A motion for a resolution tabled by the Patriots for Europe (PfE) Group in the European Parliament on 3 July 2026 seeks to object to the European Commission's delegated act on decreasing the contribution of high indirect land-use change (ILUC)-risk biofuels, bioliquids and biomass fuels to renewable energy targets. The motion, led by MEPs Paolo Borchia, Raffaele Stancanelli, Aleksandar Nikolic, Julie Rechagneux, Jana Nagyová, Georg Mayer, Roman Haider, Isabella Tovaglieri, Mélanie Disdier, Ewa Zajączkowska-Hernik, Ondřej Knotek, and Jorge Martín Frías, argues that the Commission's methodology for classifying high ILUC-risk feedstocks is flawed and that the delegated act oversteps its powers under Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). The motion is now under consideration by the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy.
The PfE Group contends that the Commission's methodology relies on theoretical global models and does not account for the specific characteristics of EU soy cultivation, which they claim has no deforestation impact. They argue that the Commission's shift of the observation period from 2008 to 2014 introduces substantive policy changes with significant economic impact—estimated at over EUR 1.4 billion—without proper democratic scrutiny or a comprehensive impact assessment. The motion calls for EU-grown soy to be considered low ILUC-risk by definition, and for the Commission to submit a revised delegated act following an appropriate impact assessment and consultation with Member States and stakeholders.
If adopted, the resolution would block the delegated act, which targets high ILUC-risk biofuels such as those derived from soybean oil. The motion pits the interests of EU soybean producers and the biofuel industry against the Commission's climate and sustainability objectives. EU soybean farmers and biofuel producers would benefit from avoiding stricter limits on their product's contribution to renewable energy targets, while environmental groups and the Commission argue that the delegated act is necessary to prevent deforestation and indirect land-use change linked to biofuel feedstock expansion. The Parliament's plenary vote on the motion will determine whether the delegated act is rejected, forcing the Commission to revise it. The Council has not yet taken a position on the matter.
Stakeholders most affected include EU soybean farmers and the biofuel industry, who face potential revenue losses if the delegated act stands, and the Commission, which sees its delegated powers challenged. EU consumers and taxpayers may be indirectly impacted through potential changes in biofuel prices and the cost of meeting renewable energy targets. The motion highlights a cleavage between agricultural and biofuel sector interests and the EU's climate and environmental goals, with the PfE Group arguing for a more pragmatic approach that protects domestic production.