Operator, trader or SME trader: the classification decides your application date, whether simplified due diligence applies, and what you owe downstream (collect and retain the upstream DDS reference, five years, Reg (EU) 2025/2650). The Annex I check answers in its own deliberate vocabulary: in scope or unknown, check the Annex. Never a guessed all-clear. The check runs against the consolidated Annex I text, versioned; the 2026 draft Delegated Act rides along as an advisory overlay, flagged not adopted, never a verdict.
The wood-packaging question, answered in two sentences: packaging sold as a product is in scope; packaging used only to support or protect another product is not. Your broker doesn't have to guess anymore.
In scope, or honestly unknown. Never a guess.
The supplier answers through a link. One request, seven short sections: who they are, the plot with its boundary (GeoJSON upload, polygon or point), the commodity down to species scientific name for wood, the deforestation declaration, legality and land title, certifications, signature.
Scale is first-class: an exporter's file with a thousand smallholder plots lands the same way as one polygon. Every line validates on import, every failure is named per plot, and a boundary already on record is recognised, not requested again.
The review is doctrine, not friction: answers land with their source recorded, a person accepts them, and only then do they file into the register. Nothing files itself.
The supplier answered through a link. The plot has a boundary now.
Four ways a boundary gets captured, each with provenance recorded: fetched from the official land registry, drawn on the map, imported as GeoJSON, or a GPS point for plots under 4 hectares. The rule is enforced at capture: a plot of land over 4 hectares as a single point is refused, not warned (Art. 9). Area is computed from the geometry itself, WGS-84, and the operator confirms the boundary matches the source before it saves.
| PLOT | BOUNDARY | PROVENANCE | AREA |
|---|---|---|---|
| EE-8842-1 Võrumaa | Polygon | Official registry | 4.62 ha |
| CO-2026-031-A Huila | Polygon | Supplier · imported | 2.10 ha |
| CO-2026-031-B Huila | Point | Supplier · GPS | 3.4 ha declared |
| BR-11-402 Pará | Point | Refused · over 4 ha needs a polygon | 6.8 ha |
The honest asymmetry, stated instead of implied: coffee and cocoa origins have no land registry to call. There the boundary comes from the supplier, imported or drawn, and its provenance is recorded all the same. The doctrine holds either way.
Where the boundary came from is part of the boundary.
Four topics, as in the product: country, legality, deforestation, social. The conclusion vocabulary is the regulation's: negligible, non-negligible, not assessed. Not assessed blocks the statement. Country risk cites the Commission's benchmarking act (Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/1093) as a versioned, dated snapshot.
Mitigation is its own beat: a non-negligible conclusion turns into named demands on the origin, extra evidence, corrective answers, a re-assessment. The conclusion is re-drawn afterwards, never overwritten, and the mitigation's effectiveness goes on the record: yes, partial, no. For coffee and timber from standard-risk countries this is the common case, and the product treats it that way.
Screening doctrine: satellite-backed forest-change screening watches the plots, and it never decides. It can only demand review. A person sets pass or fail, and the operator's legal responsibility stays where Article 4 puts it.
Negligible is a conclusion here. Never a default.
Submission is fail-closed. An invalid statement is refused with each gap named and a fix link. Fourteen blocking checks stand between a draft and a filing; each one cites its article.
Not a warning you can click past. The statement won't go out until the location, the paperwork and the risk check all hold up. Which means that when you do file it, you're not hoping it's right. You know.
Filing: the statement goes to TRACES from the product, per shipment, and the reference number comes back onto the record. The connection is verified per customer at onboarding, never assumed. Every statement also exports in the EU Information System format (JSON), with its evidence pack, connection or not.
Something is missing. The declaration stops.
The change history is kept for five years. The evidence pack travels as one artifact:
The yearly cycle lives here too: the due-diligence system reviewed at least annually, the public report drawn from the same records. Nothing reconstructed, nothing retyped. And passing it downstream happens on your terms: shared by link, plots hidden, chain confidential. A downstream operator gets the reference without your chain laid bare.
The auditor gets the same view you had.
Dates rendered from one verified source with citations.