Europe's effort to reduce bureaucracy has satisfied hardly anyone.

      Twenty months into the EU's initiative to reduce red tape, many businesses that advocated for it remain unimpressed. Companies told Politico that the "simplification" efforts are moving too slowly, are too expensive, and are overly complex.

      Politico interviewed 17 firms, consultancies, and trade organizations from various sectors, with a shared concern that an institution designed to create laws struggles to dismantle them. Richard Longden of INEOS remarked that the EU is "hardwired" to generate regulations but is ineffective at eliminating them. Martynas Barysas from BusinessEurope noted that efforts to lessen the burden are “drowning in the inertia” of working-level discussions.

      This dissatisfaction contrasts sharply with late 2024, when Ursula von der Leyen vowed to alleviate burdens, garnering applause from the industry. Since February 2025, the Commission has proposed around a dozen "omnibus" bills related to defense, energy, chemicals, agriculture, and technology, predicting billions in savings.

      The Commission countered by describing its progress as "unprecedented" and highlighting that the reductions require the support of 27 member states and Parliament. It increasingly holds national capitals accountable for the lack of implementation.

      The digital regulations in question are primarily centered around the Digital Omnibus, which revisits the GDPR, the AI Act, and other digital legislation in pursuit of competitiveness, as part of an overarching effort to revise Europe's regulatory framework to compete with the US and China.

      Parliament and the Council approved the AI Omnibus in June, making the AI Act less stringent while introducing a ban on nudification apps. The package postpones obligations for high-risk AI, establishes a new framework for training AI on personal data, and eliminates an AI-literacy requirement.

      This relaxation aligns with the hopes of much of the tech industry, which argued that the AI Act and GDPR stifled European startups compared to more lenient competitors.

      However, the softening has left almost no one satisfied. Privacy and civil rights organizations criticize the Digital Omnibus as a retreat from hard-won protections, disguised as simplification, which undermines rights to foster the AI industry.

      On the other hand, businesses express frustration that the proposed reductions are being diluted during negotiations, with reporting requirements being reinstated instead of eliminated. Observers noted that even the changes to the AI Act were merely procedural adjustments rather than substantial reforms, resulting in tensions on all fronts, as demonstrated by earlier discussions that collapsed after just 12 hours.

      Some companies are now requesting a pause, seeking a "predictability wave" of five to ten years of stability rather than ongoing upheaval. Others argue that red tape was never the main issue, pointing to energy expenses and carbon pricing as greater concerns.

      Underlying these complaints is a genuine dilemma facing the Commission, as it tries to reconcile industry demands for fewer regulations with warnings that dismantling them could jeopardize privacy, health, and the environment. This tension is unlikely to dissipate, and some contend that Europe's competitive advantage lies in establishing the right regulations rather than merely cutting them. The debate over whether reliable regulation is a benefit or a burden underpins the entire undertaking.

      Currently, Europe has ignited its bonfire, leaving few of those who gathered around it satisfied. The emerging lesson from Brussels is that unwinding laws may be just as challenging and contentious as enacting them.