On Wednesday 26 November, the European Parliament adopted, under an emergency procedure, its negotiating mandate on the deforestation regulation (EUDR), which entered into force in 2023 and aims to prevent the marketing in Europe of products that contribute to deforestation worldwide.
As a reminder: in 2024, the entry into force of this regulation's provisions was already postponed by one year following numerous concerns raised by operators and traders. That year, during the November plenary session, MEPs Sophie Wilmès, Benoît Cassart and Olivier Chastel argued for this additional delay so that the stakeholders concerned, particularly SMEs, could properly prepare to meet the requirements of the new regulation. However, given the importance of the objective pursued and the need for predictability, they nevertheless made their support conditional on the text not being amended.
In October 2025, the Commission proposed a new postponement in the form of a six-month 'grace period' for medium and large companies (application of the provisions without penalties) and a one-year postponement for smaller companies. According to the Commission, this proposal is justified in particular for operational reasons, due to the technical problems encountered in developing the traceability platform. The Council of the EU, for its part, took a position on 19 November in favour of a one-year postponement for medium and large companies, one and a half years for smaller companies, and a simplification review by 30 April 2026.
Despite negotiations between the pro-European parties (EPP, Renew, S&D) in Parliament, no majority agreement could be reached on this text.
Sophie Wilmès explains: "in terms of form, we regret that once again it was not possible to reach an agreement between pro-European parties. Each group presented its own proposal, sometimes with great creativity in figures and measures, which created more confusion than support. Under these circumstances, the most reasonable and effective solution to quickly provide clear prospects was a vote in line with the Council's position, taken up as such in the EPP's amendments. It is the position negotiated in the Council and echoed by the EPP that was adopted today in plenary. We must move very quickly and also ensure that the trilogue does not drag on, or else the regulation risks entering into force at the end of the year despite the still-unresolved problems."
Sophie Wilmès continues: "in substance, this additional one-year delay opens a new transition window that will allow for a more reliable implementation of the regulation. We are particularly pleased that this postponement has been extended for the smallest companies, which benefit from six more months than large companies. For them, the adjustments are the heaviest. Furthermore, the IT problems revealed by the Commission in September suggest that it remains bogged down in bureaucratic tangles. Does the real problem lie in the platform's capacity or in the administrative complexity generated by certain obligations? More than an impact study, a revision of the regulation now seems inevitable, and it will take place by 30 April 2026, as we wished. The question will be how to simplify and streamline the procedures as much as possible, without diluting the impact of this legislation. Environmental issues, as well as those of responsible trade, remain very important, and we systematically ensure that administrative simplification does not turn into excessive deregulation."
Benoît Cassart explains: "We voted in favour of the postponement for pragmatic reasons, to give our businesses and farmers a bit more time to get organised. Requests from the ground are flowing in this direction, and a regulation only makes sense if it is applicable in practice. Furthermore, the agreement with the Mercosur countries, if ratified as it stands, will inevitably create indirect deforestation while endangering our farmers. We must be consistent and keep an eye on the political choices that will be made. If we want to import products that do not meet our standards, we cannot keep increasing the administrative and regulatory burden on our businesses and farmers."
According to Olivier Chastel: "This postponement is above all a matter of common sense. The IT problems already identified heralded a real cacophony for all operators, regardless of their size. Beyond the disagreements between the EPP, S&D and Renew over the deadlines, one thing was clear: it was unrealistic for this text to enter into force at the end of this year. A uniform postponement for all, with greater flexibility for small businesses, is the only credible way to guarantee effective and fair implementation."