The question arises whether climate protection is truly still the priority. This vicious cycle puts the logistics industry in a precarious position and raises a pressing question: how long can this balancing act between ecological responsibility and economic reality remain sustainable?

Conclusion

All the obligations and regulations have become so complex that many companies have toto navigate this jungle and operate in compliance with the law. With steadily rising costs and falling real wages, the risk of companies, whether in agriculture or logistics, becoming uncompetitive is no longer a risk, but a certainty.
We are convinced that both agricultural activities for food production and the logistical value creation for #smoothlogistics should be generated largely within a single economy. The parallels between agriculture and logistics also underscore this, which is probably why there is such strong solidarity in this area.
This requires far-sighted policies and support from all sides to reach a consensus and find truly sustainable and environmentally conscious solutions. To achieve this, all stakeholders must sit down together and consider and discuss problems in a solution-oriented manner. Neither farmers nor logistics companies want to shirk their responsibility towards the environment, and they are very interested in using scientific findings and methods to save resources while simultaneously protecting the environment.