Strasbourg.- The votes of the European People’s Party (EPP) and far-right groups in the European Parliament today managed to delay for a year, until December 30, 2026, the application of the new European law so that the European consumption of livestock, cocoa, coffee or wood does not generate deforestation at origin.
With 402 votes in favor, 250 against and 8 abstentions, the European Parliament aligned its positions with the Council of the EU – the member states – and delayed the application of that regulation, which last year had already been postponed twelve months amid strong pressure from some countries and affected sectors.
It’s the second time this month that far-right parties and the European People’s Party have joined forces in a scrutiny of environmental regulations, after also lowering the demands on companies regarding due diligence, sustainability, and corporate responsibility.
“The EPP demonstrates that its objective is, effectively, to dismantle the text on deforestation by allying again with the extreme right in certain amendments and refusing to defend the Commission’s proposal,” declared Green MEP Marie Toussaint.
The vote this Wednesday is the result of the failure of negotiations between the People’s Party, Social Democrats, Liberals and Greens to agree on a common position and represents a new setback for the green policies approved during the last community legislature.
Christian Democrat negotiator Christine Schneider assured that the vote “guarantees the effective prevention of illegal deforestation, while reducing unnecessary burdens for operators, farmers and foresters” and promotes “economic growth and more sustainable forestry practices”.
The conjunction of the Parliament’s and Council’s positions prevents both institutions from having to engage in lengthy negotiations to agree on a final text and will make the one-year delay to the European Union’s Regulation against Deforestation, EUDR in community jargon, almost automatic.
“We have avoided a situation in which thousands of companies would have been pushed into legal and administrative chaos,” stated the European Conservatives and Reformists group.
Cutting Down Trees
Between 1990 and 2020, a forest area larger than that of the EU was globally destroyed, and nearly 10% is attributable to European consumption. The regulation aims to prevent certain raw materials and derived products consumed in the EU from generating deforestation.
The regulations cover livestock, cocoa, coffee, palm oil, soy, timber, and rubber, including derivatives such as leather, chocolate, or furniture.
Companies importing those raw materials into the EU must demonstrate, through a geolocation system, that they have not generated deforestation or degradation of forest masses where they have obtained the resources.
The text is not liked by the US Administration of Donald Trump and has received criticism from its inception also from other countries such as Brazil, Colombia, Indonesia, Malaysia or Canada, and from the timber or livestock industries.
But he had the support of major chocolate producers, such as Nestlé, Mars Wrigley or Ferrero, the scientific community, and environmental organizations.
Amidst these pressures, the European Commission announced in September 2024 that it was delaying the entry into force of the regulation by a year, as companies had not had time to adapt. A year later, it again requested a one-year extension, this time attributing it to an IT problem.
Finally, Brussels proposed to maintain its application from December 30, 2025, although it introduced some flexibilities in fines and bureaucracy.
But when the proposal reached the Council, the countries supported maintaining the second extension, with the vote in favor of 24 capitals, relying on the need for “simplification”, one of the concepts that has gained the most weight in Brussels in the last year.
The Council also defended that the regulation should not apply to SMEs until June 30, 2027, and that the European Commission should carry out a simplification review in April 2026 to assess the impact and administrative burden, particularly on small and micro-operators.
For the Social Democratic parliamentary group, that revision constitutes its “main red line” because it “introduces uncertainty and enables future postponements of the application in the coming years”.
