13 EU countries call for ‘deep cleaning’ of European laws

Thirteen EU governments seek a sweeping review of the bloc’s rulebook

Usagevpn.com – A group of 13 European Union member states is pressing Brussels to examine existing legislation sector by sector, arguing that the EU must reduce unnecessary bureaucracy while making future rules more supportive of investment, innovation and growth.

The initiative, led by Austria and backed by Czechia, Denmark, Germany, Estonia, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia and Slovakia, calls for what it describes as a legislative “deep-cleaning” across the Union’s regulatory framework.

The governments want policymakers to decide whether individual rules remain necessary, require modernisation or create administrative costs without delivering enough public benefit. Their proposal comes as the EU prepares to launch a new Alliance for the Reduction of the Bureaucratic Burden, expected on Monday. The alliance is intended to create a lasting network of countries working on simplification both domestically and at EU level.

Less regulatory accumulation

The joint paper argues that European lawmaking should not generate obligations merely for their own sake. Instead, it urges institutions to show restraint when considering fresh reporting, compliance and administrative requirements.

“EU legislation cannot be an end in itself. Therefore, regulatory restraint to avoid over-regulation and the introduction of new administrative burdens is a condition for sound EU law-making.”

The proposal reflects a wider debate that has become prominent during Ursula von der Leyen’s second term as President of the European Commission. Simplification has been promoted by member states as well as the centre-right European People’s Party, with a particular focus on the practical effect of overlapping rules on businesses and national authorities.

In response to those concerns, the Commission has advanced several omnibus packages intended to consolidate and simplify parts of the existing regulatory landscape. These measures have covered areas ranging from artificial intelligence requirements to climate-related duties. The 13 countries, however, want the EU to establish a more systematic method for preventing regulatory complexity before it builds up.

Competitiveness tests for new legislation

Under the proposed approach, major new EU initiatives would undergo a regular assessment of their effect on economic competitiveness. The signatories also stress that action should be taken at Union level only when national governments cannot adequately achieve the intended objective themselves.

That position draws on the EU treaty principles of subsidiarity and proportionality. In practical terms, subsidiarity asks whether a problem genuinely requires collective EU action, while proportionality requires that legislation does not go further than needed to meet its goal.

The countries want those principles to shape rulemaking from the beginning, rather than being considered only after complex obligations have already been introduced. They argue that laws should be workable for those required to apply them, clear enough to provide legal certainty and consistent with related measures elsewhere in the EU framework.

They also propose a “European Implementation and Consolidation Year.” The exercise would concentrate chiefly on putting current laws into effect, improving interoperability, reviewing the combined burden created by multiple obligations and reducing repeated reporting requirements. It could also identify limited legislative changes considered indispensable for improving how the system works.

Five-year review clauses

One of the most concrete requests is for every new regulation to include a compulsory review clause after no more than five years. Such a review would test whether the measure has delivered its intended results and whether its requirements remain justified.

The group also wants policymakers to examine existing requirements before introducing substantial new reporting or compliance duties in the same policy area. The aim would be to merge rules, simplify them or remove outdated provisions where possible.

“Every major new reporting or compliance obligation should be preceded by a review of existing obligations in the same policy field with a view to consolidation, simplification or repeal.”

For companies operating across several EU countries, the issue is not simply the number of individual laws. The cumulative effect of different reporting formats, enforcement practices and administrative procedures can increase costs and make expansion more difficult. A more coordinated approach to implementation could therefore matter as much as the wording of new legislation.

The proposal does not call for weaker protections in areas such as health, safety or labour. Instead, the signatories say the EU should favour legislation that is high quality, enforceable and predictable over what they call “regulatory density.” Their stated objective is to retain existing standards while ensuring that the mechanisms used to uphold them are proportionate and effective.

Balancing safeguards with a business-friendly market

The member states argue that EU rules should add demonstrable value and should be adopted only when Union-level action is necessary. In their view, a stronger regulatory system would be coherent, grounded in evidence, resilient over time and mindful of the division of powers between Brussels and national capitals.

They also want new measures judged against a wider set of criteria: whether they can realistically be implemented, whether they fit with other laws, whether they are legally predictable and whether they strengthen European competitiveness.

At the heart of the paper is a concern that complexity can undermine the EU’s own goals. When obligations multiply without sufficient coordination, they may weaken enforcement, frustrate businesses and reduce the attractiveness of the Single Market for investment.

“It is of the utmost importance to avoid cumulative complexity that risks weakening the effectiveness and as a result the legitimacy of EU action while also reducing the attractiveness of the EU Single Market as a place to do business and invest.”

The push from the 13 governments places regulatory design firmly alongside competitiveness as a central EU policy question. Whether the proposed alliance and the broader simplification agenda produce lasting changes will depend on how EU institutions translate those principles into future laws and reviews of the rules already on the books.