Despite the grave global stakes, EUDR bullying continues

The EU in-fighting over the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR), adopted in 2023 with overwhelming support in the European Parliament, continues.

Austria has led a charge to “stop the clock” on the legislation and “reopen” – i.e., further weaken – EUDR provisions. On 21 October 2025, the EU Commission made its own proposal for the pioneering legislation, offering unclarified ‘IT’ reasons to justify a second EUDR postponement and further streamlining for small businesses.

It escapes no one’s notice that proposed changes would apply mostly to EU and US businesses. The States having made its distaste for the EUDR and other EU environmental rules clear (FW 297).

In a joint statement, 87 NGOs cried foul, underscoring that the last yearlong delay has already been a year in which the world’s forests and climate were further pushed towards dangerous tipping points, and that continued inaction defies reason. They pointed out that the ongoing political turmoil amplifies uncertainty across supply chains, leaving businesses unclear about how to invest efficiently. They insisted that it is time to halt the upheaval and get on with the much-needed implementation and enforcement.

At the 5 November Environment Council, Member States discussed the Austrian and Commission proposals.

Environment Commissioner Jessika Roswall reiterated the Commission’s proposal: most EU farmers would have until the end of 2026 to comply, and all others would be extended a six-month transition period. She clarified that Austria is proposing two actions: ‘stop the clock’, and ‘further simplification’. Commissioner Roswall pointed out that the Commission proposal already features a de minimis threshold, recognises existing systems and minimises reporting requirements; it would provide exemptions for 95-99% of operators in all low-risk countries. Creating a ‘zero-risk’ category, she explained, would be difficult and few countries – including within the EU – could qualify as zero-risk for deforestation.

Things are not looking good for forests: a dozen Member States explicitly supported Austria’s meddling, three called for only postponement of full application, and Spain came out in support of the Commission’s proposal to postpone, without watering down obligations.

The political dithering does not enhance EU credibility. Failure to implement the law handicaps the good faith actors who invested considerably in compliance. Governments such as those of Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana are setting up inclusive traceability systems, chocolate companies have implemented compliance systems. That they should be put at a competitive disadvantage to those who chose to attack the law undermines the level playing field that the EU holds dear.

The EUDR turmoil is also ill considered, given the vast global stakes. We are now blowing past seven out of nine interconnected planetary boundaries. Keeping forests standing and healthy is our surest defence against climate change.

The EU has massive support from the European public to pursue ambitious forest protection and strong implementation of the EUDR. Despite all the raging of commercial interests, forest protection has long proved to be a unifying issue, and more than 1.1 million citizens had previously signed petitions backing the EUDR and urging the EU to stay strong.

EU energies and finances would be better invested in preparing compliance and protecting future generations, rather than in the relentless lobbying to delay addressing grave problems that we will be forced to address later anyway – or perish for our short-sightedness. It will now be for Parliament to weigh in later this month. 

Image: Tarcisio Schnaider/Shutterstock

Categorias: News, Forest Watch, EU Regulation on deforestation-free products