EUDR – Delay, Division and Uncertainty: Where the Debate Stands

EUDR: Delay, Division and Uncertainty in the Final Weeks Before Enforcement

The EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) is approaching one of its most decisive moments since its adoption. With only weeks left until the planned start of application on 30 December 2025, political negotiations have intensified, divisions among Member States have deepened, and pressure from both industry and civil society is growing.

What was meant to become a flagship environmental regulation now risks turning into a complex political standoff — with significant implications for companies, supply chains, national authorities and the EU’s global credibility on climate and nature protection.

Member States Split on Delay vs. Enforcement

The Danish Council Presidency has presented a new compromise proposing:

• a one-year delay of the EUDR applicability for all companies
• a mandatory review in 2026, opening the door for further simplification measures

But Member States are far from aligned:

Pushing for broader simplification

Germany, Sweden, Austria, Hungary and several Baltic States argue that the regulation is too complex to implement and requires deeper structural changes rather than a simple postponement.

Pushing to maintain ambition

France, Spain, Belgium and the Netherlands fear that further delay could undermine environmental credibility and weaken the EU’s climate commitments.

As a result, no qualified majority has emerged — leaving the legislative process stuck in the Council.

European Parliament Pushes in the Opposite Direction

While Member States debate postponement, the European Parliament is moving toward a fast-track vote on the Commission’s simplification proposal during its 24–27 November plenary.

Parliament can:

• reject the proposal (maintaining the current 2025 start),
• approve it unchanged, or
• propose amendments.

Importantly:
None of these votes change the law yet — they merely establish Parliament’s position ahead of potential negotiations.

Still, a rejection would increase the likelihood that the EUDR enters into force unchanged on 30 December 2025.

Commission Holds Its Line: Delay Not the Solution

Despite political pressure, the European Commission insists that its October simplification proposal is the limit of what it is willing to adjust.

Commissioner Jessika Roswall stated clearly:

“We do not consider a separate stop-the-clock initiative to be a politically viable option.”

And further:

“A delay will just postpone decisions — we may find ourselves in the same situation next year.”

This signals that the Commission will not support deeper changes unless forced by Parliament and Council.

Industry Pushback: Early Movers vs. Laggards

Some of Europe’s largest food and agriculture companies — including Nestlé, Danone and Mars — publicly warned this week that postponement would:

• penalise companies that have already invested in implementation
• create substantial sunk costs
• reward laggards that have not begun preparing

This marks a rare case where industry calls for stricter enforcement rather than delay.

Legal Pressure: Delay Could Violate EU Law

A new legal opinion by ClientEarth concludes that a further delay could violate:

• EU treaty obligations,
• general principles of EU law, and
• international law on state climate duties.

This adds a new dimension:
A delay may not only be politically difficult — it may be legally impossible.

What Companies Should Expect

With no political consensus and barely a month left, three scenarios remain realistic:

1. EUDR applies on 30 December 2025 as planned (increasingly likely)

If no agreement is reached, the law enters into force unchanged.

2. A negotiated one-year delay + review clause

Still possible — but requires a qualified Council majority.

3. A mixed outcome

Some parts postponed, others maintained; however, this is legally more complex.

What Companies Should Do Now

Despite political uncertainty, companies should not stop preparing:

• Maintain registration and supply chain mapping plans
• Prepare to collect and verify geolocation data
• Assess due diligence procedures
• Prepare to integrate suppliers into EUDR-compliant workflows
• Build fallback scenarios based on both 2025 and 2026 start

Even in the best-case scenario, the regulation will not disappear.

Conclusion

The EUDR has become a test case for the EU’s ability to balance:

• environmental ambition,
• administrative feasibility,
• political cohesion, and
• global competitiveness.

As negotiations continue, companies need clarity — but what they receive instead are shifting deadlines, diverging political positions and ongoing regulatory uncertainty.

One thing is clear:
Whether in 2025 or 2026, the EUDR will reshape supply chains — and preparation is no longer optional.

‍