As industry lobbying intensifies in Brussels, European luxury supply chains, including those linked to LVMH, may remain exposed to deforestation risks in Paraguay.
On 24 April, Indigenous representatives from Paraguay protested outside the Italian leather association in Milan. The Ayoreo Totobiegosode had come to protest the continuing connection between Italian leather and deforestation on their ancestral land, deep in South America’s second largest forest, the Gran Chaco of Northern Paraguay.
Their message was simple: decisions taken in Europe are destroying their territory.
Why are the Totobiegosode outside the offices of UNIC, the Italian leather association? And why now? This Monday, the European Commission signalled it may remove deforestation requirements for imported hides and leather (see EUROPE 13861/6). At the very moment it prepares to enforce its flagship anti-deforestation law, the EU is considering exempting one of the sectors most linked to forest loss, including supply chains tied to major European brands.
This is despite its own analysis showing leather has the highest deforestation footprint among South American imports, pointing to a political choice rather than an evidence-based one.
UNIC and COTANCE, Europe’s main leather lobby groups, have been central in pushing for this exemption. A new investigation by Global Witness and featured in Politico shows they met EU officials roughly every other month since early 2024 to push this agenda. This level of access raises questions about whose interests are shaping EU policy.
It also found that a leading figure in both unions, Fabrizio Nuti, owns a tannery in Paraguay identified as being at high risk of sourcing hides from cattle raised on farms associated with more than 111,000 hectares of deforestation in the Gran Chaco. Hides connected to this deforestation are at high risk of continuing to enter European supply chains. This includes another tannery group run by Nuti, called Nuti Ivo, which is a subsidiary of LVMH.
These repeated links place growing scrutiny on the robustness of corporate due diligence and traceability claims.
A significant amount of this deforestation Global Witness found occurs within protected Indigenous territory. Safeguarding forests and protecting Indigenous Peoples like the Totobiegosode is exactly what the EUDR was designed to do and why leather must remain in the scope !
While the Totobiegosode’s territory disappears, UNIC and COTANCE are attempting to convince EU powerbrokers with an industry-funded studies that fall short of scientific standards, despite clear independent evidence of deforestation links.
This is a familiar playbook: manufacture doubt, blur the evidence, and delay regulation. Leather is not a harmless by-product : it supports cattle profitability and drives deforestation.
An exemption for leather could lead to a clear contradiction: meat banned, leather allowed from the same animal. Such a loophole would not only undermine the integrity of the EUDR, but also risk eroding public trust in the EU’s environmental commitments.
Let’s not buckle in the face of smoke and mirror tactics from the leather lobby. If the EU concedes here, it sends a clear signal: persistence in lobbying can outweigh evidence. If we do so, we open the door to invite every deforestation-linked industry to do the same and set a dangerous precedent. The EUDR was meant to be a global benchmark and not a diluted compromise.
Let’s finally implement the EUDR in full: its credibility depends on it, and those already impacted by deforestation cannot afford further delay.
MEP Marie Toussaint, Vice-president of the Greens/EFA group in the European Parliament, and shadow rapporteur on the EUDR regulation