Germany Is Gutting the EU AI Act. Siemens and Bosch Are Watching.
What happened
Germany secured support from EU ambassadors to exempt industrial machinery from the EU AI Act's high-risk classification rules, as part of a broader Digital Omnibus renegotiation. Chancellor Friedrich Merz personally lobbied for the change, promising German CEOs he would fight for a less stringent AI regime. The second political trilogue collapsed on April 28 after 12 hours of failed negotiation; a third round is scheduled for around May 13. If no amendment passes before August 2, 2026, the original high-risk AI obligations take legal effect for all sectors, including machinery, medical devices, and vehicles.
Germany is not asking for a competitive carve-out. It is asking to rewrite the law's founding principle that AI risk rules apply regardless of industry, and it appears to be winning.
The Hidden Bet
The exemption is a reasonable accommodation for legacy industrial sectors that did not design their products with AI rules in mind.
AI embedded in industrial machinery is exactly the category the law was written to cover: high-stakes, opaque systems making decisions that affect workers, products, and public safety. Exempting it does not reduce AI risk; it removes oversight of the largest AI deployment surface in Europe.
This is a temporary negotiating concession that will be walked back with conditions and safeguards.
The Politico report says EU ambassadors have already agreed to support the exemption. Once the Council and Germany are aligned, the Parliament is negotiating from a weaker position. The exemption is likely to land closer to Berlin's original ask than not.
Siemens and Bosch will pass the regulatory savings on through lower compliance costs and faster innovation.
The companies lobbied for the exemption because compliance costs them money. There is no mechanism ensuring those savings translate into faster AI deployment rather than simply higher margins. The industrial AI adoption argument is the frame they chose; it is not a commitment.
The Real Disagreement
The actual fork: should AI regulation be designed around the technology's risk profile, or around the economic interests of the industries deploying it? The EU AI Act was built on the first premise. Germany is winning the argument for the second. Both positions have something going for them: generic risk categories do not map cleanly onto every industrial context, and regulatory overreach does suppress adoption. But you cannot have a law that applies equally to startups and exempts Siemens. The asymmetry is not a refinement. It is a different law. The EU is choosing its industrial legacy over its stated digital governance ambition, and it is doing so quietly, in trilogue, with no public vote.
What No One Is Saying
The EU spent five years building the world's most comprehensive AI governance framework, then handed the most powerful industrial lobbies in Europe a back-door exemption in the final stretch before enforcement. If this works, every other sector will model the same approach for the next law.
Who Pays
Workers operating AI-augmented machinery in EU factories
Immediate, once the exemption takes effect before August 2026
Systems making decisions about their workflows, safety parameters, and productivity quotas will face no transparency or challenge rights under the AI Act's high-risk provisions.
EU AI startups and non-industrial deployers
From August 2026 onward
They remain fully subject to the law's high-risk obligations while Siemens and Bosch are exempt. The compliance cost asymmetry favors incumbents over challengers.
EU citizens relying on medical devices with embedded AI
Medium-term, as AI-integrated devices proliferate
The original dispute also covered AI in medical devices under the exemption push. If those are also carved out, diagnostic and treatment-support AI faces no EU-level safety assessment.
Scenarios
Germany wins cleanly
The May 13 trilogue reaches agreement with the machinery and vehicle exemptions intact. The law enters force in August with a two-tier structure: industrial AI is exempt, consumer and public-sector AI is not. Brussels declares it a competitive win.
Signal Politico and Euractiv report a deal on or after May 13 with Germany's core demands preserved.
Compromise with conditions
Parliament insists on a sector-specific substitute framework for industrial AI rather than a full exemption. Companies must still demonstrate AI safety, but through product-safety legislation rather than the AI Act. The deadline is pushed past August.
Signal Leaked trilogue texts include language requiring 'equivalent conformity assessment' for Annex I products.
Deadlock past August
No agreement before August 2. The original obligations take effect. Germany's companies face the full compliance burden. Legal challenges begin immediately. The Commission announces enforcement discretion while negotiations continue.
Signal No deal announced by June 30 and Commission issues a non-binding enforcement guidance memo.
What Would Change This
If the Parliament holds its position on dual conformity assessment for AI in regulated products and forces Germany to accept sectoral alternatives rather than full exemption, the bottom line changes. That would mean the EU governance framework survived its largest industrial lobbying test. There is no evidence that is happening.
Related
The EU AI Act Talks Collapsed. The Deadline They Were Trying to Move Did Not.
powerSpain Is Moving to Ban Teenagers from Social Media While Making Executives Personally Liable for Hate Speech
powerOpenAI Buys Its Way Into Europe While Anthropic Waits
powerEurope Just Gutted Its Own AI Law. Industry Called It 'Not Enough.'