EU Prunes but Doesn't Delay Deforestation Regulation

The tumultuous journey of the European Union Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) continues as it moves toward its final implementation date of December 30, 2026. After significant delays and debate, the European Commission (EC) has confirmed that while the deadline is set and the regulation will not be reopened, there is still some appetite for pruning, including the elimination of leather from the scope and the confirmation that there will be no exclusion for “negligible risk” countries.

The EC has completed a simplification review to facilitate a smooth implementation of the EUDR for economic operators, EU member states, third countries, and other stakeholders.

“Today we introduce simplification measures which together with previous simplification efforts will substantially reduce administrative burden,” said Jessika Roswall, commissioner for environment, water resilience, and a competitive circular economy, in the press release. “They are expected to reduce annual compliance costs for companies by about 75%. Our efforts are fully focused on facilitating implementation in the most efficient way.”

The review includes several new documents to help stakeholders with implementation, including a report to the EU Parliament and the EU Council, an updated guidance document, a frequently asked questions (FAQ) document, and a draft delegated act detailing the proposed product scope of the EUDR. There will also be an updated implementing act on information systems.

EUDR Is Here to Stay, but Changes Continue

As Diego Torres, team leader for the EU Deforestation Regulation at the EC said in a LinkedIn post, “This package does not reopen the basic legal act. The objective is clear: to ensure legal stability and predictability for all stakeholders ahead of the regulation’s entry into application by December 2026.”

However, according to the simplification review, there is definitely more to be done. The report is the culmination of the simplification review to which the EC committed in December 2025 under Article 34(1a) of the EUDR as part of its ambition to reduce the administrative burden of the regulation, particularly for small operators such as farmers and foresters. It determined that the simplification measures introduced between 2024 and 2026 have considerably reduced the administrative burden for operators from low-risk countries, small operators, and downstream actors by as much as 75% compared to the predicted compliance costs of the first version of the EUDR.

The report noted that EU member states are making progress on EUDR requirements ahead of the implementation date in December 2026, including engaging with stakeholders through seminars, adapting technology infrastructure to support compliance, and focusing on harmonized enforcement across member states. There has also been improvement in mapping global forest cover and land cover with remote sensing tools to support risk assessments. The information system required for economic operators to implement the EUDR has also evolved, with improved training, more relevant documentation, and the publication of an API (Application Programming Interface) to allow companies to connect their systems directly to the information system for submitting due diligence statements.

The Delegated Act provides important clarifications on the products in the scope of the EUDR, including the addition of downstream products like soluble coffee and palm oil derivatives. The most significant element of this document is the exclusion of leather from the scope, which is a result for which the leather industry has been pushing. Retreaded tires will also be excluded. The draft delegated act incorporates stakeholder feedback from the consultation phase and is open for public feedback until June 1, 2026, on the EU Have Your Say portal.

The guidance and FAQ documents provide clarification of compliance obligations and definitions of terms, as well as the proposed simplifications for traceability, scope, and due diligence. Notably, countries considered low risk are still subject to simplified due diligence obligations. The U.S. has recently threatened punitive measures against the EU, particularly in relation to soy imports into the EU, if it is not granted a “negligible risk” status that exempts U.S. producers from certain compliance requirements. According to the FAQ document (5.10), “negligible risk” is a designation that can only be achieved through due diligence, which will continue to be a core requirement for all operators under the EUDR. “Negligible risk” does not provide an exemption to the regulation’s obligations and, further, cannot be applied at the commodity level.

Proposed Simplifications Provoke Strong Reactions

While the more dramatic debates about the future of the EUDR might be over, the proposed simplifications were still potent enough to provoke strong reactions from various stakeholders.

The Confederation of National Associations of Tanners and Dressers of the European Community (COTANCE) welcomed the exclusion of leather from the EUDR’s scope.

“Leather derives from the tanning of raw hides that are a by-product of the meat and dairy industries, it does not drive cattle farming, and it does not drive land-use decisions,” COTANCE said in a press release. “Keeping it in the EUDR product scope would not directly save a single tree - but it would disrupt supply chains, increase compliance costs, and risk shifting production to regions with significantly weaker environmental standards. Inclusion in the EUDR would not advance the regulation’s objectives.”

In contrast, Isabel Fernandez, senior advisor for Mighty Earth, said in a press release that the proposal to remove leather from the EUDR’s scope creates the potential for a loophole that allows prohibited products to enter the EU through a back door.

“This is the result of aggressive lobbying by the leather industry, which wrongly claimed leather doesn't drive deforestation,” said Fernandez. “The proposal means meat from cattle reared on deforested land would be banned, but the cow skins and hides would not. The two are intrinsically linked - to put it bluntly, the meat can't be accessed until the skin is removed.”

Michael Rice, value chains, trade, and investment lead at ClientEarth, agreed that the proposed simplifications amplify the threat of loopholes. In a LinkedIn post, he said that the due diligence obligations, which allow operators to evaluate, verify, document, and mitigate risks in their supply chains according to their own judgment, effectively make verification optional based on a superficial check and allow companies to presume their products are legal without requiring verification.

“Due diligence is reduced to a formality,” said Rice. “By focusing on an initial examination of general information, rather than an investigation of information relevant to a company’s own supply chains, the Commission’s approach risks turning legality due diligence into a mere tick-box exercise that nobody scrutinises and companies avoid.”