EU Deforestation Regulation What should teams do about non-negligible risk?

Do not release the product on the basis of an unresolved risk note. The EUDR due diligence sequence is information collection under Article 9, risk assessment under Article 10, and risk mitigation under Article 11 where the risk is not negligible.

An operator must not place the relevant product on the market or export it unless the risk assessment reveals no or only negligible risk of non-compliance. If the assessment remains non-negligible, complete mitigation first and hold release until the evidence supports the required conclusion.

Do not convert this into an unsupported numeric threshold. Article 2 defines negligible risk through a full assessment and no cause for concern about Article 3(a) or 3(b). The Regulation does not provide a universal score, percentage, or supplier rating that automatically permits release.

Article 10 tests collected information against non-compliance risk. The assessment must consider the country benchmark; forests and deforestation prevalence; indigenous peoples' presence, consultation, and reasoned land claims; the reliability and links between Article 9 evidence; supply-chain complexity and processing stage; difficulty connecting products to plots; circumvention or mixing; substantiated concerns; compliance history; and any other relevant information.

Article 11 is triggered when that assessment does not reach no or negligible risk. Mitigation must happen before placement or export. The Regulation gives examples: request additional information, data, or documents; carry out independent surveys or audits; or take other measures tied to Article 9 information. It also allows supplier support, including smallholder capacity building and investment.

After mitigation, the release file should show the updated risk conclusion and why the remaining risk is no or negligible. Article 10 requires the operator to document and review risk assessments at least annually and to show how the evidence was checked against the legal criteria.

For low-risk production, Article 13 removes Articles 10 and 11 only when its conditions are met, including an assessment of supply-chain complexity and circumvention or mixing risks and documentation showing negligible risk of circumvention or mixing. A substantiated concern or other relevant information pointing to non-compliance or circumvention restores the Article 10 and 11 duties and must be communicated immediately to the competent authority.

For operators, stop before placing the relevant product on the market or exporting it when the risk assessment does not show no or only negligible risk. A due diligence statement should follow a supported due diligence conclusion; it should not be used to override an unresolved assessment.

For non-SME downstream operators and non-SME traders, the stop point is also important when information indicates non-compliance before the regulated activity. If there are substantiated concerns, they must verify due diligence and not place, make available, or export unless verification demonstrates no or negligible risk.

This release gate should apply to each affected product movement. A supplier approval, prior shipment, or generic commodity policy does not by itself prove that the current product row has passed the EUDR risk conclusion.

Keep enough evidence for a reviewer to understand both the facts and the conclusion. The EUDR file should connect Article 9 information to the Article 10 result and, where needed, to Article 11 mitigation completed before release.

At minimum, the evidence should identify the relevant commodity or product, the production origin, geolocation or permitted replacement information, documentation supporting deforestation-free status and production under relevant local law, the assessed supply-chain complexity or mixing risk where relevant, and the final risk conclusion. If a due diligence statement is submitted, keep the statement record and communicate the reference number down the supply chain where required.

For downstream operators and traders, retain the Article 5 supplier and business-recipient details, including statement reference numbers or declaration identifiers when the direct supplier is an operator, for at least five years from placing, making available, or export. Operators retain due diligence documentation for at least five years and statement records for five years from submission.

Avoid treating non-negligible risk as a business preference or procurement score. The EUDR release condition is a legal due diligence conclusion: no or only negligible risk of non-compliance before the relevant product is placed on the market or exported.

Avoid filing or relying on a due diligence statement while the underlying evidence still says the risk is unresolved. The statement record should sit behind a traceable due diligence file, not substitute for one.

Keep internal procurement scores separate from the legal conclusion. Record which evidence resolves each identified concern, who reviewed it, and the date of the hold or release decision. A supplier score alone cannot establish no or negligible risk.