Why the EU’s landmark AI Act might not go as planned
The European Union’s Artificial Intelligence (AI) Act, designed to regulate AI risks, faces potential revisions due to a shifting political climate and industry lobbying, less than a year after its agreement. This has sparked concerns among safety advocates and uncertainty within industry, according to Politico.
Originally celebrated for setting a global safety standard, the AI Act is now at risk of being altered as the EU prioritizes catching up with the U.S. and China in the AI sector through simplified laws and reduced business requirements. Campaigners warn of potential technological risks, while some in the industry express concern over the uncertainty.
Tomasz Snażyk, CEO of AI Chamber, stated, “If you actually want to impose something, impose it, if you want to stop the clock, let’s stop the clock. People want to be very certain of what is going on.”
Kim van Sparrentak, a Dutch Greens lawmaker, cautioned against hindering technology adoption, noting that only 13 percent of European companies are estimated to properly use AI. She stated that enforcing the AI Act is essential to ensure the safety and functionality of AI systems on the market, encouraging wider adoption.
Conversely, the Big Tech industry, backed by the U.S. government, advocates for delaying implementation to allow sufficient compliance time. Lobby group CCIA argued that a postponement is essential to provide companies enough time to prepare.
The Trump administration voiced concerns about the AI Act in January. In June, the European Commission’s tech sovereignty chief, Henna Virkkunen, suggested pausing the law’s rollout, despite its official enactment in August 2024. While some AI practice prohibitions took effect in February, new regulations for high-risk AI applications are scheduled for 2026 or 2027.
Virkkunen stated on June 6 in Luxembourg that postponing parts of the AI Act should be considered if standards and guidelines are not ready in time. Furthermore, the Commission is reviewing the simplification of its digital rules, with a focus on AI, cybersecurity, and data regulations, to be presented in December. Kilian Gross from the AI Office indicated potential for “targeted” changes to the AI Act.
Blue Duangdjai Tiyavorabun, a policy adviser at EDRi, expressed deep concern over attempts to deregulate key provisions of the AI Act, warning against dismantling legal protections rapidly. Lawmakers plan to question Virkkunen in Strasbourg regarding the possible pause during an AI Act implementation monitoring meeting. Irish lawmaker Michael McNamara, co-chair of the meeting, anticipates the pause will dominate discussions.
The EU AI Act: Regulating the future of artificial intelligence
McNamara urged Virkkunen to provide more details to the Parliament group, asking what she intends to postpone and for how long, while noting the risk of undermining beneficial aspects of the law.
The current indecision potentially undermines the “Brussels effect,” where EU technology rules lead globally. The Commission faces the challenge of fostering homegrown AI companies without compromising its regulatory capabilities. Van Sparrentak emphasized the need for the Commission to signal its commitment to the AI Act.
The absence of Commission guidelines regarding transparency and human oversight has prompted industry groups, initially opposed to the laws, to publicly request a postponement. The U.S. government also advocated for a delay, submitting feedback to the European Commission in April. Van Sparrentak criticized listening to Trump’s call to halt the law and urged the Commission to ensure the safety of AI systems in Europe.
European Commission spokesperson Thomas Regnier affirmed the Commission’s commitment to the AI Act’s goals, while also noting that “all options remain open for consideration” as it seeks to simplify digital rules.