Responsive image
Article title Regulatory Simplification in the EU Law
Authors
Valeriia Poiedynok
Doctor of Law, Professor, Professor of the Department of Economic Law and Economic Litigation of the Academic and Scientific Institute of Law of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv (Kyiv, Ukraine) Researcher ID: G-5047-2017 ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1583-1312 valeriia.poiedynok@knu.ua
Oleksandr Harahonych
Doctor of Law, Associate Professor, Associate Professor of the Department of Economic Law and Economic Litigation of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv (Kyiv, Ukraine) Researcher ID: ABC-4279-2021 ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8984-2399 o.harahonych@gmail.com
Magazine name Legal journal «Law of Ukraine» (Ukrainian version)
Magazine number 12 / 2025
Pages 45 - 58
Annotation

The European Union has long been regarded as the global “champion of regulation,” capable of setting mandatory standards that extend their influence far beyond the EU through the phenomenon of the “Brussels Effect.” At the same time, the emergence of the Draghi Report and subsequent initiatives of the European Commission have highlighted growing criticism of overregulation as a factor allegedly hampering innovation and the competitiveness of the European economy. These developments laid the groundwork for a new course – regulatory simplification – which has consequences not only for the EU but also for candidate countries, particularly Ukraine, which is in the process of aligning its national legislation with the EU acquis.

The aim of this article is to critically examine the phenomenon of regulatory simplification in EU law and its impact on the regulation of economic activity in Ukraine as an EU candidate state.

The article explores the content and implications of the Draghi Report and subsequent EU legislative initiatives, in particular Omnibus I, which amended the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD).

It demonstrates that, under the banner of regulatory simplification, requirements for corporate responsibility regarding compliance with human rights and environmental standards were effectively weakened. The scope of the study also includes EU plans to review digital legislation (the GDPR, the Data Governance Act and the Data Act, the Artificial Intelligence Act, etc.), which may lead to a lowering of fundamental user rights protection. The EU’s decision not to adopt the AI Liability Directive is also subjected to criticism.

The analysis shows that Europe’s competitiveness challenges stem primarily from structural, cultural, and institutional factors (entrepreneurship culture, corporate and insolvency law, investment practices), rather than from overregulation per se. Special attention is devoted to the Ukrainian context: the absence of developed legislation on corporate sustainability, AI, and data protection creates a risk of uncritical transposition of inconsistent European reforms.

The article argues that the logic of “less regulation – more competitiveness” is flawed. The key task is not to reduce the number of rules but to improve their quality, coherence, and ability to strike a balance between innovation, market development, and the protection of human rights and the environment. For Ukraine, it is crucial to take into account the dual context: the need to adapt its legislation to the EU acquis, while at the same time critically reflecting on new European trends in order to avoid replicating external problems and contradictions. Regulatory simplification can make sense only as an improvement of processes, but not as a departure from fundamental principles of law.

Keywords regulation; competition; innovation; sustainable development; corporate relations; virtual assets (crypto-assets); artificial intelligence; liability
References

Bibliography

Authored books

1. Bradford A, The Brussels Effect: How the European Union Rules the World (Oxford University Press 2020).

2. Kibenko O, Yevropeiske korporatyvne pravo na etapi fundamentalnoi reformy: Perspektyvy vykorystannia yevropeiskoho zakonodavchoho dosvidu u pravovomu poli Ukrainy (Straid 2005) (in Ukrainian). Websites

3. Address by Mr. Draghi – Presentation of the report on the Future of European competitiveness – European Parliament – Strasbourg – 17 September 2024 (accessed 10.09.2025).

4. Andrews C, ‘European Commission withdraws AI Liability Directive from consideration’ (12 February 2025) (accessed 10.09.2025).

5. Corporate sustainability (Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) (accessed 10.09.2025).

6. Moller-Nielsen Thomas, ‘Who’s afraid of deregulation?’ (Euractive 7 February 2025) (accessed 10.09.2025).

7. OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Business Conduct (2018) 21 (accessed 10.09.2025).

8. Off the hook? How Business Lobbies against Liability for Human Rights and Environmental Abuses (Friends of the Earth Europe, European Coalition for Corporate Justice and Corporate Europe Observatory 2021) (accessed 10.09.2025).

9. Press release “Not without us” – EU’s Omnibus proposal rewards corporate interests instead of protecting people & planet (European Coalition for Corporate Justice 6 February 2025) (accessed 10.09.2025).

10. The future of European competitiveness: Report by Mario Draghi (2024). (accessed 10.09.2025).

11. Van Quathem K, ‘European Commission Confirms Plans to Simplify GDPR’ (17 March 2025) (accessed 10.09.2025).

12. Kontseptsiia natsionalnoi ekonomichnoi bezpeky Ukrainy (Mizhnarodnyi instytut svobody 2024) accessed 10.09.2025 (in Ukrainian).

Electronic version Download