Skip to content
Portada » Blog » Responsibility in the coffee industry for EUDR

Responsibility in the coffee industry for EUDR

In our previous article, we discussed the consequences of non-compliance with the EUDR, but in the coffee industry, it remains unclear… whose responsibility is it?

The answer is no longer a theoretical debate. The new European Environmental Crime Directive explicitly criminalises the handling of commodities linked to deforestation, shifting the legal impact directly onto the individual who signs the documentation, rather than just the company logo.

Responsabilidad industria del cafe EUDR: la firma del DDS ya no es solo un trámite responsibility of the coffee industry eudr

Directive 2024/1203, Plain and Simple

Directive (EU) 2024/1203 on the protection of the environment through criminal law entered into force on 20 May 2024. Its main objective has been to update the legal framework, expanding the catalogue of environmental offences in Europe from 9 to 20.

Among these new offences, there is no room for interpretation. Article 3(2)(p) explicitly criminalises placing on the market or exporting commodities in breach of Article 3 of Regulation (EU) 2023/1115 (the EUDR).

In other words, placing coffee sourced from deforested plots onto the European market is, legally, a defined criminal offence.

(Note: the regulation excludes cases involving a “negligible quantity”, but at a commercial logistics level, a lot or a container will hardly fall into that category).

The Trap of "Gross Negligence" (Bad Intentions Not Required)

Here is the nuance that completely changes the rules of the game for any honest roaster or coffee importer buying directly at source.

You do not need to have intended to break the law. Article 3(4) of the Directive extends criminal liability to acts committed with at least gross negligence. It is enough to have failed to exercise the care and rigour expected of a professional operator.

Translated to your day-to-day operations:

  • If you accept GPS coordinates without verifying them.

  • If you take your exporter’s word for granted without solid supporting documentation.

  • If you sign the Due Diligence Statement (DDS) in the TRACES NT system without thoroughly checking what you are asserting.

All of this can legally constitute gross negligence.

The Real Penalties

1. For the Company (Legal Entity)

Article 7 sets fines of at least 5% of the company’s total worldwide turnover, or €40 million (depending on what each Member State decides when transposing).

2. For the Signatory (Individual)

Article 5 sets a maximum term of imprisonment of at least five years for this offence. If the conduct causes widespread, substantial, and irreversible damage to an ecosystem (a qualified offence), the penalty rises to at least eight years.

Furthermore, Article 6(3) establishes that company liability does not prevent criminal proceedings against individuals, explicitly including members of the board of directors.

Two Aggravating Circumstances You Should Watch

Article 8 lists the aggravating circumstances of the offence. Two of them hit coffee operations right below the waterline:

  • Using false or forged documents (point c): If the documentary evidence behind your statement is not genuine, it aggravates the criminal offence.

  • Cost saving (point f): If the infringement avoided substantial expenditure, it constitutes an aggravating factor. The cost of rigorously documenting traceability at source is high; cutting corners to avoid that expense is now explicitly considered an aggravating circumstance.

responsibility of the coffee industry eudr Multa administrativa frente a responsabilidad industria del café bajo la EUDR

The Implementation Landscape

The deadline for the 27 Member States to transpose this Directive into national law passed on 21 May 2026. However, the geographic reality is uneven, featuring critical exceptions:

  • The Ireland and Denmark exception: According to Recitals 69 and 70, these two countries are not bound by this criminal law Directive. If you work with Irish roasters or importers, you should know that they remain subject to the heavy administrative sanctions of the EUDR (the famous 4%), but this criminal layer does not apply to them.
  • The rest of Europe: Adoption is progressing at different speeds. Belgium already recognised lasting damage caused to ecosystems by human activity; Germany and Italy have their transpositions well advanced. However, independent analyses (such as those by WWF) point out that legal loopholes still exist in many Member States.

(We recommend verifying the exact status of transposition in Spain or your country of tax residence with your legal team).

At A Coffee & A Story, This Risk Comes as No Surprise

For years, regulatory compliance in the coffee industry was treated as a PR and marketing exercise: buy a seal, conduct a surface-level audit, and tick a box.

The Environmental Crime Directive, read alongside the EUDR, proves us right on a point we have advocated since day one: the data you document isn’t marketing; it is the basis of a legal declaration with real consequences. A seal is not proof; a georeferenced document is.

The stakes are higher. If you are going to put your signature and personal liability on a Due Diligence Statement, make sure the document withstands the scrutiny you yourself would demand before a court does.

Do you know exactly which plot the coffee in your next container comes from, and do you have the data to prove it seamlessly? If the answer gives you pause, that is your critical starting point for this season.

Sources cited

Traceability you can actually verify.

We help European roasters meet the EUDR with real origin data, documented directly with the cooperative, without chasing exporters who never reply.

Tell us about your company
Tags:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.