Aerial picture of a deforested area close to Sinop, Mato Grosso State, Brazil, taken on August 7, … More 2020. (Photo by FLORIAN PLAUCHEUR/AFP via Getty Images)
AFP via Getty Images
Will the EU deforestation law be postponed again? Given how events have unfolded this month, this is a question worth asking. The law is set to take effect in December 2025 and is seen as the EU’s global leadership in curbing deforestation. But this month, a major chocolate company asked the government to delay implementation further, citing practical challenges. In addition, many EU Member States supported a proposal to the European Commission requesting simplification —a move that could also have implications for the implementation timeline.
On the other hand, many civil society groups maintain that further delay would send the wrong signal that the law is negotiable under pressure. So, which way will the law tilt? It is essential to stay alert to how this plot unfolds.
In my post on Climate Policy Development to Follow in 2025, I flagged this as a space to watch. With the growing debate, it’s worth taking a closer look to assess new developments and uncover concerns.
The EU Deforestation Regulation (famously called EUDR) is a first-of-its-kind regulation that checks the import of deforestation-linked products into EU markets. Seven product categories are under the radar: cattle, cocoa, palm oil, rubber, soya, coffee, and wood from deforested regions. The regulation was passed by the EU in 2023 and initially set for implementation in December 2024. It was postponed by a year last year until 2025, due to demands from producer countries and companies asking for more time to prepare for compliance. With only six months left before implementation, one wonders: Will it be further delayed?
Forests play a critical role in absorbing carbon from the atmosphere. Research released yesterday by the World Resources Institute’s Global Forest Watch showcased that our forest carbon sink reached its lowest point in the past two decades due to fires and persistent deforestation. The forest carbon sink could only absorb a quarter of its usual emissions in the past two years. This has disastrous impacts on us and our planet. That’s why regulations like the EUDR that curb deforestation are more urgent than ever.
Some Chocolate Giants Need More Time
Mondelez, Cadbury’s parent company, called for the EU to delay EUDR implementation earlier this month. The company’s key reason for this request was practical hurdles in implementing the regulation, especially at a time when the industry is facing high cocoa prices. This year, crop diseases have impacted cocoa prices, constrained supply and pushed up costs for companies. As a result, dealing with the increased compliance costs related to reporting on EUDR would be especially challenging.
Mondelez is reportedly lobbying other US chocolate companies to support this request. However, there isn’t a consensus. Mars and Hershey—two leading US chocolate manufacturers—did not join Nestlé and Ferrero in signing a letter supporting the delay.
Companies like Nestlé have made clear they do not want further delays. Nestlé has already begun implementing systems to comply with the new regulation. An additional delay, they argue, would create uncertainty and negatively affect first-mover companies.
So the big question is, are companies ready for EUDR, or are the delayed requests just excuses? Many firms are preparing for compliance. For example, according to a report by Food Navigator, 99% of Nestlé’s key ingredients were considered deforestation-free in 2022. The company publicly stated that it was committed to deforestation-free supply chains in 2010, and by March 2020, 75% of its commodities were verified as deforestation-free
However, Nestlé was questioned by the Rainforest Action Network on the lack of independent verification and for failing to protect farmers’ human rights. Still, compared to others, Nestlé is performing better. An analysis by the same network assessing how well major brands address deforestation and human rights in their supply chains ranked Mondelez and Ferrero at the bottom among the ten companies evaluated. At the same time, Nestlé’s performance was scored better.
Many EU Countries Say the Deforestation Law Needs to Be Simpler
Agriculture ministers from Austria and Luxembourg argued that the regulation, as it stands, is onerous for countries with no exposure to deforestation-linked commodities. They proposed simplifying the regulation and adding a new no-risk category to the benchmarking system. Eighteen EU Member States supported this idea, but a vote on 24 June did not accept the proposal.
Still, this push reveals that many countries see the compliance requirements as burdensome and are not yet ready to take them on.
Under the current EUDR country benchmarking, introduced in May this year, countries are grouped into three categories based on deforestation risk: low, standard, and high risk.
The ministers suggested the no-risk category to ensure that countries not exposed to deforestation or have sufficient policies to address it do not have to fulfil multiple compliance requirements.
However, civil society groups strongly oppose this idea. Including such a no-risk category could weaken the regulation; countries in this category could be exempt from geolocation requirements. Geolocation data is critical—it tracks whether products come from deforested areas. Removing this requirement could create loopholes. For example, there have been reports of Russian birchwood being relabelled as originating from China to bypass sanctions on Russian imports.
Countries Most Exposed to Deforestation Not Classified as High Risk
The new benchmarking system under EUDR classifies only four countries as high risk: Belarus, Myanmar, North Korea, and Russia. These countries are not typically associated with tropical deforestation. The high-risk countries were included because they are subject to sanctions. Surprisingly, Brazil—which has some of the highest deforestation rates globally—is classified as standard risk.
One could argue that applying a standard label to a country with extensive deforestation sends the wrong message. From 2002 to 2024, Brazil lost about 33.5 million hectares of primary forest, 47% of its total tree cover loss.
Under EUDR, high-risk and standard-risk countries must follow similar compliance requirements, such as risk assessments and mitigation, as specified under Articles 10 and 11 of the law. However, enforcement differs: for high-risk countries, at least 9% of operators and product volumes must be checked annually, while only 3% must be checked for standard-risk countries. The EUDR will be reviewed in 2028 as part of the broader evaluation process; there could be a potential to take a stock then of what is and is not working well under the current system.
All Eyes on EU
With only a few months left until deforestation law comes into force, establishing a system that could help protect our trees and biodiversity, all eyes are on the Commission. Will it be firm or give in to the mounting pressure?