The European Commission wants to push back the EU\u2019s anti-deforestation law once again, considering a delay to rules that were already postponed from 2024 to this December.<\/p>\n
In a letter obtained\u00a0<\/a>by Euractiv, EU Environment Commissioner Jessika Roswall notified the European Parliament\u2019s Environment Committee chair, Antonio Decaro, and the Danish Presidency, of her intention to delay the rules by one year.<\/p>\n The EU\u2019s anti-deforestation regulation (EUDR) would force importers of palm oil, coffee, cocoa, cattle, timber and rubber to demonstrate that these have not been produced on deforested land in order to be sold on the bloc\u2019s market.<\/p>\n Roswall pointed to concerns over the functioning of the IT platform managing compliance data, which could create \u201cuncertainty for authorities and operational difficulties for stakeholders\u201d. \u201cIn view of this, the Commission is considering a postponement of the entry into application of the EUDR, currently foreseen for 30 December 2025, for one year,\u201d she added.<\/p>\n Speaking at the Council this morning, the Swedish Commissioner said she would engage in discussions with the Parliament and Council before formally announcing a delay \u2013 and left the door open to \u201csimplifying\u201d the regulation beyond the delay.<\/p>\n The EPP member leading negotiations on the file, Germany\u2019s Christine Schneider (CDU), welcomed the move.<\/p>\n \u201cFor a long time, I have been advocating for a practical implementation of the Deforestation Regulation,\u201d she said in a press release. \u201cHowever, the renewed postponement clearly shows: the problems run deeper and cannot be solved by further transitional periods or non-binding guidelines,\u201d she added.<\/p>\n Schneider said she would again propose the creation of a new category dubbed as \u2018zero-risk\u2019 that could exempt some countries \u2013 including EU member states \u2013 from the obligations. The last time she put\u00a0forward<\/a>\u00a0such measures, they were opposed by the Commission and Council.<\/p>\n