European Commission - Questions and answers Questions and answers on the findings of the first review of the Foreign Subsidies Regulation Brussels, 14 July 2026 Under Article 52(2) of the Foreign Subsidies Regulation (FSR), the European Commission is obliged to review its practice of implementing and enforcing the rules and present a report to the European Parliament and the Council every three years. Where the Commi...
European Commission - Questions and answers Questions and answers on the findings of the first review of the Foreign Subsidies Regulation Brussels, 14 July 2026 Under Article 52(2) of the Foreign Subsidies Regulation (FSR), the European Commission is obliged to review its practice of implementing and enforcing the rules and present a report to the European Parliament and the Council every three years. Where the Commission considers it appropriate, it may combine the report with relevant legislative proposals. 1 . What is the goal of the FSR review? This regular assessment ensures that the regulation remains effective, fit for purpose, and responsive to subsidies control systems set up by third countries. More precisely, the aim of the review is to evaluate on a regular basis: the assessment of foreign subsidies that distort the internal market; the application of the balancing test between any positive effects of the foreign subsidy and its distortive effects; the assessment of foreign subsidies with a possible distortive effect in the internal market on the Commission's own initiative; the notification thresholds; and more generally, the need for, and scope of, simplification in line with the Commission's policy priorities. 2 . What is the FSR review based on? The Commission relied on several sources of evidence for the review: a public consultation questionnaire , which gathered views on specific aspects of the implementation and enforcement of the FSR; a call for evidence , which invited general feedback from interested parties; targeted interviews and meetings with stakeholders and Member States; An FSR Review Study by an external contractor. The study provided an evidence-based assessment of the functioning of the FSR, drawing on surveys of practitioners, an analysis of the Commission's enforcement practice, and a review of subsidy control systems in third countries; and The Commission's internal analysis of its enforcement practice. This included feedback from case teams, and an analysis of internal data and case experience relating to both concentrations and public procurement procedures. Together, these sources provided the Commission with a broad and balanced evidence base for the review. 3 . What are the main findings of the FSR review? The review finds that the FSR is fit for purpose and an important tool to address distortions caused by foreign subsidies in the internal market. The Commission's review spans the FSR's different chapters, including the ex officio procedure. The review concludes that the FSR functions effectively and does not require structural changes. However, the review also shows that there are areas where FSR implementation and enforcement may be made more efficient and proportionate, through simplification and more streamlined procedures, while preserving the effectiveness of the instrument. That is why the Commission intends to adjust some requirements and thresholds in the near future. 4 . How has the FSR helped maintain a level playing field in the internal market? Has the FSR already produced concrete results? The FSR provides an effective framework to address distortions caused by foreign subsidies in the internal market and to preserve a level playing field. Under the concentration chapter: The Commission received around 100 notifications per year, with a total of 272 formal notifications by 31 May 2026; The Commission closed 99% of the preliminary reviews without opening an in-depth investigation; The Commission has opened three in-depth investigations into concentrations, with two conditionally approved following commitments to address the Commission's concerns and one ongoing at the time of publication of the report. Under the public procurement chapter: The Commission received 5,150 submissions across 863 public procurement procedures by 31 May 2026, including 4,293 declarations, 733 notifications and 124 pre-notifications. The Commission launched four in-depth investigations into public tenders. Three cases were closed after the companies under investigation withdrew from the procedures. One in-depth investigation resulted in a conditional clearance where a commitment was made to replace the subsidised subcontractor . Overall, the available evidence shows that the FSR enables the Commission to detect potentially distortive foreign subsidies, intervene where necessary, obtain commitments, and maintain a level playing field in the internal market. In addition, the Commission has taken several steps to provide guidance on substantive and procedural issues and increased transparency on cases to stakeholders: In July 2024, the Commission published a Staff Working Document with initial clarifications on key FSR concepts, including how to assess distortions and apply the balancing test. In January 2026, the Commission published the FSR Guidelines to improve predictability and transparency for stakeholders. The Guidelines explain how the Commission assesses distortion to the internal market, applies the balancing test, and uses its call-in powers for cases below notification thresholds. The Commission also regularly updates FSR Q&As on its dedicated websites for Competition and for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs , as well as information on cases, non- confidential decisions, and FSR briefs on policy developments and case practice. Statistics are available on the competition website regarding cases reviewed since the start of application of the FSR in July 2023. The Commission works with Member States, national contact points, expert groups, legal practitioners, and business associations through networks and conferences to provide further clarity on FSR practice. 5 . Has the Commission used its ex officio review powers? The Commission has opened two in-depth investigations using its ex officio powers so far. One concerns Nuctech , a company active in the production and sale of threat detection equipment and related services in the EU. The other concerns Goldwind , a company active in the production and sale of wind turbines and related services in the EU. Both investigations are currently ongoing. 6 . Does the review suggest that the FSR creates an excessive administrative burden? While stakeholders acknowledge the importance of the objectives of the FSR, they underline complex reporting obligations, including as regards foreign financial contributions (FFCs), and tight procedural deadlines, as well as a cumulative administrative burden associated with parallel procedures and information requests. Based on the obtained feedback, there are certain areas where the FSR could be streamlined to lower the administrative burden on businesses, while preserving the objectives of the regulation. 7 . Is the Commission proposing to revise the FSR? While the review finds that the FSR is perceived as creating some administrative burden for companies, it also confirms that the FSR is fit for purpose, rather than requiring fundamental changes. The findings show that some targeted simplifications could reduce unnecessary burden and improve proportionality, which may be implemented without requiring a revision of the FSR. To address the concerns identified, the Commission will consider some targeted adjustments to the FSR procedural framework. These adjustments may include, in particular: Under the concentration chapter: Increasing the turnover notification threshold through a delegated act; Introducing a simplified notification possibility for specific cases or FFCs; Moderately increasing the reporting thresholds for FFCs, both per individual FFC and per third country; and Introducing additional exemptions from reporting requirements for FFCs not categorised as foreign subsidies most likely to distort the internal market. Under the public procurement chapter: Introducing simplifications and clarifications in the forms used for notifications and declarations; Revising the framework for companies to request waivers to limit the disclosure of information of certain FFCs; Clarifying and limiting the reporting of FFCs not categorised as foreign subsidies most likely to distort the internal market; and Clarifying the rights and obligations of companies and the contracting authority, including for processing of confidential information, in the context of access to file. In parallel, the Commission will continue its efforts to strengthen awareness and promote compliance, while enhancing the transparency of its enforcement practice. These efforts may include targeted guidance, updates to the website and outreach activities for contracting authorities, companies, and practitioners. 8 . Why is the Commission not considering changes to the jurisdictional threshold in public procurement procedures? The Commission is empowered to amend the jurisdictional threshold of EUR 250 million for public procurement procedures by increasing it by up to 20% (to EUR 300 million) or decreasing it by up to 20% (to EUR 200 million). Raising the threshold would reduce the number of submissions and the associated burden but is expected to limit the Commission's ability to detect potential distortions in certain critical industrial sectors. Conversely, lowering the threshold would increase the number of submissions without clear evidence that this would proportionately improve enforcement outcomes. Moreover, at this stage, stakeholder feedback does not point to a clear direction. While some stakeholders favoured a higher threshold, a significant proportion found the current threshold appropriate or advocated for lower thresholds to better address perceived distortive effects in specific sectors. In light of these considerations, the Commission currently considers that there is no sufficient basis to revise the jurisdictional threshold. It will continue to monitor implementation and assess whether any future adjustment may be warranted. 9 . How does the FSR review fit into the Commission's simplification agenda? The review was carried out with the Commission's simplification agenda in mind and is aligned with the Commission's current policy priorities. Simplification is not treated as an abstract objective. Rather, it forms part of the overall objective of the review, which can serve to identify where FSR procedures can be clarified, streamlined and made more efficient, while preserving the effectiveness of the instrument. More broadly, the review shows that some simplification actions could be considered alongside the objectives of greater transparency and more efficient use of resources. These objectives are closely aligned with the Commission's overarching priorities of improving regulatory clarity, reducing administrative burdens and ensuring the effective and efficient application of EU rules. 10 . When does the Commission plan to take actions following the findings of the review? The Commission has already initiated work to present targeted adjustments to the FSR procedural framework for the concentration and public procurement chapters. The Commission aims to adopt targeted adjustments to the FSR procedural framework in 2027. Until then, the Commission will gather evidence supporting the envisaged adjustments, including feedback from stakeholders. In this context, the Commission plans to publish the draft text of the targeted adjustments to the FSR procedural framework this autumn and stakeholders will have the opportunity to provide further feedback. QANDA/26/1607 Press contacts: Siobhan MCGARRY (+32 2 29 64798) Luuk DE KLEIN (+32 2 299 47 74) General public inquiries: Europe Direct by phone 00 800 67 89 10 11 or by email
Speech Brief