EU AI Act Faces Uncertain Future Amidst Political Pressures

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 evolving situation has sparked concerns among safety advocates and uncertainty within the industry.

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 surrounding the Act.

Industry Perspectives

Tomasz Snażyk, CEO of AI Chamber, expressed the need for clarity in the implementation of the Act, stating, “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 emphasized that enforcing the AI Act is essential to ensure the safety and functionality of AI systems on the market, encouraging wider adoption across sectors.

Calls for Delays and Compliance

Conversely, the Big Tech industry, backed by the U.S. government, advocates for a delay in the implementation of the AI Act to allow sufficient compliance time. The lobby group CCIA argued that a postponement is essential to provide companies enough time to prepare for the new regulations.

Concerns about the AI Act were raised by the Trump administration 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 prohibitions on AI practices took effect in February, new regulations for high-risk AI applications are scheduled for 2026 or 2027.

Potential Changes and Industry Reactions

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, focusing 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 too rapidly. Lawmakers plan to question Virkkunen in Strasbourg regarding the possible pause during an AI Act implementation monitoring meeting.

Challenges Ahead

The current indecision around the AI Act 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 has also advocated for a delay, submitting feedback to the European Commission in April.

European Commission spokesperson Thomas Regnier affirmed the Commission’s commitment to the goals of the AI Act, while also noting that “all options remain open for consideration” as it seeks to simplify digital rules.

More Insights

AI Regulations: Comparing the EU’s AI Act with Australia’s Approach

Global companies need to navigate the differing AI regulations in the European Union and Australia, with the EU's AI Act setting stringent requirements based on risk levels, while Australia adopts a...

Quebec’s New AI Guidelines for Higher Education

Quebec has released its AI policy for universities and Cégeps, outlining guidelines for the responsible use of generative AI in higher education. The policy aims to address ethical considerations and...

AI Literacy: The Compliance Imperative for Businesses

As AI adoption accelerates, regulatory expectations are rising, particularly with the EU's AI Act, which mandates that all staff must be AI literate. This article emphasizes the importance of...

Germany’s Approach to Implementing the AI Act

Germany is moving forward with the implementation of the EU AI Act, designating the Federal Network Agency (BNetzA) as the central authority for monitoring compliance and promoting innovation. The...

Global Call for AI Safety Standards by 2026

World leaders and AI pioneers are calling on the United Nations to implement binding global safeguards for artificial intelligence by 2026. This initiative aims to address the growing concerns...

Governance in the Era of AI and Zero Trust

In 2025, AI has transitioned from mere buzz to practical application across various industries, highlighting the urgent need for a robust governance framework aligned with the zero trust economy...

AI Governance Shift: From Regulation to Technical Secretariat

The upcoming governance framework on artificial intelligence in India may introduce a "technical secretariat" to coordinate AI policies across government departments, moving away from the previous...

AI Safety as a Catalyst for Innovation in Global Majority Nations

The commentary discusses the tension between regulating AI for safety and promoting innovation, emphasizing that investments in AI safety and security can foster sustainable development in Global...

ASEAN’s AI Governance: Charting a Distinct Path

ASEAN's approach to AI governance is characterized by a consensus-driven, voluntary, and principles-based framework that allows member states to navigate their unique challenges and capacities...