Former Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi has called for a pause in the implementation of the European Union’s AI regulations, emphasizing the need to evaluate potential drawbacks before advancing further. This statement was made during a recent conference focused on the European Commission’s progress in applying recommendations from Draghi’s pivotal 2024 report. The AI Act, which was enacted in August last year, is designed to regulate artificial intelligence systems based on the risk they pose to society. Draghi highlighted that while the initial ban on “unacceptable-risk” AI systems was implemented smoothly, the impending regulations concerning high-risk systems—particularly in crucial areas such as healthcare and critical infrastructure—require a more cautious approach.
Industry leaders have echoed Draghi’s concerns, with CEOs from over 40 European firms, including ASML and Siemens, previously advocating for a two-year delay on the full implementation of the AI Act. They argue that additional time would facilitate reasonable compliance efforts and permit the refinement of the new rules. Their request underscores the prevailing uncertainty and apprehension surrounding the comprehensive enforcement of these regulations, which are seen as potentially stifling innovation and development in the tech sector.
Compounding the complexity of the situation, recent provisions regarding General Purpose AI (GPAI) like ChatGPT and Gemini have sparked confusion. Companies, including Google, have expressed the need for a grace period to adhere to the voluntary code of practice laid out for GPAI. Moreover, ambiguity remains regarding which authorities in EU member states will be designated to ensure compliance with these rules, as the European Commission has yet to announce a list of enforcement agencies tasked with this responsibility.
In a related development, the EU’s tech chief, Henna Virkkunen, announced plans to unveil a digital omnibus package in December. This initiative will encompass a review of existing tech legislation, potentially alleviating burdens on companies by reducing reporting obligations and increasing overall efficiency. The digital omnibus will also address the implications of the AI Act and could simplify aspects of the regulations, although this has raised concerns among various advocacy groups.
Over 50 organizations, including prominent civil society entities, have cautioned against any attempts to delay or revise the AI Act. They argue that such moves might weaken essential accountability mechanisms. Their position asserts that the EU’s regulatory framework is grounded in fundamental values and principles, and simplifying regulations should enhance, rather than compromise, existing legal protections. These concerns reflect a broader tension in balancing innovation with responsibility in the ever-evolving landscape of AI technology.
Adding another layer to this regulatory landscape, recent pressure has emerged from the U.S. government. Former President Donald Trump threatened substantial tariffs against countries enforcing legislation that negatively impacts American tech companies unless those actions are retracted. In response, the European Commission maintained that it is within the sovereign right of the EU and its member states to regulate economic activities in ways that align with democratic values. This ongoing international confrontation further complicates the future of the EU’s AI regulations and their impact on global tech markets.
