It won't hurt consumers as much as you think it will. If I have a faulty Apple product, Apple can always choose to repair it. However if the repaired part continually fail, they have to replace the entire product. Apple can't choose to repair the product indefinitely.
That's not how it works. Fortunately, iPhones don't "continually fail," so consumers aren't all eventually going to get new iPhones when they need to be repaired. There's also the little problem with your warranty expiring.
The way it works now is for the benefit of consumers. Most times, if there is something wrong with the phone and its under warranty, instead of making you wait while your phone is sent off for repair, Apple will simply swap you out a new or refurbished phone and you are on your way. Even if your warranty is expired, Apple generally has a very generous program where they will sell you a refurbished model at a very good price and you can be on your way if you don't want to wait and pay for a repair.
The reason consumers would in Denmark would be hurt is once you make it so expensive for Apple by forcing them to give you a brand new phone, (ridiculous because you have a used phone with a used battery, scratches, etc. ) it will become cheaper more often for Apple to simply take your phone and send it out for repairs instead of giving you a new phone. This means that instead of getting a refurbished phone, which will have a new battery, new outer shell and have been thoroughly tested gone through, a consumer will now have to wait without a phone and then get back their used phone.
Of course everyone would want a brand new phone instead of their used phone, but how many people would prefer to wait and end up with a "used" phone instead of an Apple refurbished phone with a new battery and outer shell, with a minimum of ninety days warranty (1yr?)on the entire refurbished phone?