Digital Omnibus: Legal Deadline Precedes Compromise

GAIGI Team

— 4 min de lecture
Partager

The second political trilogue on the Digital Omnibus regarding AI concluded on April 28, 2026, after approximately twelve hours of negotiations, without reaching an agreement. The disagreement did not concern the postponement of obligations applicable to high-risk systems, but rather the conformity assessment framework for systems integrated into products governed by sector-specific legislation. Until the amending text is adopted, the August 2, 2026, deadline remains in effect under the current regulation for the obligations in question. See also: the dates proposed by IMCO and LIBE.

Updated September 10, 2026. Regulation (EU) 2026/1744 amending the AI Act was published in the Official Journal on July 24, 2026, and entered into force on July 27. The new deadlines for high-risk systems are now set for December 2, 2027 (Annex III) and August 2, 2028 (Annex I). Full details in our reference article.

The Essentials in 30 Seconds

  • The Digital Omnibus proposal is COM(2025)0836, published on November 19, 2025.
  • On April 28, 2026, the second trilogue concluded without an agreement after approximately 12 hours.
  • The institutions had agreed in principle on a postponement and on deadlines: December 2, 2027 for Annex III and August 2, 2028 for Annex I.
  • The impasse concerns the conformity assessment of products listed in Annex I, particularly the role of the sectoral regime.
  • Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 generally applies as of August 2, 2026; a pending proposal does not yet amend the applicable law.

What Happened

The case is legally identifiable: the European Parliament’s Legislative Observatory lists it under procedure 2025/0359(COD), with a Commission proposal published on November 19, 2025, COM(2025)0836. Following the Parliament’s position at first reading on March 26, 2026, the dossier was referred back to the relevant committee for interinstitutional negotiations.

The session on April 28 was intended to transform political convergence into a full compromise. It did not succeed in doing so. According to the minutes of the negotiations, the failure was not due to the very principle of deferring the obligations of high-risk systems. The three institutions had already agreed on fixed, final deadlines: December 2, 2027 for systems covered by Annex III and August 2, 2028 for those covered by Annex I. They had also moved away from the conditional mechanism initially proposed by the Commission, which tied implementation to a decision on the availability of harmonized standards, common specifications, and guidelines.

However, in a trilogue, reaching a consensus does not mean adoption. The rule of thumb is that no single point is definitively settled until the entire package is. This is where the timing risk lies: the politically envisaged postponement does not yet exist in current law.

The crux of Annex I

The disagreement concerns AI systems integrated into products covered by EU harmonization legislation, as listed in Annex I of the AI Act. The issue is less semantic than procedural: should we retain a framework where sector-specific assessments and the requirements of the AI Act overlap, or should certain products be brought under primarily sector-specific regulation?

The Parliament’s position, supported by Germany, aimed to shift some or all of these products toward a more sector-specific regulatory framework in order to avoid double regulation. The Council refused to reopen this structural balance and stated that it was willing to consider only technical adjustments. Behind the scenes lie two concrete questions for manufacturers: will they have to organize one or two conformity assessment pathways, and will notified bodies already authorized under sector-specific legislation be able to assess elements related to the AI Act?

These questions are distinct from the Annex III regime. Article 6 of the regulation classifies as high-risk, on the one hand, safety systems or components covered by Annex I when a third-party conformity assessment is required; and, on the other hand, the systems listed in Annex III. Confusing the two approaches leads to planning for the wrong timeframe and with the wrong assessment body.

The Risk of the Deadline

Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 generally applies as of August 2, 2026. Article 113 provides for an exception: Article 6, paragraph 1, and the corresponding obligations apply as of August 2, 2027. Systems covered by Annex III therefore remain subject to the general deadline of August 2, 2026, subject to the transitional rules specific to the regulation.

The legal issue is clear. A Commission proposal, a position from the Parliament, or an agreement reached in trilogue do not alter the date set by a regulation that has already been published. A text adopted through the legislative process and subsequently published is required to change the deadline. Otherwise, a company that were to suspend its preparations on the grounds that a postponement seems politically likely would be making a decision based on an assumption, not on a rule in force.

Caution is all the more necessary given that the non-blocking elements cannot be isolated. Agreement on the deadlines was tied to an overall deal; it cannot be taken for granted as long as the dispute over Annex I remains unresolved. The postponement is a negotiating objective, not yet a legally enforceable provision.

What to Do Now

  • Keep August 2, 2026 — plan Annex III systems based on currently applicable law.
  • Separate the portfolios — distinguish between Annex III and security products or components covered by Article 6(1).
  • Prepare two scenarios — anticipate the effects of an adopted postponement without interrupting the ongoing compliance program.
  • Document dependencies — identify which requirements depend on clarification from the sectoral assessment and which do not.
  • Avoid definitive announcements — do not communicate either a confirmed postponement or a new date until an amending act has been adopted and published.

Sources

  • European Parliament, Legislative Train Schedule, procedure 2025/0359(COD), proposal COM(2025) 836, and parliamentary stages: europarl.europa.eu
  • EUR-Lex, Articles 6 and 113 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, notably the effective dates: eur-lex.europa.eu
  • Bird & Bird, report on the second trilogue of April 28, 2026, points of agreement and deadlock regarding Annex I: twobirds.com

Lire la suite