The European Parliament’s Internal Market and Civil Liberties committees adopted a joint position on a significant amendment to the Artificial Intelligence Act (AIA) on Wednesday, securing 101 votes in favor, 9 against, and 8 abstentions. This omnibus proposal aims to simplify compliance with the AIA, particularly concerning high-risk AI systems, in light of concerns that essential standards may not be ready by the original deadline of August 2, 2026.
The amendments introduced by Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) include new timelines for the application of rules governing high-risk AI systems, which encompass those that utilize biometric data and are applied in critical areas such as education, law enforcement, and border management. The MEPs propose a deadline of December 2, 2027, for these systems, while extending the deadline for AI systems that serve as safety components under EU sectoral legislation to August 2, 2028.
Additionally, the MEPs supported a more gradual timeline for compliance with watermarking rules for AI-generated content. They suggest a new deadline of November 2, 2026, a shift from the February 2, 2027, deadline initially proposed by the European Commission.
New restrictions on nudifier apps have also been proposed, aiming to ban AI systems that create or alter sexually explicit images of identifiable individuals without their consent. The suggested ban would, however, exempt systems that implement effective safety measures against the creation of such content.
In a bid to enhance flexibility and support for small to mid-cap enterprises (SMEs), the MEPs are advocating for measures that would allow service providers to process personal data to identify and rectify biases in AI systems. Safeguards have been included to ensure such actions are limited to absolute necessity. The proposal also extends support measures to small mid-cap enterprises, easing transitions for companies scaling beyond SME status.
To avoid redundancy with existing EU product safety regulations, the MEPs recommend that the obligations of the AI Act should be less stringent for products already under sector-specific laws, such as medical devices and toys. They urged the European Commission to update these regulations to close any potential gaps.
Arba Kokalari, co-rapporteur for the Internal Market and Consumer Protection committee, emphasized the need for clear and simplified regulations, stating, “We want predictable, stop-the-clock, simplified rules that remove overlaps with sectoral legislation and reduce fragmentation between Member States.” He remarked that clarity regarding whether a system qualifies as high risk is essential for fostering investment and innovation in AI technologies.
Michael McNamara, co-rapporteur for the Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs committee, expressed satisfaction with the compromise achieved, particularly regarding the nudifier apps ban, which he believes aligns with public expectations. He stated, “I’m glad that it was possible to achieve a compromise acceptable to the majority of the Parliament and at least the centrist parties.”
The next step involves parliamentary approval of the mandate in a plenary vote scheduled for March 26, after which negotiations with the Council will commence.
See also
OpenAI’s Rogue AI Safeguards: Decoding the 2025 Safety Revolution
US AI Developments in 2025 Set Stage for 2026 Compliance Challenges and Strategies
Trump Drafts Executive Order to Block State AI Regulations, Centralizing Authority Under Federal Control
California Court Rules AI Misuse Heightens Lawyer’s Responsibilities in Noland Case
Policymakers Urged to Establish Comprehensive Regulations for AI in Mental Health
