The European woodworking industry expressed great concern about the EUDR
The European Woodworking Industries are greatly concerned regarding information disclosed
about the EU Deforestation-Free Products Regulation (EUDR)1 in a recent article in the Financial
Times (8th March 2024). According to the article, the EU intends to delay the application of the
much-needed risk-based approach – practically implemented via a risk benchmarking of
producing countries (low, standard, and high risk) – which is essential for enabling compliance
with the EUDR by market actors (operators, traders, importers, exporters, and their authorised
representatives) and the competent authorities of the EU Member States (CAs), as well as for
incentivising good practices in producing countries (EU Member States or third countries).
Instead, all countries will now apparently be designated as “standard risk” in order to “give them
more time to adapt” to the new Regulation. It is crucial to understand that the benchmarking of
countries is a central part of the EUDR and its implementation, and any delays related to this
classification will only result in additional costs and administrative burden for market actors,
without any real advantages either for the producing countries or for the CAs.
Indeed, per the EUDR, whether market actors source their commodities from standard risk
countries or from high-risk countries, they are facing the same due diligence obligations. Simply
put, the benefit implied by the seemingly planned delay of the country risk benchmarking does
not exist because no simplified procedure for export or imports is actually foreseen for standard
risk countries, compared to high risk countries.
The only difference between the two tiers of risk is the implication that it has on the control and
verification obligations of CAs: CAs must control 9% of all the operators placing or making
available on the market or exporting relevant commodities and products originating from high risk
countries, compared to 3% in the case of relevant commodities and products originating from
standard risks countries (as per Article 16, paragraphs 8 and 9 of the EUDR).
However, it is essential to identify low-risk countries as the implications are significant to all the
actors: when sourcing from low-risk countries, market actors do actually benefit from the
possibility of simplified due diligence, while CAs can reduce the number of controls to 1%, as
foreseen by Article 16 paragraph 10.
The difficulties associated with the implementation of the EUDR are also reflected by the
challenges faced by the EU when seeking to deliver on its own commitments under the
Regulation.
(Link: Regulation (EU) 2023/1115)
One such example is the task of benchmarking the risk level of countries, particularly
the identification of the low risk-countries, which, to underline again, needs to take place
urgently.
An aggravating factor is that the EU’s Information System, intended to be the main tool supporting
the EUDR implementation by all the actors, is still at an early stage of development and needs
significant improvement, in particular when it comes to the automatic, reliable and safe
collection, registration, and protection of commercially sensitive information . Moreover, in the
case of timber, aspects related to the transition period from the currently applicable EU Timber
Regulation (EUTR)3 to the EUDR still need to be clarified. The goal is to ensure that wood which
has been legally sourced until 30 December 2024 in full compliance with the EUTR can be sold
on the EU market. It is crucial that the EU Information System takes this into account and does
not require retrospective submission of Annex2 data of downstream producers when they place
goods (e.g., sawn wood) on the markets which originates of raw material harvested before 30
December 2024.
Conclusion:
The European Woodworking Industries fully support the scope and the objectives of the EUDR
and strongly oppose all forms of deforestation and forest degradation. At the same time, the
European Woodworking Industries regret that the EUDR has become a huge administrative and
regulatory monster.
In the light of all the above, the European Woodworking Industries urge the EU institutions to delay
the entry into application of the EUDR for the operators and traders , to amend the EUDR in order
to eliminate unnecessary bureaucratic hurdles and to provide actors with sufficient time to adapt
for full and adequate compliance.
Moreover, it is imperative that the EU Commission swiftly proceed with the classification of the
low risk countries, with this action being its main priority.
Signatories:
CEI-Bois – The European Confederation of Woodworking Industries –
Transparency register n° 470333818389-37
EFIC: European Furniture Industries Confederation –
Transparency Register n° 95910795422-52
EOS - European Organisation of the Sawmill industry –
Transparency register n° 024776016336-52
EPF- European Panel Federation –
Transparency register n°: 572064811767-22
ETTF - European Timber Trade Federation –
Transparency register n° 151485550468-20
FEP- European Federation of the Parquet industry –
Transparency Register n° 294492727880-53
- Vietnam: Wood product exports recover but problems remain
- US hardwood flooring imports fell more than 10% in January
- The decline in the construction industry affects European laminate flooring sales
- Plywood Container Flooring: The Backbone of Modern Shipping Introduction
- Film Faced Plywood,Known by various names such as formwork plywoo
- Packing Plywood: A Reliable Material for Secure Shipping
- Flexible Plywood: Versatility in Design and Construction