Austrian Initiative Wants a Europe-Wide Alliance to Reduce Bureaucracy in Brussels

Valdis Dombrovskis, the EU Commissioner for Economy and Productivity, as well as Implementation and Simplification, opened the conference. The initiative is a direct response to the call by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, who, in her most recent State of the Union address, urged member states to take more decisive action at the national level against unnecessary bureaucracy and so-called “gold-plating” (the practice of tightening EU requirements at the national level).

“Europe can only become simpler if Brussels and the capitals work toward the same goal. It’s of little use if a regulation is simplified at the European level and we then add three more layers of red tape during national implementation,” emphasized State Secretary Schellhorn.

Origins and Goals of the Alliance

The network's foundation was laid in the spring of 2026 during a meeting in Vienna between Schellhorn and the Italian Minister for Institutional Reforms and Regulatory Simplification, Maria Elisabetta Alberti Casellati. Both government officials noted that, despite similar reform mandates, there was no direct exchange between them. Following intensive consultations with several partner countries over the summer, the initiative was finally anchored with the European Commission.

Participating nations at the kick-off meeting included Italy, Belgium, Romania, Portugal, Sweden, Slovenia, the Netherlands, Denmark, the Czech Republic, and Croatia, among others. During the conference, the member states signed a joint declaration aimed at making directives more practical, reducing reporting requirements, and modernizing administrations. “Good ideas emerge all over Europe. Reducing bureaucracy is not a national solo effort. We don’t have to reinvent the wheel 27 times. If something works in Portugal, Italy, Sweden, or Austria, the others should also know about it and be able to learn from it,” said Schellhorn. The alliance is intended to serve as a permanent, informal network in the future. To continue the process, Schellhorn has already invited the member states to a follow-up meeting in Salzburg next year.

Specific EU Reducing-Bureaucracy Targets and Economic Pressure

As part of its simplification initiative, the European Commission aims to reduce the overall bureaucratic burden on businesses by 25 percent and reporting requirements for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) by up to 35 percent.

According to an estimate by the Austrian Federal Economic Chamber (WKÖ), bureaucracy in the commercial sector incurs annual costs of approximately 21.1 billion euros and ties up about 320 million working hours. While business associations welcome the initiative, opposition parties such as the FPÖ have criticized the government’s EU policy. The Greens emphasized that a distinction must be made between unnecessary bureaucracy and essential safety standards.

A straw man argument?

The topic of “debureaucratization” is one of the most controversial and, at the same time, most complex areas of current economic policy. To assess the situation objectively, it is worth examining three key questions. Depending on whom you ask, the term “debureaucratization” serves a completely different purpose. The accusation (straw man/rhetoric) typically comes from labor unions (such as the Chamber of Labor), while environmental organizations often argue that “debureaucratization” is used as a euphemism to gradually erode labor rights, consumer protection, environmental standards, or transparency rules. From this perspective, bureaucracy is held up as a straw man to dismantle regulation itself—even though reports (e.g., on occupational safety or wage transparency) pursue socially meaningful goals.

For businesses, however, the burden is very real. SMEs do not have their own legal or compliance departments. When a small carpentry shop or an SME supplier must comply with documentation requirements (e.g., regarding the EU Deforestation Regulation, ESG criteria, or transparency requirements), this directly ties up the working time of the owners or key personnel.

In Austria and the EU, approximately 99% of all businesses fall under the category of SMEs (small and medium-sized enterprises). However, the problem affects different types of SMEs in different ways. Businesses with 20 to 250 employees often do not fall directly under major EU directives but are forced by their clients (e.g., automotive groups or retail chains) to help meet their clients’ verification obligations along the supply chain (“ripple effect”). Businesses with fewer than 20 employees. Here, the main issue is administrative overload in day-to-day operations (e.g., lengthy approval procedures for business facilities, complex grant applications, or statistical reporting requirements).

Initiatives like Schellhorn’s are not mere fig leaves, but a balancing act. They make a great deal of sense where duplicate reporting (“gold-plating” through additional national laws) is avoided, and procedures are digitized. However, they become problematic when simplified regulations undermine the protection of workers or the environment.

How promising is the initiative?

Alliances and working groups at the EU level naturally take a long time to form and can themselves become bureaucratic behemoths, since 27 member states with different administrative traditions must work together. Since the European Commission under Ursula von der Leyen has set the goal of reducing reporting requirements for SMEs by 25 to 35 percent, the initiative finds fertile ground politically.

The key question will be whether the outcome is merely declarations of intent or whether the alliance actually prevents EU requirements from being unnecessarily complicated when transposed into national law (“gold-plating”).

Austrian MFA

Austrian Parliament