Yesterday’s letter from Commissioner Jessika Roswall has put the timeline of the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) back in question. At Coolset, we’ve been following every development so you know exactly what this means, and what it doesn’t.

In her letter to the European Parliament and the Council, Commissioner Roswall proposed postponing the EUDR by one year. As she wrote: “It is not possible to have sufficient guarantees that the IT system will be able to sustain the level of the expected load.”

It’s a convenient explanation, and one that adds to existing concerns about a trend in Brussels to abruptly change its own timelines.

For now, it’s important to underline that nothing has changed in law. A letter, even from a Commissioner, is still just a letter. To become reality, the proposal must still move through the ordinary legislative process – debated and voted on by both the European Parliament and the Council of the EU. That process is likely to play out over the autumn, with a final decision expected by December.

The context matters. Last year’s delay was justified on different grounds, mainly the lack of guidance and country benchmarking data. This time, the focus is on the Commission’s IT system. Some members of Parliament may be less willing to accept another postponement, especially if they doubt the Commission can deliver on its promises. After all, postponements lose credibility quickly if they don’t actually solve the problems they’re meant to address.

Déjà vu? Inside last year’s delay timeline

For many in Brussels, this will feel like déjà vu. In 2024, the Commission proposed a similar one-year postponement, which moved through the institutions at record speed:

• 2 October 2024 – Commission proposed the delay
• 16 October 2024 – Council gave its approval
• 14 November 2024 – Parliament voted in favor
• 3 December 2024 – Compromise deal was reached
• 23 December 2024 – Final law adopted and published

That sprint through the legislative process gave companies an extra year to prepare. But the difference this time is that lawmakers may be less forgiving: another delay will only be politically viable if it clearly delivers results – namely, a functioning IT system and a credible plan for implementation. For businesses, the lesson is clear: timelines may shift, but the regulation itself is here to stay. This uncertainty is best treated not as a reason to pause, but as an opportunity to get further ahead while Brussels debates.

{{custom-cta}}

Where we see the EUDR delay going

The political winds in Brussels point in one direction: this delay is likely to pass. The EPP Group, the largest force in the European Parliament, has already published a statement in favor of postponement, framing it as necessary to fix what they see as flaws in the deforestation law. With their numbers combined with other right-leaning parties, they hold a narrow working majority in Parliament – enough to secure approval once the file reaches plenary.

That matters because the Parliament was the only real question mark. In Council, environment ministers are generally pragmatic and have already signaled a general readiness to give businesses more time. 

The Commissioner, by sending yesterday’s letter, has made her position explicit. While this is not yet a formal Commission proposal, it is a strong political signal from within the institution. 

Put differently: the Council is already leaning toward postponement, a key political group in Parliament has lined up in support, and now a senior Commissioner has put her weight behind the delay. That means two institutions are signaling readiness, and the third has a majority bloc prepared to push it through.

Does this mean it’s a done deal? No. Expect strong resistance from Green and progressive MEPs, as well as NGOs, who will argue that another delay further undermines the EU’s credibility and is a result of blatant lobbyism. But politics is a numbers game: if the EPP and other right-wing parties stay aligned, the votes are there.

Political influences shaping the EUDR delay

Officially, Commissioner Roswall’s letter frames the proposed one-year delay as a technical necessity, and that explanation will be the one carried through the legislative process and, eventually, into the Official Journal if the delay is adopted. But beneath the surface, other political factors are clearly in play.

US pressure

The United States has been vocal about its concerns with EUDR. In May 2024, the U.S. Trade Representative, Department of Agriculture, and Department of Commerce sent a letter to Brussels to postpone the regulation, arguing that exporters lacked clear compliance pathways and that the systems to register shipments were not yet ready. While Brussels has not linked yesterday’s letter to Washington’s lobbying, the timing underlines that transatlantic trade friction is part of the context.

Indonesian trade politics

Indonesia has also kept EUDR on the negotiating table. In 2024, officials in Jakarta warned that the regulation was “stalling” progress in the long-running EU–Indonesia Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA). This week, the two sides announced they had reached a “substantive conclusion” of CEPA talks . With five out of seven EUDR commodities forming a central export for Indonesia, the coincidence of a new EUDR delay and the breakthrough in trade negotiations is politically hard to ignore.

Six Omnibusses

Another important backdrop to the EUDR delay is the Commission’s omnibus agenda. In October 2024, EU leaders – drawing on the Draghi report – called for a regulatory reset. The Commission acted quickly: between 26 February and 9 July 2025, it tabled six Omnibus packages covering sustainability reporting, investment and capital markets, agriculture, SME financing, digitalisation and common specifications, defence readiness, and chemical products. Their collective aim is to simplify existing legislation and ease costs for business. While EUDR is not formally part of this omnibus push, the delay fits the same political logic – scaling back or postponing green rules under the banner of competitiveness.

What you can do today

The timeline may be uncertain, but your preparation doesn’t have to be. Here’s what makes sense right now:

• Keep building your EUDR compliance processes. A delay changes the date, not the substance. Traceability, due diligence, and reporting will remain the core requirements.
  
  
• Use the extra time wisely. If the postponement goes through, treat it as breathing room to refine supplier data, close gaps, and stress-test your systems.
  
  
• Stay plugged into updates. Follow developments from Parliament, Council, and Commission closely, the final decision will likely come by December.
  
  
• Don’t overreact. It’s tempting to hit pause, but doing so risks leaving preparation to the last minute (again). Companies that stay on track will be more resilient, whatever Brussels decides.

Honest takeaway: the EUDR is not going away. Whether enforcement starts in 2025 or 2026, businesses that invest in readiness now will be in a stronger position.

FAQ

1. Has the EUDR deadline officially been postponed?
No. At this stage it’s only a letter from Commissioner Roswall. The EUDR still applies from 30 December 2025 until a formal amendment is adopted.

2. What is in Commissioner Roswall’s letter about the EUDR, and how much weight does it carry?
She proposed a one-year delay to the EUDR, citing IT system readiness. It’s politically influential but not legally binding.

3. What needs to happen before the EUDR delay becomes law?
Both the European Parliament and the Council must debate, vote, and adopt an amendment to the EUDR under the ordinary legislative procedure.

4. When will the EU decide on the proposed EUDR delay?
A final decision is likely by December 2025, mirroring the speed of the 2024 EUDR delay process.

5. How did the 2024 EUDR delay process unfold, and what can we learn from it?
In 2024, the EUDR delay was proposed on 2 October and formally adopted by 23 December. It shows Brussels can (selectively) move very quickly when deadlines loom.

6. What political influences are affecting the EUDR delay?
Officially, the delay is about IT readiness, but U.S. pressure, Indonesian trade negotiations, and the Commission’s omnibus deregulation agenda are shaping the debate.

7. What is the EU’s “Omnibus agenda,” and how does it impact the EUDR delay?
Between February and July 2025, the Commission tabled six Omnibus packages to cut reporting burdens. While the EUDR isn’t formally part of them, the proposed delay reflects the same deregulatory trend.

8. If the EUDR delay is confirmed, will the regulation’s requirements change?
No. The EUDR rules remain the same; only the application timeline would shift.

9. Should companies pause their EUDR compliance preparations while the EU decides?
No. The EUDR obligations remain, and any extra time (if granted) should be used to strengthen systems and prepare.

10. How can Coolset’s software help with EUDR compliance during the delay?
Coolset automates EUDR workflows – from satellite monitoring and risk assessments to supplier tracking – so businesses are prepared whether the deadline is 2025 or 2026.