Parliament adopts the AI Omnibus: Council sign-off is the last step

The vote: 423 to 57, with one foot in the next stage

On June 16, the European Parliament adopted the Digital Omnibus on AI by 423 votes to 57, with 174 abstentions. The vote endorses the trilogue agreement reached on May 7 and the joint IMCO-LIBE position from June 2. Three steps remain before the regulation enters into force: formal Council adoption, signature by the Presidents of both institutions, and publication in the Official Journal.

The margin is worth noting. In March 2026 the Parliament’s negotiating mandate gathered 569 yes votes; in June, support dropped to 423 and abstentions nearly quadrupled. The political signal is that simplification is more divisive than the headline number suggests.

Co-rapporteur Arba Kokalari framed the vote bluntly: “To all the entrepreneurs and engineers out there, we are pressing the pause button on the AI Act and we are reducing red tape.” Co-rapporteur Michael McNamara focused on the nudifier prohibition: “They impact real people, overwhelmingly women, with the purpose of humiliating, degrading and objectifying them.”

What’s now adopted, pending Council and OJ publication:

• December 2, 2027 for Annex III standalone high-risk AI systems
• August 2, 2028 for AI embedded in regulated products (Annex I)
• December 2, 2026 for watermarking obligations under Article 50
• A ban on AI nudifier apps and CSAM-generating systems
• Clarifications on AI built into machinery products

The vote also locks in fixed application dates, replacing the conditional trigger that would have depended on when supporting technical standards landed. Compliance teams now have certainty on the timeline, not a moving target.

“The fixed dates are genuinely useful, but they only become law on OJ publication, which the Council needs to deliver before August 2. Until then, the original AI Act timeline remains the legal baseline. Organisations still mapping their Annex III systems should treat August 2 as real, and anyone with generative AI features should be planning for the December 2026 watermarking obligation regardless of what else moves.”

Giulia Stancampiano, Head of Legal, iubenda

What didn’t move, and what to watch

The Omnibus shifts a lot, but not everything. Watermarking under Article 50 still arrives in December 2026, sooner than many businesses had hoped. GPAI obligations under Articles 51-55 continue on the original schedule, unaffected by the deferral.

Council formal adoption is expected before August 2, that date is the forcing function, not an optional deadline. Until OJ publication, the original AI Act timeline remains the legal baseline.

Also this week

Commission refreshes the Data Union Strategy. The European Commission updated its Data Union Strategy page on June 11, consolidating three priority areas (scaling data access for AI, streamlining EU data rules, safeguarding data sovereignty) and tying them to Digital Omnibus objectives. Flagship actions include data labs for AI-driven innovation, expanded common European data spaces with around €100 million in EU investment, and a new defence data space.

Classification consultation extended. The Commission extended its consultation on draft guidelines for classifying high-risk AI systems from June 23 to July 23. The draft guidelines clarify how Articles 6(1) and 6(2) of the AI Act apply. Final guidelines are expected by end of 2026.

DPIA template consultation closed. The EDPB’s public consultation on the harmonised DPIA template closed on June 9. Finalisation is now underway, with EU DPAs expected to adopt the final template either as their sole standard or as a meta-template their national versions must align with.

For a consolidated walk-through across all three regulatory tracks (GDPR, AI Act, ePrivacy), OneTrust published a webinar resource on June 10.

“The Data Omnibus will be a much longer process than the AI track, and more contested. That said, the direction from the Council is encouraging: the June 10 presidency compromise deleted Arts. 88a and 88b, the provisions that would have moved cookie consent into the GDPR and mandated browser-level consent signals. It’s a meaningful signal that member states want more time and a proper impact assessment before touching the consent architecture. The risk hasn’t disappeared, it now sits with the Parliament, where the ITRE/IMCO report is due June 22, but the Council’s position is significantly better than where the Commission’s original proposal started.”

Giulia Stancampiano, Head of Legal, iubenda

Worth watching

• Council formal adoption of the AI Omnibus. Needed before August 2 to make the deferrals binding. Until OJ publication, the original AI Act dates remain legally in force.
• OJ publication and the August 2 cliff. Confirmation that publication lands before August 2 is what makes the deferral binding. The Council has a hard incentive to move quickly.
• The Digital Legislation Omnibus (GDPR, ePrivacy, Data Act), not yet in trilogue. The Parliament is still finalising its position (ITRE/IMCO first joint report expected June 22; Parliament impact study on GDPR, ePrivacy, and P2B strands expected October 2026). On the Council side, the June 10 presidency compromise deleted Arts. 88a, 88b, and 88c, the cookie consent and AI legitimate interests provisions, after ambassadors failed to agree on June 8. The Council mandate vote is June 26. If it holds without those provisions, the structural risk to the consent management ecosystem is significantly reduced. The Parliament track is now where to watch.
• December 2, 2026. Watermarking and the new nudifier/CSAM ban both take effect on that date, sooner than the Annex III deadline. Worth planning around now.