Brussels is buzzing with news: The European Union is on the verge of postponing its ambitious anti-deforestation law for yet another year. This significant piece of legislation, designed to halt the import of products linked to forest destruction, was initially set for implementation at the close of this year, having already seen a 12-month delay in 2024.
Environment Commissioner Jessika Roswall addressed reporters in Brussels, explaining that the crucial IT system required to support the law isn’t quite ready for prime time. “We’re facing some challenges with the IT system,” she stated, emphasizing the need for additional time to ensure a seamless rollout. The European Commission plans to propose this further one-year extension, driven by concerns that an premature launch could cause significant disruptions for businesses across Europe.
Interestingly, this announcement closely follows the commission’s new free trade agreement with Indonesia, a nation that has been openly critical of the deforestation regulations. However, Roswall was quick to clarify that these two developments are entirely separate and “not linked at all.”
Environmental organizations had initially celebrated this anti-deforestation law as a monumental stride forward in the global battle against nature loss and climate change. The legislation targets a broad spectrum of commodities—from coffee, cocoa, and soy to timber, palm oil, cattle, printing paper, and rubber—prohibiting their entry into the EU if they originate from land deforested after December 2020.
Companies importing these goods into the 27-member EU bloc face the considerable responsibility of meticulously tracking their supply chains. They must provide irrefutable evidence, often relying on advanced geolocation and satellite data, to confirm that their products are not sourced from deforested areas.
However, the proposed ban hasn’t been without its detractors. Several trading partners and even some EU member states have voiced strong opposition, citing worries about increased bureaucracy, substantial costs, and lingering ambiguities surrounding various aspects of the law. This renewed inclination towards a delay also reflects a broader shift in Brussels, where the focus appears to be moving from solely climate initiatives towards strengthening defense, trade, and industrial sectors.