![\"Press](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/EUDR.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Press conference following the vote to delay the EUDR, again. Image courtesy of Laurie Dieffembacq\/European Union.<\/p>\n
The European Parliament voted on Dec. 17 to delay a key anti-deforestation regulation that was adopted in 2023 and originally supposed to be implemented at the end of 2024. The implementation was\u00a0delayed a year<\/a>\u00a0to December 2025, and now the EU has voted to delay it yet again by another year.<\/p>\n The European Union Deforestation Regulation (EUDR)\u00a0requires producers of seven of the key commodities that drive tropical deforestation \u2014 beef, cocoa, coffee, palm oil, rubber, soy and timber \u2014 to prove that their products are not sourced from land deforested after Dec. 31, 2020. \u00a0<\/p>\n That requirement includes submitting geolocalized data. But in\u00a0September<\/a>, the European Commission cited concerns that its IT system wasn\u2019t ready yet to meet that demand, as a reason for proposing a delay to implementation.<\/p>\n \u201cThis is the latest chapter in a farce\u00a0that\u2019s\u00a0lasted more than two years, ever since the EUDR was passed with a huge democratic mandate,\u201d\u00a0Nicole Polsterer, sustainable consumption and production campaigner with the forests and rights nonprofit Fern, wrote Mongabay by email. \u201c[This] decision\u00a0puts\u00a0forests\u00a0on the chopping block\u00a0and\u00a0rule-abiding European\u00a0businesses\u00a0at a competitive disadvantage.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n The amendment confirms a blanket one-year delay, but small operators will have an additional six months after that, until June 30, 2027, to comply. The decision also introduces the opportunity for additional changes until April 2026 to \u201cassess the law\u2019s impact and administrative burden<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n European lawmakers voted 405 to 242 in favor of the change; eight abstained.<\/p>\n Polsterer criticized the decision to assess the law before it\u2019s even been enacted, saying that without operational experience, there\u2019s no real-world situation to assess. \u201cAgreeing to review the law in April 2026 without this evidence\u00a0enables\u00a0anti-EUDR\u00a0lobbyists\u00a0to base proposals on\u00a0what they think might happen rather than actual\u00a0experience of the law,\u201d she said. \u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n The change also exempts paper used in books, newspapers and other products of the printing industry from the scope of the law \u2014 a development the UK Publishers Association celebrated. \u201cIt\u2019s a common sense move given the legislation was never designed for our sector,\u201d Dan Conway, the CEO of the Publishers Association, wrote in a\u00a0statement<\/a>. \u00a0<\/p>\n Fern has criticized the pressure from lobbyists for the international pulp and paper industry, going as far back as July 2024, citing the American Forest and Paper Association\u2019s claim that the companies they represent could not prove that their products were deforestation-free.<\/p>\n The recent vote confirms the final text of the amendment but it still\u00a0needs<\/a>\u00a0to be confirmed by the Council of the European Union and published in the EU\u2019s Official Journal before the end of 2025 to apply.<\/p>\n Author:\u00a0Shanna Hanbury<\/strong><\/p>\n This article was originally published on Mongabay under the Creative Commons BY NC ND licence. Read the\u00a0original article<\/a>.<\/p>\n