1) The document provides industry's view on EFSA's contributions to pesticide regulation, including their processes for active substance peer reviews, establishing maximum residue levels (MRLs), and scientific guidance. 2) While timelines are generally respected, industry finds some EFSA comments on active substance evaluations arrive too late and there are limitations on submitting new information. 3) Guidelines for MRL reasoned opinions are followed predictably but outcomes are sometimes viewed as conservative. 4) The annual MRL report is considered very useful but guidance documents are seen as sometimes disconnected from use contexts and imposing unnecessarily complex or conservative standards.