Protect global forests from senseless deforestation! >>

The European Union is implementing important regulations to help protect people and forests around the world. Instead of following in its footsteps, the U.S. government has sent a letter opposing these critical protections.

If enough members like you speak up, we can push back against this decision – and instead encourage the U.S. to immediately implement rules to protect global forests.

Secretary

Gina

Raimondo

Department of Commerce

Secretary

Tom

Vilsack

U.S. Department of Agriculture

USTR Envoy

Katherine

Tai

United States Trade Representative

Dear Secretary Raimondo, Secretary Vilsack, and Envoy Tai,

I write to express my dismay that you have sent a letter to the European Commission demanding that the European Union delay the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR), in which you argue that the EUDR would hurt American producers.

American producers are perfectly capable of producing the products regulated by the EUDR – namely soy, cattle, timber, cocoa, rubber, and coffee -- without deforestation. Indeed the United States should be the foremost supporter of the EUDR. Your letter is actually hurting US companies, not helping them.

In fact, most major companies in the regulated commodities – including the ones which dominate US industry – have already asked for the EUDR to be passed and have publicly supported this regulation as well as regulations like it in the UK and US.

It has apparently escaped your notice that thousands of companies and investors representing trillions of dollars in assets under management are on the opposite side of your arguments. They believe, as do I, that the EUDR is good for business. Investors worth $6 trillion in assets under management supported such regulation in Europe, while a consortium of investors with assets under management worth close to $3 trillion came out for US deforestation-free regulation. By speaking out for forest-protection laws and human rights due diligence laws, thousands of companies helped build momentum for the EUDR to create a level playing field, where rogue operators can no longer take advantage of wild west situations to sell deforestation- or slavery-tainted products at lower prices than more ethical competitors. Companies already committed to ending deforestation and zeroing out their carbon can benefit from ensuring entire high-forest-risk industries are compelled to match such commitments, by law.

It is impossible in one short letter to adequately represent all the companies which have spoken out for the regulations which you now seek to delay and to derail. However, it is important in this letter to cite some of the business support for the EUDR that you are currently betraying. In the pulp and paper industry, IKEA together with 11 companies from the Nordic Business Network for Human Rights, signed a joint statement supporting EU legislation on mandatory human rights due diligence regulation. Stora Enso, a leading global provider of packages, biomaterials, paper and wood products, joined 41 other companies in asking the Swedish government for robust legislation to require respect for human rights. In the fashion industry, which drives deforestation for leather, rubber, and fabrics from trees, major brands spoke out for deforestation-free and due diligence regulation, including Nike, ASOS, Swiss Textiles, Varner, New Look, H&M, Primark, Marks & Spencer, Adidas, to name a few. (Primark’s support for the EUDR is particularly special, coming on top of what it did in a letter massively endorsed by other UK companies for a parallel UK regulatory endeavor). Inditex, the biggest fast fashion group in the world, joined Adidas and 26 other companies in a joint statement calling for EU-wide, cross-sectoral mandatory human rights and environmental due diligence legislation. The automotive industry also chimed in for the EUDR, which is especially valuable because of both rubber & leather deforestation risks embedded in car tires and seats (which would be regulated by the EUDR): BMW, Daimler and Volkswagen supported EU regulation. The world’s largest rubber trader, Halcyon, which trades 12% of the world’s natural rubber, likewise spoke out crystal clear for EU regulation. Arla Foods, a Danish multinational cooperative and the largest producer of dairy products in Scandinavia, supported EU legislation on mandatory human rights due diligence as part of a bigger Nordic Business Network on Human Rights statement. McDonalds also spoke for deforestation regulation, as did Pepsico, Coca Cola, Unilever, and other major palm oil players like Jardine Matheson. Nearly every major cocoa player has spoken out for EUDR and other related regulation, often multiple times. From Ferrero to Mars, Mondelēz, Nestle, Tony’s Chocolonely, Barry Callebaut, Hershey’s and beyond, to the biggest cocoa industry groups, cocoa has been a bulwark for the EU to regulate deforestation. Certifiers like Fairtrade International and Rainforest Alliance fought for the EUDR.

Closer to home, the US Cattlemen’s Association spoke out forcefully in favor of the US FOREST Act, the U.S. corollary to the EUDR. In the cross-commodity food space, Nestlé, Danone, Unilever, and Mars banded together in the Sustainable Food Policy Alliance companies recently to endorse the FOREST Act. Moreover, the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil supported the FOREST Act. If we also consider industry support for parallel regulatory efforts beyond the EU and US and turn to the UK: Tesco UK, the third-largest retailer in the world measured by gross revenues, manifested its support for UK regulation similar to the EUDR along with other UK retailers and supermarkets such as John Lewis, Waitrose, The Body Shop, and Princes Group. The world’s 6th largest employer and the leader in food and support services management, Compass Group, joined 32 companies from 8 economic sectors in speaking out in favor of legislation in Luxembourg for due diligence on human rights and the environment.

It is rare that such a broad bench of companies supports environmental and human rights regulation like the EUDR (and parallel laws/bills in other jurisdictions including the US), and yet your letter undermines everything that thousands of companies clearly stated in public to support the EUDR.

Worse yet, your letter in essence asks to penalize the most law-abiding companies, many of which are already investing in due diligence and deploying all their resources to ensure timely compliance. Delaying the EUDR would penalize companies that have started early and reward the laggards.

I therefore ask that you change your position and publicly endorse the EUDR.

Should you not be swayed by the evidence of myriad companies and investors supporting the EUDR – contrary to what you represent in your ill-informed letter – you should be moved by considerations of democracy and representativeness. Your letter does not represent the American people. Hundreds of thousands of Americans are asking for deforestation-free regulation of exactly the sort that you now propose to undermine. You have only to see petitions like this 85,000 strong one calling for a California bill akin to the EUDR, a 68,000 strong petition calling for a NY bill akin to the EUDR, and another 89,000 strong petition calling on governors to emulate the Governor of Colorado’s deforestation-free procurement Executive Order, to cite but a few. Polls show that Americans support this kind of regulation and do not want to see deforestation embedded in the products they consume. Moreover, lawmakers such as Senators Schatz and Blumenauer representing millions of Americans have proposed the FOREST Act which is similar to the EUDR and already boasts bi-partisan support in the House and Senate. State level deforestation-free procurement bills in both NY and CA States garnered tremendous lawmaker support and are now proposed for NY and IL’s next legislative sessions. Your letter attacking the EUDR is a betrayal of elected US, NY, CA, and IL legislators and the Colorado Governor who are courageously fighting against global deforestation, and undermines their vital efforts.

Besides flying in the face of industry support for the EUDR, and undermining elected US lawmakers in their crucial efforts at home, your letter also can only be perceived as an attack against a green legacy of a close ally. The EUDR is important for Europe. Criticizing it is particularly unhelpful at a time when Europe is facing major threats from Russia, climate change, and more. Your letter also constitutes an indirect attack on the UK, a close ally, which passed a law similar to the EUDR, namely the Environment Bill, Schedule 17. The Biden administration’s impressive track record on climate action, its strong support of Europe, its solidarity with the United Kingdom, all point to your letter being out of step with Administration policy and contrary to US national interests.

The Biden administration should focus on helping to pass the FOREST Act and on supporting small and medium sized US companies to comply with the EUDR – not standing in the way of progress, attacking allies, undermining democratically elected lawmakers, and hurting responsible businesses.

Thank you.

First name

Last name

Email address

Zip Code

Phone number

Alerts about ways you can take action

Friends of the Earth Action Activists

By submitting this form, you are signing up to receive updates and alerts from Friends of the Earth and Friends of the Earth (Action), Inc. You may unsubscribe at any time.

By providing your mobile number and submitting this form, you are signing up to receive calls and voice mails from Friends of the Earth and Friends of the Earth (Action), Inc. You may unsubscribe at any time.