The EC had been adamant it would implement its controversial EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) on 31 December 2024, refusing to back down even in the face of criticisms from producer countries of key affected commodities such as palm oil, cocoa and coffee, as well as strong internal pressure from the EU parliament.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!In a twist of events earlier this month, the EC finally caved in to all of this pressure and announced on October 2 that it was proposing an additional 12 months of ‘phasing-in time’ in response to the feedback from global partners.
“Given feedback received from international partners about their state of preparations, the Commission proposes to give concerned parties additional time to prepare,” the EC said via a formal statement.
“If approved by the European Parliament and the Council, it would make the law applicable on 30 December 2025 for large companies and 30 June 2026 for micro- and small enterprises.
“Since all the implementation tools are technically ready, this extra 12 months can serve as a phasing-in period to ensure proper and effective implementation.”
On the same day, the EC also finally released a 48-page long guidance document for EUDR implementation at long last, the delay of which has been a major point of criticism by many producer countries and especially the palm oil sector.
The publishing of these documents, along with the implementation delay, has seen a warm welcome from the Malaysian palm oil sector.
“The EU Commission’s announcement that EUDR implementation will be delayed until 30 December 2025 is the right decision. This is a victory for common sense, and a welcome relief for all of those businesses who highlighted the need for a delay,” Malaysian Palm Oil Council CEO Belvinder Kaur Sron said.
“This delay is a sensible decision to ensure that supply chains around the world have the time to prepare the technical and bureaucratic processes demanded by EUDR.”
But although the industry’s general attitude to this delay has been one of relief for the additional preparation time, the Indonesian palm oil sector has voiced concerns about facing the same issues further down the line.
“The Indonesian palm oil community welcomes the Commission’s proposed delay. Indonesia has been underlining the problems with EUDR for more than a year, and our calls have been listened to,” Indonesian Palm Oil Association (GAPKI) Chairman Eddy Martono stated.
“We also welcome the strengthened international cooperation framework and new guidance for those in the supply chain [but] despite the steps today, our three key concerns remain: the exclusion of smallholders, support for our national certification and compliance systems, and recognition of Indonesia’s anti-deforestation efforts.
“We look forward to working cooperatively with the EU going forward on this and other issues going forward.”
This sentiment was echoed by the Australian government, with Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Julie Collins calling upon the EU to prevent ‘unnecessary barriers’ to imports.
“The government welcomes the proposal to delay the implementation of the EUDR,” she said via a formal statement.
“A delay in implementation will provide an opportunity to further work with the EU to ensure the measure does not impose requirements that create unnecessary barriers to Australian exports.
“However, the EUDR imposes complex due diligence requirements that create technical barriers for a range of Australian agricultural products [and] has the potential to affect around A$234mn (US$160mn) in Australian exports [so] we are actively engaged with the EU at all levels on its development.”
Delaying the inevitable?
But with this delay, it appears that imports into the EU after 30 December 2025 might be assessed even more harshly from the start of EUDR implementation, especially with the EC having squarely placed the reason for delay on the shoulders of its ‘international partners’ as mentioned above.
In its latest announcement, it has also stressed that the proposed postponement does not mean that it is planning to make changes to the regulation even those portions which have been continually called out by stakeholders such as country benchmarking into different risk levels.
“The extension proposal in no way puts into question the objectives or the substance of the law, as agreed by the EU co-legislators,” the EC stated.
“The Commission considers that a 12-month additional time to phase in the system is a balanced solution to support operators around the world in securing a smooth implementation from the start.
“The Commission is publishing today the principles of the methodology it will apply to the EUDR benchmarking exercise, serving to classify countries as low, standard, or high risk – Following this methodology, a large majority of countries worldwide will be classified as ‘low risk’.
“This will give the opportunity to focus collective efforts where deforestation challenges are more acute.”
As it is, there several parties are already pushing the postponement as a reason to stop the ‘excuses’ from producer markets pushing back against EUDR.
“With the very generous postponement of the EU deforestation regulation, there are no longer any excuses for all parties to implement it quickly by next year,” EU Parliamentary Greens political alliance agriculture spokesman Thomas Waitz has said via a formal statement.
With statements like this still circulating, but not yet any acknowledgement that concessions may need to be made on both sides for such a regulation to be truly effective, it remains to be seen whether this postponement will truly make the positive impact the EC hopes for – or whether the same problems/issues/challenges will resurface again come the end of 2025.
