After a brief summer hiatus, Beyond’s bi-weekly Debrief is back - this time with a refreshed new look. Over the break, there have been major developments on the EU's deregulatory Omnibus Directive, with the Council agreeing on a position that would make sweeping changes to the regulation's due diligence obligations. Meanwhile, the EU Parliament’s Rapporteur has published a report supporting further gutting of the CSDDD, raising the stakes ahead of internal negotiations.

Elsewhere, the EU Deforestation Regulation continues to face mounting roadblocks. Last week, right-wing lawmakers pushed back against the Commission’s proposed anti-deforestation blacklist, arguing the "approach imposes a blanket burden instead of targeting real risk." Commentators warn that these attacks are an underhand attempt to further delay implementation of the law and weaken its enforcement mechanisms.

Upcoming Event

The Outlaw Ocean Project and the Human Trafficking Legal Center are co-hosting an event titled, “Using Trade Policy to Fight Forced Labor” on July 22, 12pm ET. The event will highlight the U.S. government’s recent ban of all seafood imports from the Zhen Fa 7, a Chinese fishing vessel tied to forced labor, based on their investigations. Sign up here.

Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD)

Updates:

The EU Council has agreed its position on CSDDD and CSRD, prioritising further simplification of the Commission’s Omnibus proposal to “boost EU competitiveness.”

On June 23rd, the Council agreed on its negotiating mandate, which aims to simplify the directives on corporate sustainability reporting (CSRD) and due diligence (CS3D). Some key elements of the Council's position are to:

  • Delay due diligence obligations until July 2028.
  • Replace an EU-level, harmonised rule to hold companies accountable, with rules at member state level. According to Human Rights Watch, the creation of 27 individual sets of rules ‘would make enforcing the law more complex and expensive, while weakening its preventive nature and encouraging forum shopping between member states.’
  • Limit due diligence rules, changing the ‘focus from an entity-based approach to a risk-based approach.’ As well as keeping the limitation of obligations to ‘tier 1’ suppliers, under this proposal companies would no longer be required to carry out a comprehensive mapping exercise, but instead, conduct a more general scoping exercise. In-scope companies are ‘supposed to base their efforts on reasonably available information.’

The EU position paper follows the EU Parliament’s rapporteur Jörgen Warborn’s publication of a draft legislative resolution, proposing drastic amendments to the CSDDD.

David Carlin’s LinkedIn post breaks down Warborn’s ambitions for theregulation, including a drastic reduction in scope, the full removal of mandatory climate reporting, the limitation of due diligence to direct suppliers and further delays to enforcement.

In Carlin’s words, ‘The latest draft update to the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) in the EU parliament weakens accountability and creates uncertainty, just when strong leadership and clarity are most needed.’

Warborn’s draft report is yet to be agreed with the other parties in the European Parliament. MEPs have until 27 June 2025 to table amendments to the Commission's proposal text. The text does however send a signal of the direction of Parliament and will form a basis for the European Parliament’s negotiations toward its official final position in October.

For further details on his proposed changes, read Akin Gump’s breakdown each group’s proposed alterations to the law.

Human rights groups strongly oppose the EU Council and Parliament's bids to hollow out the EU due diligence directive and stall the progress of sustainability regulations.

Human Rights Group has criticised the EU Council’s position on the Omnibus for turning “Supply Chain Law into Window Dressing" and ignoring the opinion of companies, legal experts and economists, EU Agency for Fundamental Rights, the European Central Bank, leading United Nations officials and experts, and the UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights.

More recently, HRW also criticised the EU for pushing forward with an Omnibus proposal which would severely weaken key due diligence laws, under the influence of concertive lobbying by European and US companies, including the American Chamber of Commerce to the EU.

In a statement, the Corporate Justice Coalition labelled the EU Council’s deregulatory approach deregulation a “betrayal of victims.”

Landmark ruling from the Inter-American Court affirms that states have a legal obligation to protect human rights, including those of workers, in the face of the climate emergency.

The ruling on July 3rd “marks the first time an international tribunal has directly linked the climate crisis to core labor rights and protections”, including the rights of working people.

The Court held that all “member states of the Organization of American States (OAS) are obligated to adopt strong measures that reduce climate risks and protect people from its harmful effects.”

Notes/Further Reading:

New report by Good Jobs First: “How the EU Distorts Data to Justify Green Deregulation.”

This analysis of regulatory penalties debunks the claim that the EU “burdens companies so much more than the US," by finding that two-thirds of all penalties paid by the EU companies were imposed by US authorities.

Over the past 15 years, EU companies paid a total of €128 billion in fines worldwide. In fact, the research found that two-thirds of all penalties paid by the EU companies were imposed by US authorities.

Read the joint letter by the PRI and the Forum pour l’Investissement Responsable (FIR) to French and German PMs, expressing their continued support of the CSDDD.

Implementation timeline:

  • October 2025: Planned vote on the Omnibus in the Plenary of European Parliament (date TBC)
  • Late 2025-2026: Trilogue on Omnibus (Parliament, Council and Commission) to negotiate final legal text.
  • From 2028 [delayed]: Companies with 5,000+ employees and a net turnover of 1 ,500 million EUR must comply.
  • From 2028 [unchanged]: Companies with 3,000+ employees and a net turnover of 900 million EUR must comply.
  • From 2029 [unchanged]: Companies with 1,000+ employees and a net turnover of 450 million EUR must comply.

EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR)

Updates:

The Indonesian government claims that the EU deforestation law is still unworkable

Indonesia’s deputy ambassador to the EU, Muhammad Takdir, has called on Brussels to further postpone the application of the EUDR until 2028 to allow suppliers and farmers more time to prepare, and to ensure that no fines are charged within this period.

The EU Parliament rejects the Commission’s EUDR anti-deforestation blacklist

A non-binding parliamentary resolution was adopted by members of the European Parliament on Wednesday, July 9th, calling on the Commission to repeal and revise the country benchmarking system based on "up-to-date data" and allowing for "regional differentiation."

The resolution, tabled by the EPP and supported by other right-wing groups, calls for the consideration of more states into the high-risk category and the introduction of a new "no risk" category, "for countries with stable or expanding forest areas."

This is the latest in the EPP’s attacks on the EU's sustainability agenda. The Socialists and Democrats claim that the objection is an attempt "yet again postpone the implementation of the EU anti-deforestation law”, with the Left MEP Jonas Sjöstedt accusing the EPP of “us[ing] progressive arguments ... to tear [the law] down.”

While progressive groups share concerns about the classification list — they argue the 'solution is to take up the Commission on its existing commitment to update the benchmarking methodology and risk classification based on new Food and Agriculture Organization datasets in the beginning of 2026.'

EU countries send letter calling for more cuts to deforestation rules

Agriculture ministers from 18 of the 27 EU countries wrote to the Commission on Monday, demanding the rules are not applied to countries deemed to have a low risk of deforestation.

The letter puts forward, "Excessive and redundant due diligence requirements should be removed in countries where agricultural expansion is not significantly reducing the forest area." The countries said Brussels should consider delaying the launch of the policy again, while it drafts proposals to simplify the rules further.

Signatories include Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Portugal and Sweden.

Further Reading/Listening: None

Implementation timeline:

30 June 2025: Country benchmarking act adopted. Obligations stemming from the regulation will be binding from:

  • 30 December 2025: for large operators and traders
  • 30 June 2026: for micro- and small enterprises

EU Forced Labour Regulation (EUFLR)

Update:

Labour Behind the Label releases a new investigation exposing forced labour risks in Amazon seller supply chains

The report traced fashion products from three UK-based sellers to three supplier factories in Pakistan, finding several forced labour concerns in the process.

Garment workers in the supplier factories ‘reported they were not being paid minimum wages, were being forced to work overtime and excessive hours with no legal contracts or payslips, and did not have access to mandatory social security.’

Further Reading: None

Implementation timeline:

  • 2026: EU Commission to publish guidelines, including a forced labour risk database.
  • 14 December 2027: law becomes applicable.

Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA)

Updates:

Beyond’s sister organisation, Global Rights Compliance, published a landmark report uncovering global supply chains’ exposure to minerals mined and processed in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (XUAR).

The report, titled, ‘Risk at the Source: Critical Mineral Supply Chains and State-Imposed Forced Labour in the Uyghur Region’,exposes connections between critical minerals tainted with state-imposed forced labour and companies across the globe. The research documents the Chinese government's expansion of critical mineral exploration, mining, processing, and manufacturing in the Uyghur Region, known for mass-atrocities agains the Uyghur people and traces the flow of these products into the global market.

Disclaimer: This newsletter is for general informational purposes only. It does not, and is not intended to, constitute legal advice.