WT/CTE/GEN/33  
 
10 November 2023  
(23-7592)  Page: 1/9 
Committee on Trade and Environment  
  Original: Spanish  
 
  
EUROPEAN UNION REGULATION ON DEFORESTATION AND FOREST  
DEGRADATION -FREE SUPPLY CHAINS  
COMMUNICATION FROM ARGENTINA, BRAZIL, COLOMBIA, ECUADOR, GUATEMALA,  
HONDURAS, MEXICO, PARAGUAY AND PERU  
The following communication, dated 9 November 2023, is being circulated at the request of the 
delegations of Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Paraguay 
and Peru. 
 
_______________  
 
 
1. At the Committee on Trade and Environme nt1 meeting of 2 February 2022, the European Union 
(EU) presented the main elements of the draft deforestation regulation (RD/CTE/206).  
2. On 13 June 2023, the European Union circulated document WT/CTE/GEN/30  to “inform the 
Members of the Committee on  Trade and Environment that on 9 June 2023 it has published the text 
of Regulation (EU) 2023/1115 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 May 2023 on the 
making available on the Union market and the export from the Union of certain commodities and 
products associated with deforestation and forest degradation and repealing Regulation (EU) 
No. 995/2010 (the "Deforestation Regulation")”, and that the Regulation would enter into force 
20 days following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union, i.e. 29 June 2023.  
3. During the WTO’s Trade and Environment Week, held within the framework of the Committee on 
Trade and Environment from 12 to 16 June 2023, the European Union organized a briefing on its 
Deforestation Regulation in which  it invited Members to discuss the Regulation and its 
implementation with representatives of the European Commission.  
4. The Members sending this communication participated in the briefing, in which they expressed 
concern about this unilateral standard that imposes a trade measure that could generate higher 
costs or barriers to trade, especially for small businesses and p roducers in chains of great importance 
to our countries.  
5. It is particularly worrying that many aspects of the European regulation remain unclear or require 
supplementary regulations, which means that the actual time frame operators and all actors involved 
in these chains have to implement the adjustments need ed to ensure compliance will be far shorter 
than the 18 -month time frame set out for implementation.  
6. Under the European regulation, countries shall, in principle, be unilaterally assigned a 
deforestation risk rating, the specific criteria and methodolog y for which have not been 
communicated or coordinated with the countries potentially affected.  
7. In addition, the Members making this submission would like to thank the European Union for 
arranging briefings. However, in the absence of sufficient time dur ing briefings to address all 
 
1 The aim of this Committee is to make international trade and environmental policies mutually supportive. 
Sustainable development and protection and preservation of the environment are fundamental goals of the WTO. 
They are enshrined in the Marrakesh Agree ment, which established the WTO, and complement the WTO's 
objective to reduce trade barriers and eliminate discriminatory treatment in international trade relations.  WT/CTE/GEN/33  
 
- 2 - 
 
  questions and of a formal notification with a deadline for comments, they wish to ask the following 
questions, to which they hope replies may be provided in writing:  
8. How does the EU intend to minimize the negative impact on trade for developing or 
least-developed countries that are highly dependent on agriculture and certain commodities , 
particular ly taking into account the costs and structural challenges associated with demonstrating 
compliance that may lead European operato rs to switch supplying countries ? 
9. How does the EU plan to prevent costs incurred in the implementation of traceability and due 
diligence systems from being borne by producers in third countries?  
10. The EU stated that the Deforestation Regulation does n ot involve the extraterritorial application 
of measures, since compliance is required only from products that are intended to be “ma[de] 
available on the Union market”. In this connection:  
a. How will a legal change in land use in a country be prevented fr om affecting its risk rating 
and, by extension, not only production intended for the EU but also all other domestic 
production?  
b. How does the EU intend to offset or further recognize each country's legal deforestation, 
which shall, in any event, be deeme d prohibited by this legislation?  
11. The cut -off date for determining the existence of deforestation (31 December 2020) and the 
requirements laid down in the Regulation fail to account for countries’ common but differentiated 
responsibilities and for the EU’s responsibility for historical emissions and deforestation. In this 
connection:  
a. What mechanism does the EU plan to put in place to address these issues?  
b. How does the cut -off date established in the EU Regulation address restoration 
commitments su ch as those included in the recently adopted Kunming -Montreal Global 
Biodiversity Framework?  
12. How does the EU intend to contribute to mitigating the costs of adaptation to demonstrate 
compliance with the measures provided for in its Regulation? How does  the "cooperation " that the 
EU can provide to third countries compare to domestic support for its producers?  
13. What mechanisms does the EU have in mind to provide certainty to producers and exporters 
from third countries and avoid unnecessary or unclear requests for information from European 
operators?  
14. Article 1 - Subject matter and scope : 
Regarding cattle and cattle products, the geolocation requirements under the Regulation refer to the 
geographical location of each of the establishments where the c attle were raised. However, there 
also appears to be a requirement for the feed used for livestock to be deforestation -free (see recital 
39 of the preamble to the EU Regulation).  
a. How can this be determined?  
b. What information or documentation will be r equired in this regard?  
15. Article 8 - Due diligence : 
The due diligence regime provided for in the Regulation grants European operators broad discretion 
in terms of the specific documentation that each may require from producers and exporters from 
third countries. Individual European operators may be more or less averse to the risk of being 
exposed to sanctions under the Regulation. This could entail a different trade impact for the same 
exporting country:  WT/CTE/GEN/33  
 
- 3 - 
 
  a. How will the EU or the competent authorities of member States assess whether the 
“excessive” reactions  or requirements of European operators are arbitrary or 
discretionary?  
b. How can such situations be avoided?  
c. Will channels be established for third -country suppliers or their governments to present 
their concerns about these practices?  
16. Article 9 - Information requirements : 
a. How does the EU intend to respond to the logistical challenges posed by some of the 
products covered in situations where trade logistics dictate that products from several 
producers are mixed together?  
With respect to the geolocation of all plots of land where the relevant commodities that the 
relevant product contains, or has been made using, were produced (Article 9.1(d)):  
i. Will the EU require the use of a specific digital tool (e.g. Google Earth or Copernicus)?  
ii. Will the EU (or the competent authorities of member States) accept or recognize 
programmes and systems for satellite mapping, geolocation and information 
developed by third countries that export to the EU?  
iii. How will equivalence between the various program mes, platforms or systems 
presented by the private sectors of supplying countries be ensured? In other words, 
how will the definitions and methodologies for measuring deforestation be harmonized 
to ensure neutrality for European operators between the optio ns open to them?  
b. What information will be considered "adequately conclusive and verifiable " for the purpose 
of demonstrating that products are deforestation -free (Article 9.1(g)) and that the relevant 
commodities have been produced in accordance with th e relevant legislation of the country 
of production (Article 9.1(h))?  
c. What steps will the EU take to ensure that the discretion given to seek information does 
not constitute a barrier to trade?  
i. What will be the limit to operators’ power in this regar d? 
17. Article 10 - Risk assessment : 
The criteria to be taken into account in the risk assessment carried out by European operators would 
appear to punish conservation efforts while rewarding past deforestation. Could the EU shed light 
on the following que stions concerning several of the criteria under Article 10.2 of the Regulation?  
 
- (b) the presence of forests in the country of production or parts thereof  
 
Does the conservation that has allowed these forests to be maintained to date imply a 
possible higher risk and a requirement of more documentation?  
 
- (c) the presence of indigenous peoples in the country of production or parts thereof  
 
Does the existence of indigenous peoples imply a higher level of risk and a requirement of 
more documenta tion? 
 
- (d) the consultation and cooperation in good faith with indigenous peoples in the country of 
production or parts thereof  
 
Could the EU clarify how it believes that consultations with indigenous peoples should be 
held? What criteria should be applied in order for a particular land tenure claim to be 
considered representative and reasoned?  WT/CTE/GEN/33  
 
- 4 - 
 
   
- (h) concerns in relation to the cou ntry of production and origin or parts thereof, such as 
level of corruption, prevalence of document and data falsification, lack of law enforcement, 
violations of international human rights, armed conflict or presence of sanctions imposed by 
the UN Securit y Council or the Council of the European Union  
 
i. Could the EU clarify what bases, indicators and criteria European operators should 
take into account to assess, in an objective and accurate manner, a country’s 
performance in terms of compliance with laws , corruption, falsification of documents 
or human rights violations? How will the type of sources that operators may use for 
this analysis be determined?  
 
ii. Does the Commission plan to provide member States with a list of databases and 
indicators that it  considers objective in this regard? If so, can the databases considered 
reliable be mutually agreed with the third country being assessed?  
 
iii. How will risk assessments carried out by EU operators be verified? What criteria will 
be used to measure the o bjectivity of their findings?  
 
iv. Is a mechanism envisaged to enable third countries to challenge risk assessments 
carried out by operators?  
 
v. More generally, what is the relationship between, for example, compliance with laws 
and respect for international human rights law, on the one hand, and the EU 
Regulation’s objective of preventing deforestation and forest degradation, on the 
other?  
 
- (i) the complexity of the relevant supply chain and the stage of processing of the relevant 
products, in  particular difficulties in connecting relevant products to the plot of land where 
the relevant commodities were produced  
 
In addition to tariff escalation for products from developing countries, is the processing of 
commodities in developing countries pen alized through a possible higher level of risk and a 
requirement of more documentation?  
 
- (j) the risk of circumvention of this Regulation or of mixing with relevant products of 
unknown origin or produced in areas where deforestation or forest degradation  has occurred 
or is occurring  
 
i. Aside from the additional cost incurred as a result of the geographical location of some 
countries - such as landlocked developing countries - is the need to tranship and 
consolidate cargoes again in seaports in third coun tries of transit penalized through a 
possible higher level of risk and a requirement of more documentation?  
 
ii. How will the risk of triangulation of mixed products with others of unknown origin be 
avoided?  
 
iii. What happens if the mixing of products occurs in European territory? To what extent 
can third -country exporters be held responsible?  
 
- (n) complementary information on compliance with this Regulation, which may include 
information supplied by certification or other third -party verifie d schemes, including 
voluntary schemes recognised by the Commission under Article 30(5) of 
Directive(EU)  2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council, provided that the 
information meets the requirements set out in Article 9 of this Regulation  
 
i. How will the EU articulate the relationship between voluntary schemes for the 
certification of the sustainability criteria set out in the Renewable Energy Directive for 
commodities used as biofuels or to produce biofuels, on the one hand, and the 
certifications or information required by the Deforestation Regulation, on the other?  
 WT/CTE/GEN/33  
 
- 5 - 
 
  ii. How will the European Commission or the competent authorities of EU member States 
recognize the traceability protocols or systems developed by third countries (either by 
the private sector and value chain or officially) that export products covered by the 
Regulation to the EU market?  
 
iii. Will "equivalence” approaches be considered to establish applicable protocols tailored 
to the situation in each country and to the speci fic characteristics of the sector or 
product concerned?  
 
The Regulation indicates that the Commission should assess the deforestation and forest degradation 
risk at the level of a country or parts thereof based on a range of criteria that reflect quantitat ive, 
objective and internationally recognized data, and indications that the countries are actively engaged 
in fighting deforestation and forest degradation. It also states that, in order to ensure appropriate 
transparency and clarity, the Commission shoul d in particular make publicly available the data being 
used for benchmarking, the reasons for the proposed change of classification and the reply of the 
country concerned.  
 
 a. When will these data be available?  
 
Articles 9, 10 and 11, together with other provisions of the Regulation, establish procedures but no 
time frames for any of them.  
 
a. Will the EU establish specific time frames for the procedures under the Regulation in order 
to provide greater certainty to businesses?  
 
18. Article 15 - Technical assistance, guidance and exchange of information : 
Although Article 15.5 of the Regulation states that the Commission "may facilitate the harmonised 
implementation of this Regulation, by issuing relevant guidelines ", there is no detai led information 
on these guidelines.  
a. Does the EU have more information on these guidelines? Will they be general or 
product -specific? Will they establish what information will be required? Will the same 
information be considered sufficient to meet due d iligence requirements by all member 
States? Will these guidelines be mandatory or indicative?  
b. Could the EU clarify the status of the "focus groups " announced by the Commission to 
develop traceability and due diligence guidelines for each sector of commodities and by -
products covered by the Regulation?  
c. Could the EU clarify how it will be possible to establish protocols tailored to the situation 
in each country and to the specific characteristics of the sector or product concerned?  
d. Will the Commission take into account the traceability and certification protocols or 
systems developed by third countries (either by the private sector and value chain  or 
officially) under these guidelines?  
We understand that there will be guidelines to develop some aspects of the Regulation, provide 
greater clarity and facilitate its implementation. Given the different circumstances and capabilities 
of suppliers of pro ducts to the EU, it will be important to have this guidance prior to the entry into 
force of the Regulation and for 18 or 24 months after its issuance.  
a. When is it expected that guidance or clarifications will be provided on how to implement 
processes an d satisfy requirements under the Regulation?  
19. Article 16 – Obligation to carry out checks : 
Why is it necessary for each competent authority to establish different national risk criteria? This 
could lead to a non -uniform enforcement of the Regulation.  WT/CTE/GEN/33  
 
- 6 - 
 
  20. Article 17 – Relevant products requiring immediate action : 
What criteria shall be used to identify situations where "relevant products present such high risk of 
non-compliance … that they require immediate action by competent authorities"? How will the EU 
ensure a uniform enforcement of the Regulation if  it is the competent authorities of each member 
State  that identify situations where immediate action is required?  
 
21. Article 18 – Checks on operators and non -SME traders : 
a. Could the EU clarify who wi ll cover the cost of the additional checks listed in Article  18(2)?  
Will they apply to operators only in the event of non -compliance?  
b. How long will these checks take? Considering, in particular, their implications for exporters 
or producers in third co untries . 
22. Article 21 - Cooperation and exchange of information : 
This provision appears to focus on the exchange of information in the event of non -compliance. 
Article 21(4) provides, for example, that competent authorities "shall immediately alert compe tent 
authorities of other [m]ember States and the Commission when they detect any potential 
non-compliance with this Regulation and serious shortcomings that could affect more than one 
[m]ember State".  
 
Could the EU clarify how the favourable  results of checks will be shared with a view to preventing 
them from being required again by other member States?  
 
23. Article 23 – Interim measures : 
a. Could the EU clarify how the interim measures are lifted and a fter how long?  
b. How will the EU ensure a uniform enforcement of the Regulation if these measures will be 
taken by the competent authorities in accordance with the provisions of each member 
State?  
c. How will the EU provide predictability for exporters, whose products may be subject to 
interim measures, despite being sent with the required information and with the due 
diligence completed by the European operators?  
24. Article 24 – Corrective action in the event of non -compliance and Article 25 - Penaltie s: 
a. Could the EU clarify what is the difference between interim measures and corrective 
action?  
b. How will the EU ensure a uniform enforcement of the Regulation if the corrective action 
and penalties will be assessed and determined  by each member State ?  
25. Article 29 – Assessment of countries : 
a. Considering the deadline for the initial list of high - and low -risk countries, we would be 
grateful if the EU could clarify the following points:  
i. What sources of information will the EU use to assess the criteria laid down in 
Article  29?  
ii. Will the sources of information and assessment criteria be mutually agreed with the 
country to be assessed? Will the criteria and sources be adapted to each national 
reality?  
iii. When and how will data be requested from trade partners?  WT/CTE/GEN/33  
 
- 7 - 
 
  b. Among the crit eria to be taken into account for the classification of countries are 
"production trends of relevant commodities and of relevant products" (Article 29(3)(c)).  
i. When assessing the rate of expansion of agriculture land for relevant commodities, will 
consid eration be given to instances of expansion of agriculture land due to climatic 
variability, soil improvement, product adaptation to specific soil types and/or 
implementation of sustainable agricultural practices, together with the development of 
appropriat e policies that minimize the negative impacts on forests and promote a more 
harmonious development between agriculture and forest conservation?  
ii. Will an increase in production be considered negatively and punished with a higher 
level of risk and more d ocumentation requirements? How is this consistent with the 
attainment of some Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) such as SDG 2?  
iii. How does the EU intend to take into account sustainable intensification, recognized by 
the recently adopted Kunming -Montr eal Global Diversity Framework as a biodiversity 
friendly practice?  
iv. What would be the involvement of non -state actors in the identification and collection 
of data? How will the EU assess and verify that the information provided by third 
countries, NGO s and/or civil society is objective, true and accurate?  
v. What right to object and/or reply will a country to be assessed have in relation to the 
sources used and the assessment made?  
c. Since the EU Regulation includes a definition of "forest degradation" that is not 
internationally agreed:  
i. Under what conditions and parameters, and on the basis of which elements, will the 
"forest degradation" criterion be identified, verified and measured?  
ii. Will the concept of "forest degradation" apply to all products/sectors covered by the 
Regulation or only to the timber sector and products that contain or have been made 
using wood?  
iii. How will the EU take into account third -country legislation that permits "legal 
deforestation"? Could the EU clarify  what criteria will be used to assess the forestry 
policies, projects and standards of these countries? How will the environmental 
benefits of these policies be assessed? How will the EU take into account the legal 
deforestation "compensation" approaches t hat are currently permitted?  
iv. Will the EU recognize as equivalent the environmental measures to combat 
deforestation adopted by exporting third countries which, although they may diverge 
from the EU project, are pursuing the same goals?  
d. Article 29(4) (a) of the Regulation states that the assessment may take into account 
"information submitted by the country concerned, regional authorities concerned, 
operators, NGOs and third parties, including indigenous peoples, local communities and 
civil society org anisations, with regard to the effective covering of emissions and removals 
from agriculture, forestry and land use in the nationally determined contribution to the 
UNFCCC":  
i. Could the EU clarify the information submitted by which "operators" will be tak en into 
account under this provision?  
ii. Could the EU clarify which "NGOs'" information will be considered eligible under this 
provision?  
iii. Could the EU clarify what level of representativeness will be necessary to objectively 
be considered representa tive of an indigenous people, within the meaning of this 
provision?  WT/CTE/GEN/33  
 
- 8 - 
 
  iv. Could the EU clarify how it will select the "civil society organizations" whose information 
will be taken into account under this provision?  
v. How does the EU intend to assess the c riteria laid down in the multilateral agreements 
on climate change?  
vi. How does the EU plan to require third countries and third parties to provide information 
not foreseen in the multilateral agreements on climate change?  
e. Article 29(4)(b) of the Regu lation states that "agreements and other instruments between 
the country concerned and the Union and/or its [m]ember States that address 
deforestation and forest degradation" may be taken into account. In this regard:  
i. What type of agreements and other instruments between the country concerned and 
the Union and/or its member States, which facilitate compliance with the Regulation, 
will be taken into account?  
ii. What will be the relative importance of each type of agreement or instrument? Will 
agreement s concluded at the member State level and agreements concluded with the 
EU bloc have the same validity or weight? Or will the latter take precedence?  
iii. What type of practices must these agreements contain for them to be considered as 
being in accordance  with the Regulation and conducive to its implementation?  
f. Article 29(4)(c) of the Regulation states that the assessment may take into account 
whether a country "applies penalties of sufficient severity to deprive of the benefits 
accruing from deforesta tion or forest degradation". What criteria must the penalties 
applied by third countries meet in order to be considered of sufficient severity to ensure 
compliance with domestic laws?  
g. Pursuant to Article 29(4)(d) of the Regulation, a country's deforesta tion risk assessment 
may take into account "the existence … of laws protecting human rights, the rights of 
indigenous peoples, local communities and other customary tenure rights holders":  
i. What relationship is the EU establishing between the risk of def orestation and the 
protection of human rights in third countries?  
ii. What transparency criteria will the EU apply when assessing the information available 
on human rights, and the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities to 
customary land tenur e?  
iii. What will be the verifiable information (specific documentation that must be 
submitted), and what criteria or indicators will the EU take into account in its 
assessment of these aspects?  
h. In accordance with Article 29(5) of the Regulation, "[t]he Commission shall engage in a 
specific dialogue with all countries that are, or risk to be classified as, high risk, with the 
objective to reduce their level of risk ":  
i. What type of information must the country concerned provide in the  context of this 
dialogue?  
ii. How will mechanisms be developed through which these countries' level of risk may 
be reduced? Who will finance these mechanisms?  
iii. What type of follow -up is envisaged under these programmes?  
i. The EU includes a benchmar king system to assess the risk of non -compliance with the 
Regulation's deforestation -free requirement , and to classify countries of production as low, 
standard or high risk. We would like to know how countries ' particular circumstances and WT/CTE/GEN/33  
 
- 9 - 
 
  capacities and t he actions taken to date with regard to this classification will be taken into 
account.  
i. How will the EU ensure that the competent authorities of all its members and the 
operators conducting due diligence do not violate the principles of national treatme nt 
and most -favoured -nation treatment?  
ii. Should an exporter not agree with the result of the due diligence conducted  by an 
operator, to which authority can the exporter turn for a review or to complain?  
j. If this classification is based on general rates , how will the particular circumstances and 
capacities of third countries be taken into account so as not to negatively affect producers 
and exporters from low -risk areas, putting them at a disadvantage vis -à-vis like products 
in other countries?  
26. Article 30 - Cooperation with third countries : 
a. Could the EU clarify how the cooperation objectives will be achieved to help producers 
meet the Regulation's requirements and provide assurances in the context of due 
diligence?  How does this include the possibi lity of working on "equivalence" approaches?  
b. Can the EU foster direct investment and direct funds from public and private financial 
platforms for trading partners in the context of these dialogues?  
27. Article 33 – Information system : 
a. Could the EU p rovide information on what progress is being made towards establishing 
the information system?  
b. How will the favourable results of checks be shared in advance so that they do not have 
to be carried out again by other member States?  
c. What type of access  will third parties have to the information system being developed by 
the Commission?  
28. Article 34 - Review : 
Even before the implementation of this Regulation, the Commission's impact assessment 
("COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT - minimising the risk of 
deforestation and forest degradation associated with products placed on the EU market") determined 
that "[m]aize and rubber account for the smallest fraction of embodied deforestation among the 
commodities analysed, while their trade vo lumes are very large (around EUR 2.8 billion per year for 
maize and 17.6 billion for rubber). Including these two commodities in the scope would require a 
very large effort and significant financial and administrative burden, with limited return in terms o f 
curbing deforestation driven by EU consumption." Nonetheless, rubber  was included in the 
Regulation. In the light of Article 34 of the Regulation:  
a. Could the EU clarify whether there is a possibility that a review would demonstrate that 
the Regulation is burdensome and creates excessive trade restrictions for a very limited 
environmental impact and, thus, whether there is a mechanism for excluding  commodities 
and associated products from the scope of the Regulation?  
b. Bearing in mind that the restorati on commitment falls mainly to developed countries, while 
developing countries' commitments are focused on conservation, does the EU envisage a 
review mechanism that may establish an earlier cut -off date for the EU and other 
developed countries?  
__________