EU Proposed a Live-Export Regulation Overhaul (2023) — Final Rules Tighten Welfare Standards but Stop Short of a Ban

Jurisdiction: European Union Law or Treaty: Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2005 on the protection of animals during transport (and its replacement, proposed in 2023) Last verified: 2026-05-23

Summary

On 7 December 2023, the European Commission published a comprehensive proposal to replace Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2005 on the protection of animals during transport. The 2005 regulation had been the subject of decades of welfare-NGO criticism and an extensive series of independent reports — from the European Court of Auditors, the European Food Safety Authority, and EU member states' own veterinary services — finding it inconsistently enforced and inadequate to the welfare concerns documented at sea-port and overland-export points.

The 2023 proposal tightens journey-time limits, restricts the export of certain categories of animals (notably very young calves), introduces mandatory live-positioning telemetry on long-distance shipments, and toughens enforcement provisions [European Commission 2023]. It does not, however, prohibit the export of live animals to non-EU countries, despite long-standing campaigns by Compassion in World Farming, Eurogroup for Animals, and EU member-state governments (notably Germany and the Netherlands) calling for such a ban.

This brief is a case study in regulatory tightening as a partial substitute for outright prohibition, and what that delivers vs. what it does not.

What the 2005 regulation provided

Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2005 required that animals transported across EU member-state borders or to non-EU destinations be subject to:

Maximum journey times by species (e.g., 8 hours for unweaned calves on standard vehicles; longer with specific certification)
Mandatory rest periods at approved control posts
Vehicle and vessel design standards (ventilation, water access, space allocation)
Certified driver training and operator authorisation
Sealed-in journey logs subject to retrospective inspection

The regulation was binding on every EU member state and applied to exports leaving the EU customs territory.

What went wrong with enforcement

Multiple official EU bodies documented systematic enforcement failure:

The European Court of Auditors in special report 31/2018 found that the Commission's monitoring of member-state enforcement was inconsistent and that the regulation had not produced the expected welfare improvements [ECA 2018].
The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) in its 2022 scientific opinion on the welfare of animals during transport found that the maximum journey times in the 2005 regulation did not adequately reflect contemporary welfare science and recommended substantial reductions [EFSA 2022].
The European Parliament's Committee of Inquiry on the Protection of Animals during Transport (ANIT Committee), reporting in January 2022, found "shortcomings in implementation, monitoring and enforcement" across multiple member states and recommended a comprehensive legislative overhaul [European Parliament ANIT Committee 2022].
Investigations by Animals' Angels, Compassion in World Farming, Eyes on Animals, and Animal Welfare Foundation documented specific cases of regulation breaches at the Bulgaria–Turkey land border, the Spain–Algeria sea route, the Ireland–North Africa sea route, and the Romania–Middle East sea route over the 2010s and early 2020s.

The cumulative weight of these findings drove the Commission's December 2023 proposal.

What the 2023 proposal would change

Per the published draft regulation [European Commission 2023]:

Reduced maximum journey times for most species, with stricter limits for unweaned animals and for transport in extreme temperatures
Prohibition on transport in extreme temperatures (below 5°C or above 30°C, with limited exceptions)
Mandatory live-positioning telemetry on long-distance journeys, enabling real-time monitoring rather than after-the-fact log review
Stronger driver training and operator authorisation requirements
Enhanced inspection coverage at exit points (sea ports, land borders)
Specific provisions for vessel design in long-haul sea transport
Higher penalties for non-compliance, with mandatory minimum penalties harmonised across member states

The proposal does not include a prohibition on live exports to non-EU countries, despite the substantial NGO and partial member-state campaign for such a ban. The Commission characterised the proposal as a substantial tightening within the existing framework rather than a structural change to the framework itself.

Where the proposal stands

The 2023 proposal entered the EU Ordinary Legislative Procedure: Commission proposal → Parliament position → Council position → trilogue negotiation → final adoption. As of mid-2026, the proposal is in advanced stages of trilogue negotiation between the Parliament (which has generally favoured stricter rules and has voted in support of a partial export ban for certain species/destinations) and the Council (where member-state positions are more divided, with several major agricultural-exporter member states resistant to the strictest provisions).

Final adoption is expected in late 2026 or 2027; the timeline depends on the trilogue and on the political composition of the post-2024-elections European Parliament.

Who is accountable

This brief names no individual defendants. The accountability actors are:

The European Commission (Directorate-General for Health and Food Safety, SANTE) — drafted the 2023 proposal, responsible for enforcement coordination.
European Parliament — particularly the AGRI (Agriculture) and ENVI (Environment) Committees and the ANIT successor follow-up structure.
EU member-state governments — primary enforcement authorities. Particularly: Germany and the Netherlands (campaigning for tighter rules), France, Spain, Ireland, Romania, Bulgaria (positions vary).
The European Court of Auditors and EFSA — independent technical bodies whose reports informed the proposal.

What worked

The compound effect of multiple independent reports (ECA, EFSA, ANIT) created a documentation base that made the status quo untenable to defend. No single report would have been sufficient; the combination was.
Real-time telemetry as an enforcement lever. Mandatory live positioning on long-distance journeys is a structural change to the enforcement mechanism — moving from retrospective log review to in-transit monitoring — that should materially improve compliance once deployed.
The ban on transport in extreme temperatures, if adopted as drafted, addresses one of the most-documented welfare failure modes (heat stress on summer Spain–North Africa shipments).

What failed

No prohibition on live exports outside the EU. Welfare conditions at non-EU destination ports (slaughterhouses in Egypt, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Libya, Algeria, etc.) are outside EU regulatory reach. Multiple NGO investigations have documented severe welfare violations at non-EU destinations of EU-exported animals, but the EU regulation has no extraterritorial application. A prohibition on export to countries that do not meet EU welfare-equivalent standards would have addressed this; the 2023 proposal does not.
Implementation timeline. Even with adoption in 2026–2027, the regulation typically allows multi-year transition periods. Effective enforcement of the new standards may not begin until 2028–2030.
Enforcement capacity within member states has been historically inadequate. New legal standards do not automatically produce enforcement capacity; the Commission's coordination role and member-state veterinary-service budgets remain limiting factors.

What readers can do

Engage on the EU trilogue process while it is open. Public consultations and Parliament committee processes during 2026 are the principal civic-action window for influencing the final regulation. Compassion in World Farming and Eurogroup for Animals run member-state-specific advocacy programs.
Support Compassion in World Farming (CIWF), Eurogroup for Animals, Animals' Angels, and Eyes on Animals. These organisations conduct the on-the-ground investigations at EU border crossings and ports that have driven the documentation base for the 2023 proposal.
For EU citizens: contact your MEPs (European Parliament members) ahead of relevant plenary votes on the live-transport regulation. Parliament-side support has been the principal lever for strengthening the Commission proposal during trilogue.
For consumers: reduce demand for live-exported meat by choosing locally-slaughtered alternatives. Several major EU retailers (Aldi, Lidl in some markets) have adopted no-live-export commitments for certain product categories; consumer pressure has materially influenced these commitments.
Track outcomes through the Commission's TRACES system when it publishes journey-completion data. Public-facing summaries are produced by NGO partners.

References

European Commission (2023). Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of animals during transport, COM(2023) 770 final, 7 December 2023. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/
European Court of Auditors (2018). Special Report 31/2018: Animal welfare in the EU — closing the gap between ambitious goals and practical implementation. Luxembourg.
European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) (2022). Scientific Opinion on the welfare of cattle / pigs / poultry / equids / sheep, goats and small ruminants / fish during transport. EFSA Journal 20(9). https://www.efsa.europa.eu/
European Parliament (2022). Report of the Committee of Inquiry on the Protection of Animals during Transport (ANIT). A9-0001/2022. Adopted January 2022.
Eurogroup for Animals (2024). Live transport regulation reform — campaign briefing. https://www.eurogroupforanimals.org/
Compassion in World Farming (2024). Live exports campaign — EU regulatory tracker. https://www.ciwf.eu/