The vast majority of European Union ambassadors now want the European Commission to “stop the clock” on the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR), intensifying a scramble in Brussels over whether the bloc can meet the planned enforcement date and how implementation should be simplified.
The dispute has deepened since the Commission proposed easing reporting requirements for the 2023 regulation — which obliges companies to show their products did not contribute to forest clearing by uploading geolocation data for commodities such as cocoa, coffee, palm oil, livestock, timber and rubber — while offering only a limited enforcement reprieve for small operators.
At a meeting of national envoys on Wednesday, “most EU ambassadors said the rules should not take effect on 30 December 2025, as initially planned, and that any delay should cover all affected operators,” a diplomatic source close to the matter told European media. Wood Central understands that member states remain divided: some favour a short “stop‑the‑clock” pause to allow technical fixes; others press for longer postponements or broader simplifications.
It comes as European media reports that the Danish Presidency is expected to table a compromise next week, with the Council position needing to be reconciled with the European Parliament before its final plenary session on 15 December.
Industry pushback on the rollout of the EUDR has been fierce.
Nineteen European trade associations representing wood, pulp, feed, energy and related downstream sectors urged the Commission to postpone the rollout, calling the current timetable “simply unworkable” and warning of severe operational and legal burdens across supply chains. In an open letter published by the European Organisation of the Sawmill Industry, the “timber coalition” warned that “the recent amendments prolong a situation of costly uncertainty and unrealistic implementation timelines,” before adding that “it is unrealistic and unacceptable to expect that companies will be ready to comply right away with a regulation that has been hastily renegotiated only a few weeks before entry into application.”
That opposition emphasises the significant technical challenge for downstream operators that rely on IT systems connected to the EU’s TRACES platform. “In fact, most large downstream industries will not be in the position to adapt their IT systems, which have been designed to interact with the TRACES platform,” the letter warns, and it notes the knock‑on burden for small and micro‑enterprises as due diligence reference numbers accumulate along the value chain.
Trade groups also criticised the Commission’s enforcement dates as impractical. “The interdependence of companies within the value chain makes the proposed postponement illusory, as smaller operators will be required to align immediately to maintain business relations,” the coalition wrote. Brussels officials defend the regulation’s environmental goal and timeline. An EU official says the timetable reflects political compromise and urgency to implement the regulations, even as industry signals technical challenges.
Some member states have taken their objections further.
Earlier this week, the agriculture ministers of Czechia, Latvia, Estonia, and Poland called for a delay and urged the Commission to designate certain supplier countries as “no‑risk” for deforestation, a move that would exempt some supply chains from the strictest requirements. Already, the European Commission has proposed limited changes, such as using postal codes for the geolocation of small farmers’ data and requiring due diligence statements from importers only. Still, many governments and business coalitions argue that more profound changes are necessary for the law to be effective.
- To learn why failures with the EUDR’s IT system could lead to further delays in the rollout of the world’s strictest deforestation regulation, click here for Wood Central’s special feature.
