One of the most practice-oriented discussions during the second day of ELMC 2026 focused on recent legal and administrative developments affecting cross-border service provision within the EU Single Market.
The session “Intra-EU Service Provision in Practice – National Updates and Takeaways”, moderated by Marek Benio, brought together young lawyers and experts from Italy, the Netherlands and Poland to discuss how Member States increasingly shape the freedom to provide services through detailed national compliance systems and administrative practices.
The discussion showed a Europe that is formally based on the same freedoms, but increasingly fragmented in practical application.
Italy – health and safety obligations as a major barrier
Daria Matecka presented Italy as a country where the most significant barriers for posting companies no longer stem primarily from wages or collective agreements, but increasingly from occupational health and safety obligations.
For a small company carrying out assembly works on a construction site, the initial implementation of required health and safety documentation may cost around €11,000. Italian regulations require extensive documentation in Italian, including risk assessments, training records and formally designated safety functions.
Particular attention was also drawn to the broad interpretation of the concept of “construction site”, which extends beyond traditional construction work and includes installation, maintenance and assembly activities.
The discussion also addressed the new Italian point-based licence system (“patente a crediti”) for construction companies. Under this model, companies begin with 30 points and lose points for violations. Falling below a certain threshold may effectively prevent them from operating on construction sites.
Davide Vieni complemented the discussion with practical observations concerning Casa Edile — the mandatory construction fund operating in Italy. Employers may be required to contribute between 8% and 10% of salaries, and up to 12% in the case of temporary work agencies.
He also highlighted the complexity of the Italian collective bargaining system, where around 800–900 collective agreements coexist, often with very similar names and overlapping scopes. In practice, determining which agreement actually applies may itself become a significant compliance challenge.
Netherlands – labour inspection and migration control
David Wernsing focused on recent Dutch measures aimed at preventing artificial posting arrangements, particularly involving third-country nationals.
The discussion addressed proposals requiring workers to remain employed for a certain period in the sending state before posting can take place. According to the Dutch authorities, such measures are intended to combat abuses linked to immigration law circumvention.
Particular concerns were raised regarding the increasing cooperation between labour inspection authorities and immigration enforcement bodies in the Netherlands. During the discussion, attention was drawn to the absence of an effective “firewall” between labour law enforcement and migration control.
As highlighted during the session, workers who report labour law violations may simultaneously expose themselves to immigration consequences, potentially discouraging them from reporting abuses altogether.
Poland – a country defending free movement while creating new barriers
Michał Szypniewski pointed to what he described as a growing paradox in Poland.
Traditionally, Poland has positioned itself as one of the strongest defenders of the freedom to provide services within the EU. At the same time, however, new legal and administrative barriers increasingly affect both foreign service providers operating in Poland and Polish companies posting workers abroad.
One of the key issues discussed concerned visa obstacles affecting third-country nationals. Consular authorities increasingly rely on broad discretionary assessments concerning the risk that workers may not leave Poland after the expiry of their visa.
The discussion also addressed stricter requirements related to work permits for posted workers, including the requirement of an existing employment relationship and limitations concerning intra-corporate postings between companies lacking direct capital links.
According to the speakers, these developments raise broader questions concerning the compatibility of certain national solutions with the freedom to provide services guaranteed under EU law.
Increasing fragmentation through national detail
One conclusion emerged particularly clearly from the discussion: today’s barriers to the freedom to provide services rarely result from direct or open violations of EU freedoms.
Instead, they increasingly arise through highly detailed national regulations, administrative practices and compliance requirements implemented at Member State level.
As repeatedly emphasised during the session, the real challenge for labour mobility and cross-border services in Europe no longer lies primarily in general principles — but in the growing complexity of practical implementation.
📸 A few moments from this part of the programme below
