"Stop the clock" for the AI Act: the momentum builds (in the North)
Momentum grows for delaying the AI Act as smaller EU states, Baltic tech groups, and Sweden raise concerns over unclear rules and readiness. While the Commission races to meet the August 2025 deadline, calls to “Stop the Clock” are getting harder to ignore.
In March 2025, the Council - under the Polish Presidency - approved the negotiating mandate for the so-called "Stop the Clock" directive, initially aimed at postponing the application and/or transposition of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD).
In June 2025, first the industry, then the European digital ministers began discussing a "Stop the Clock" approach for the AI Act - initially backed by Czech Deputy Minister Jan Kavalírek, who also stated that the Czech businesses will not be able to prepare in time:
“The requirements of the AI Act are extremely complex, new, and demanding. Companies declare that they will not be able to prepare for it by next year”
EVP Henna Virkkunen hasn’t entirely dismissed the idea in her interview with Politico Europe, but added one condition: only if the guidelines and standards aren’t “ready in time”.
All eyes are now on the AI Board, the AI Office, and the upcoming GPAI Code of Practice, which will soon be discussed with industry representatives. The AI Office appears to be racing to finalize the much-debated General Purpose AI Code of Practice by August 2, 2025, to meet the deadlines... and maintain the status quo.
The Balts are getting frustrated
This week, the leading tech associations in Lithuania and Estonia sent a letter to the Commission, urging a review of the AI Act’s implementation timeline - proposing to delay the GPAI provisions by one year (from August 2, 2025) and push full enforcement to August 2027.
"With key definitions and guidelines still in development and not expected before July 2025, AI developers and investors face unclear obligations that hinder decision-making and growth"
It seems that Baltic representatives in Brussels (and at home) are warming up to the idea and have also begun supporting the "Stop the Clock" initiative. Frustration over moving forward without finalized standards and guidelines is becoming increasingly common.
This sentiment is widespread among smaller EU Member States with leaner bureaucracies, which must juggle the applications for AI factories and gigafactories, the creation of AI regulatory sandboxes, the implementation of the RRF, legislation adopted during the last mandate, and other things. Even if the Commission meets its deadlines, that doesn’t mean smaller EU Member States will be able to meet theirs, at least not properly.
Unexpectedly, Sweden
Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson, a liberal-conservative, also spoke this week in favor of postponing parts of the AI Act, citing the lack of prepared standards and guidelines, which he warned could be “confusing” for businesses.
Biometric update reports that the PM told the Swedish Parliament that:
“an example of confusing EU regulations is the fact that the so-called AI Act is to come into force without there being common standards"
Two possible outcomes
The Commission’s position has remained clear: as long as the standards and guidelines are ready by the August 2025 deadline, implementation of the AI Act should proceed as planned. With the AI Office racing to finalize the GPAI Code of Practice and no slowdown expected in the Brussels bubble this summer, the deadline will likely be met, which will serve as justification to maintain the current implementation and enforcement course.
The other scenario: traditionally more reserved Member States - such as the Central and Eastern European countries, the Nordics, and a few others less optimistic about the AI Act, particularly those with leaner public sectors unprepared for implementation even if the Commission meets its deadlines - may drop their cautious stance, support the idea, and stop the clock, at least for a little while.
