“A bold ‘stop-the-clock’ intervention is urgently needed to give AI developers and deployers legal certainty, as long as necessary standards remain unavailable or delayed.”
Wants delayEUAdopted
Defer EU high-risk obligations to December 2027
Postpone the AI Act's high-risk regime (originally binding from August 2026) until standards and guidance exist, operationalised in the Digital Omnibus as a delay to December 2027.
Where it stands
Enacted via the Digital Omnibus on AI (COM(2025) 836, proposed 19 Nov 2025). The 7 May 2026 provisional Council-Parliament agreement fixed the dates: 2 Dec 2027 for stand-alone (Annex III) high-risk systems and 2 Aug 2028 for high-risk AI embedded in regulated products (Annex I). EP plenary adopted 16 Jun 2026 (423-57-174); Council gave final approval 29 Jun 2026; final act signed 8 Jul 2026, OJ publication due before the original 2 Aug 2026 deadline. Not everything industry sought was granted: the two-year across-the-board 'stop the clock' (incl. pausing GPAI obligations) was rejected in July 2025, and Art. 50 transparency obligations still apply 2 Aug 2026.
first seen 2025-04-10 · last seen 2026-07-08 · locus: deployer
Bill-status would miss this
The vehicles it rode
- 2025-06-26
CCIA Europe urges EU leaders to pause AI Act implementation ahead of the June European Council
EU AI Act - 2025-07-03
EU AI Champions Initiative 'Stop the Clock' open letter: 40+ European CEOs urge a two-year clock-stop on GPAI and high-risk obligations
EU AI Act - 2025-07-04
European Commission rejects pause calls: 'no stop the clock, no grace period, no pause'
EU AI Act - 2025-08-02
GPAI obligations enter into application on schedule; no pause granted
EU AI Act - 2025-10-14
Deferral filed on the record in the omnibus call for evidence
Digital omnibus consultation - 2025-11-19
Commission proposes Digital Omnibus on AI (COM(2025) 836) deferring high-risk application dates
EU Digital Omnibus - 2026-03-13
Council agrees general approach
EU Digital Omnibus - 2026-05-07
Provisional trilogue agreement: fixed high-risk dates of 2 Dec 2027 (Annex III) and 2 Aug 2028 (Annex I); new Art. 5 prohibition on AI-generated NCII/CSAM added
EU Digital Omnibus - 2026-06-16
European Parliament plenary adopts the agreement (423 for, 57 against, 174 abstentions)
EU Digital Omnibus - 2026-06-29
Council gives final green light
EU Digital Omnibus - 2026-07-08
Final act signed; OJ publication due by 30 Jul 2026, entry into force on the third day after publication
EU Digital Omnibus
Cross-corpus detections
Pattern flags
- frame-mismatch2026-07-21
The 19 Nov 2025 statement's frame is legal certainty and 'more realistic timelines'; the ask it advances is a 16-month-plus deferral of binding high-risk obligations plus further loosening (higher systemic-risk compute threshold, narrowed copyright extraterritoriality). Frame tag and ask direction diverge, recorded as a mismatch, not a judgment of either.
4 claims · every quote links to its document
The record
For · 4
“To address the uncertainty this situation is creating, we urge the Commission to propose a two-year “clock-stop” on the AI Act before key obligations enter into force, in order to allow both for reasonable implementation by companies, and for further simplification of the new rules.”
Open letter signed by 40+ European CEOs incl. Airbus, ASML, Mistral AI, Lufthansa, BNP Paribas, Philips, Mercedes-Benz.
“The adjustments to the AI Act provide companies with more realistic timelines. Unfortunately, the Omnibus misses critical opportunities to raise the outdated compute threshold for identifying AI models which pose a ‘systemic risk’, and fails to fix problematic wording on the extraterritoriality of copyright provisions, which conflicts with EU and international principles.”
“DIGITALEUROPE urges co-legislators to formally request a separate proposal postponing the entry into application of the high-risk AI requirements, to be adopted under accelerated procedures. This would provide immediate legal certainty for companies and authorities, avoid a compliance cliff driven by missing standards and guidance, and remove the artificial time pressure currently distorting the legislative debate.”
Against · 0
No on-the-record claims captured on this side. Absence here is a coverage fact, not a finding.