Who gains from saving nature
Ledger 1 : 33 — For each dollar financing nature-based solutions in 2023, about $33 financed activities harmful to nature. (UNEP)
Cases / Law, regulation and treaties · European Union · 2022

EU Deforestation Regulation delays and trade pressure

Nature's voice · report
No measurement of the harm done to me here is on record.
Did nature suffer? Not measured.
Not on record
  • The record does not name which of my species, waters, soils or forests were harmed.
What the record lacks: 3 none on record · 3 insufficient · 2 not measured · 1 disputed See the gaps

The EU regulation requiring that cocoa, coffee, soy, palm oil, cattle, rubber and wood sold in the EU did not come from land deforested after 2020 has been postponed twice. Trading partners, the United States government and industry groups pressed for delay.

30 Dec 2026Application date for large and medium operators
After two postponements (regulation 2025/2650); small operators 30 June 2027.

Status As of the latest sources reviewed (September 2026): application date 30 December 2026 for large and medium operators and 30 June 2027 for small ones; the Commission proposed removing hides and leather from scope in May 2026.

What?
Application of the EU Deforestation Regulation was postponed twice, to 30 December 2026 for large and medium operators. ESG Today (via VinciWorks)
Where?
European Union.
When?
Letters July 2022 and September 2023; votes November 2024 and November 2025; review May 2026.
Who?
Gained
  • Importers and commodity exporters — More time before the rules apply.
Lost
None on record
Harmed
None on record
Why?
Trading partners and industry sought delay; the official reason given for the second postponement was the IT system.
How?
Parliament amendments and votes; regulation 2025/2650. ESG Today (via VinciWorks)
6 of 6 questions answered from the record

What happened

The record, in order.

The EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR), adopted in 2023, requires companies selling cocoa, coffee, soy, palm oil, cattle, rubber and wood products in the EU to show that the goods did not come from land deforested after 2020.

In July 2022 and September 2023 Indonesia, with a group of countries including Brazil and Malaysia, sent joint letters to the EU about the regulation; the letters had 14 and 17 signatories. On 30 May 2024 the US Secretary of Commerce, the Secretary of Agriculture and the US Trade Representative asked the EU to delay, and 27 US senators described the rules as a non-tariff barrier to trade.

On 14 November 2024 the European Parliament adopted amendments proposed by the European People's Party and passed with votes of far-right groups, including a 12-month delay and a proposed "no-risk" country category. The category did not enter the final text; the delay did, moving the date to December 2025.

On 26 November 2025 Parliament voted 402 to 250 for a second one-year delay. Regulation 2025/2650 was published on 23 December 2025: the date became 30 December 2026 for large and medium companies and 30 June 2027 for small ones, and printed publications were removed from the scope. A joint US–EU statement of 21 August 2025, which is not legally binding, recorded the EU's acceptance that deforestation risk from US production is negligible.

On 4 May 2026 the Commission's simplification review did not add a "no-risk" category. It proposed removing cattle hides and leather products from the scope and estimated that compliance costs would fall by 75%.

  1. 2022July: joint letter from Indonesia and like-minded countries to the EU
  2. 2023September: second joint letter (17 signatories); EUDR adopted
  3. 202430 May: US ministers ask for delay; 14 November: Parliament adopts delay amendments
  4. 202521 August: US–EU joint statement; 26 November: Parliament votes 402–250 for second delay; 23 December: regulation 2025/2650 published
  5. 20264 May: Commission simplification review proposes removing hides and leather from scope

What was said

Claims, in the words of those who made them.

Where accounts differ

Each party's account, side by side, with its source. The record does not settle these points; it shows them.

Why was the regulation postponed?
Government and regulators
European Union (official reason)

The second postponement was explained by the readiness of the IT system.

Government and regulators
United States ministers and 27 senators

Asked the EU to delay; the senators called the rules a non-tariff barrier to trade.

FoodNavigator
Communities and civil society
Earthsight

Said the November 2024 vote weakened the regulation, adopted with votes of far-right groups.

Earthsight

How it looked

What was shown, beside what was recorded.

Shown

  • Brussels Times reported the second postponement with the official reason that the IT system was not ready.
    Brussels Times, citing the official reason
  • The Commission estimated a 75% reduction in compliance costs from its May 2026 proposal.
    European Commission

Recorded

  • Parliament voted 402 to 250 on 26 November 2025 for a second delay; regulation 2025/2650 was published on 23 December 2025.
    ESG Today (via VinciWorks)
  • The "no-risk" country category was not included in the final text.

Who gained

Money that reached nature, beside money that stayed elsewhere.

Reached nature or the ground

Not published
No figure published.

Gained elsewhere

Not totalled
Currency: EUR · Window: 2026. All figures cover the same period. * Estimate built from cited figures.

Responses on record

  • eu (4 May 2026): The Commission's May 2026 review proposed removing cattle hides and leather and estimated compliance costs would fall by 75%.
  • eu (21 August 2025): In the joint statement with the United States, the EU accepted that deforestation risk from US production is negligible and committed to address US producers' concerns.

In court and with insurers

Every proceeding and every insurer decision on record.

Lawsuits and rulings

No court case on record. No court has ruled on this case.

Insurers

No insurer decision on record.

What nature saw

Outcomes measured on the ground, and nature's note.

Nature's report opens this page. Below: further outcomes measured on the ground.

Application date, large and medium operators
30 Dec 2026
Regulation 2025/2650
Number of postponements
2
Last published 23 December 2025
Cut-off date for deforestation
31 Dec 2020
Reported as unchanged (unverified)

What we don't know

Undisclosed, unproven, untried: recorded as data.
No court caseNo independent ecological evaluation

Nature

  • Not measured Harm to nature: No independent ecological evaluation is on record.

Court

Accounts

  • Disputed Why was the regulation postponed?

Record

  • None on record The Commission's 75% cost reduction is its own estimate; no independent estimate is on record in the sources reviewed.
  • Insufficient Reported but not independently verified: the vote count of 371 to 240 on the November 2024 delay amendments.
  • Insufficient Reported but not independently verified: the figure of US$3.5 billion in forest-product trade cited in the US request.
  • None on record The text of the first postponement and of the Commission's May 2026 review could not be checked in the sources reviewed.
  • Insufficient Reported but not independently verified: that the cut-off date of 31 December 2020 was left unchanged by the postponements.
  • Not measured Effect of the regulation on deforestation: not measured, as it has not yet applied.

Did the harm stop?

The regulation has not yet applied; the application date was moved twice.

Who paid?

Not established in the sources reviewed.

Sources

Voices on record: — Company or project— Government and regulators— Courts✓ Press and investigations✓ Communities and civil society— Researchers

Press and investigations

Communities and civil society

  1. EUDR weakened
    Earthsight · 2024-11-14

Connected cases

Related matters, and cases linked to this one through the same organisations, with the role each played in both.
Terms used on this page

Carbon and conservation finance

ESG
Environmental, social and governance criteria that investors and insurers use to screen companies and projects.
Similar cases
Law, regulation and treaties · Multi-country (Sahel) · 2020
Great Green Wall core area reported at about 4% of its 100 million hectare target
Same type: Law, regulation and treatiesSame regionHarm to nature not measured
Law, regulation and treaties · Mekong basin · date not stated
Four Mekong dams trap an average 81% of sediment, Reuters reports
Same type: Law, regulation and treatiesSame regionHarm to nature not measured
Law, regulation and treaties · Greenland · 2009–2014
Danish opinion piece reports Greenland seal exports down 90 per cent
Same type: Law, regulation and treatiesSame regionHarm to nature not measured