Sonia Draga, President of the Federation of European Publishers, commented: “European publishers and all those who sell books in Europe are relieved that this Regulation excludes books. I must thank my colleagues at the Federation and all our members for the work they have done to explain the situation to MEPs and their governments. A year ago, such an exclusion was unimaginable, but it has become a reality thanks to the solid arguments and the work of all publishers on environmental sustainability. MEPs and governments must be thanked for recognising the importance of books to society”.
Although books are exempt, paper products remain within scope, and the European Commission is surveying importers on their expected use of the TRACES Information System under the EUDR. FEP will encourage its members to participate.
The final voting in plenary followed an agreement reached on 4 December 2025, when the European Parliament and Council signed a political agreement on revising the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR). As part of the deal, the co-legislators decided to remove books, newspapers, and printed pictures from the scope of the regulation, acknowledging the low deforestation risk linked to these products.
On this occasion, the Danske Forlag Danish Publishers issued a statement welcoming the decision and reflecting on its implications for the publishing sector (see below).
Books carry a very limited risk of deforestation.
Both Danske Forlag and FEP naturally support the objectives of the EUDR!
But we have pointed out that the Commission’s proposal from 2021 precisely limited the scope of the regulation to wood pulp and paper: finished printed products such as newspapers, magazines and books pose no or very limited risk of deforestation, but the regulation would, conversely, impose disproportionate burdens on press and book publishers and booksellers.
We have argued that if the regulation ignores the practical realities of different supply chains and imposes disproportionate obligations on sectors that do not drive deforestation, it risks undermining both its own credibility and its objectives: by imposing such a heavy administrative burden on production, the inclusion of books in the scope of the EUDR would paradoxically discourage environmentally friendly practices such as smaller and more frequent print runs or the use of print-on-demand services, which precisely allow for a more rational use of resources.