EU negotiators have struck a deal on the AI Omnibus, exempting industrial machinery from the strictest obligations of the AI Act. The agreement hands industry a long-sought victory, but worker groups and digital rights organisations warn it comes at a cost. The ban on nudifier apps, widely celebrated as a win for women’s safety, may have provided the political cover for a significant regulatory rollback.
The agreement, reached after a failed attempt in April, ends months of contested negotiations over the AI Omnibus. The deal attracted the most attention for its ban on nudifier apps. Its broader outcome gives industry more time and reduces regulatory overlaps for industrial AI systems.
The late-night compromise introduced several changes. High-risk AI obligations face a one-year delay. Sector-specific measures, including exemptions for machinery such as medical devices and toys, now push compliance deadlines to 2028. Requirements to watermark AI-generated audiovisual content will also apply from December, later than the Commission had originally proposed.
Industry’s machinery exemption
The result of the trialogues reflects the negotiations’ biggest fight, one industry ultimately won. After sustained pressure, AI systems already covered by EU product safety laws, such as machinery, medical devices, and toys, will not fall under the strictest AI Act obligations. At the same time, the agreement calls on the European Commission to adopt delegated acts under the Machinery Regulation to add health and safety requirements for high-risk AI systems.
Cecilia Bonefeld-Dahl, Director-General of DIGITALEUROPE, one of the voices calling out the ‘double regulation’, described the outcome as a clear win for European industry. “European Parliament champions simplification”, she said. “This is what happens when legislators listen to industry: European manufacturers just got a regulation that allows them to innovate with AI.”
You might be interested
The reaction from other industry groups was also broadly positive, but far from triumphant. Guido Lobrano, Director General for Europe at the Information Technology Industry Council, welcomed the postponement of high-risk obligations. He also praised efforts to reduce duplicative rules for industrial AI. However, he warned the Omnibus still leaves major problems unresolved, “from tight deadlines for watermarking and labelling requirements to continued regulatory overlaps across horizontal and vertical frameworks, beyond industrial AI”.
CCIA Europe was more critical and described the postponement of high-risk obligations as the “bare minimum”, given that technical standards necessary for compliance are still missing. It also criticised negotiators for rejecting some of the Commission’s original simplification proposals, including removing the obligation to register certain systems in the EU database.
Throughout the negotiations, several political groups and civil society organisations pointed to Germany as the driving force behind demands to exempt industrial AI systems from the strictest AI Act obligations. The Greens blamed the German pressure for the first failed talks. “What should have been the final negotiations last week, were postponed due to an attempt from Friedrich Merz to exempt German industry.”
Trade unions fear weaker protections
For worker representatives, the deal is the result of industrial lobbying. “The regrettable message behind this deal is clear: when industrial lobbying intensifies, workers’ rights and occupational safety protections become negotiable,” says industriAll Europe. The organisation argues that moving machinery from the AI Act weakens protections for workers operating in increasingly automated environments. Its General Secretary, Isabelle Barthès, warned that “weakening AI safeguards at this moment sends the wrong political signal and undermines confidence in Europe’s commitment to safe and human-centred technological transition.”
The regrettable message behind this deal is clear: when industrial lobbying intensifies, workers’ rights and occupational safety protections become negotiable.
— Isabelle Barthès, General Secretary, industriAll Europe
Digital rights groups also reacted negatively to the agreement. EDRi is concerned that the EU is diluting the regulation even before it has had the chance to apply. Prior to the high-risk provisions becoming fully applicable in August, lawmakers had already delayed and softened parts of the framework.
The centre-right claims the political win
For EPP and parts of Renew, the Omnibus fits the wider competitiveness agenda that has dominated Brussels since Draghi’s report. Arba Kokalari (EPP/SWE) negotiated the file for the IMCO committee. She framed the deal as proof that Europe can simplify rules without slowing innovation. “With this agreement, we show that politics can move just as quickly as technology. We now make the AI rules more workable in practice, remove overlaps and pause the high-risk requirements.”
Axel Voss (EPP/DEU) made a similar argument. “Existing legal uncertainties have now been resolved, and by introducing a regulatory pause we are giving companies more time to adapt to the new rules,” he added. “Beyond that, we must continue to keep bureaucracy and costs for businesses as low as possible by generally avoiding any additional requirements for AI in sector-specific legislation, as this would otherwise create duplicative structures.”
Renew framed more of the political messaging on the nudifier ban. Michael McNamara (Renew/IRL), Parliament rapporteur in the LIBE committee, said: “I am relieved that we reached an agreement early this morning that simplifies some key aspects of AI regulation in Europe while maintaining protections. We also reached agreement that AI that generates non-consensual sexual imagery or child sex abuse material would be banned.”
On simplification, Svenja Hahn (Renew/DEU) stated that “by limiting unnecessary ‘double regulation’ of industrial AI and taking machinery products out of the AI Act, we are cutting red tape, strengthening legal certainty, and giving many companies the freedom to innovate and stay competitive.”
The centre-left claims a defensive victory
For the Greens, the agreement brings mixed feelings. The nudifier ban is a political win. There had been fears that the collapse of April’s talks could delay it altogether. But the broader direction of the Omnibus remains contested.
Before the agreement, Kim van Sparrentak (Greens/NLD) raised concerns. She warned that exempting devices covered by sectoral legislation would create ‘complexification’ rather than simplification. Nevertheless, the group presented the outcome as a defensive success, arguing they prevented wider deregulation while securing the nudifier ban.
By the end of this year, everyone, but especially women and girls will be safe from horrific nudifier apps.
— Kim van Sparrentak (Greens/NLD)
“By the end of this year, everyone, but especially women and girls will be safe from horrific nudifier apps,” she said. “Industry exemptions will not prevail over our safety.” “The Commission wanted simplification so badly, now we’ve given them more resources and they have to work for it. Everyone now has clarity on when and how the AI Act applies, standards need to be ready in time.”
The European Parliament plans to vote on the file in plenary in June. If approved, as expected, the rules for high-risk systems will not come into effect in August.
