Europe eases rules for businesses

The European Parliament took a clear step today toward reducing red tape for businesses. With the support of the N-VA, a majority agreed to significantly revise the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), easing the burden of reporting requirements.

“The European Union is facing a major Competitiveness The extent to which companies in one country can compete with similar companies in another country. A law came into force in Belgium in 1996 to monitor competitiveness. This stipulates that Belgian salaries may not evolve faster than the average of those in the three neighbouring countries. The Central Economic Council (CEC) performs an annual measurement to see if the objectives have been obtained. competitiveness crisis, stagnant growth, and declining productivity. Our industry is gasping for air,” said Johan Van Overtveldt, head of the N-VA delegation in the European Parliament. “Europe’s regulatory pressure must come down. Today’s vote marks an important step in the right direction—away from the excesses of the Green Deal.”

Due diligence directive rolled back

The directive, adopted in April 2024, placed heavy obligations on companies. They were required to screen their entire value chain for violations of environmental and human rights standards and to draw up transition plans aligned with climate goals. These measures came with significant administrative burdens, compliance costs, fines, and liabilities.

With the Omnibus I package, the European Parliament is now rolling back the directive on three key fronts: the scope of application is narrowed, mandatory climate transition plans are scrapped, and there will be no EU-wide liability regime. This brings the EU closer to a workable approach that doesn’t stifle business.

A balance between responsibility and a healthy economy

Kris Van Dijck, Member of the European Parliament and part of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE), emphasized that sustainability is not up for debate: “But resources must go to investment—not to ticking boxes, bureaucracy, and rising costs.” He sees this revision as a necessary course correction and a first step toward restoring competitiveness, which he considers essential to future prosperity.