Insights ¡ Procedures & timing ¡ Published . This analysis was generated with the help of an AI system. Its legal references were checked against the official EU texts listed under Sources on . It describes the law as it stood on that date. Not legal advice.
Short answer. On 9 September 2026 the Commission proposed a âPublic Procurement Actâ: a Regulation that would repeal Directives 2014/23, 2014/24 and 2014/25 and replace them with one set of rules applying directly in every Member State (COM(2026) 590). It is a proposal. It doesnât apply to any tender today. The Directives, as each Member State has transposed them, still govern every procedure, and everything else on this site describes those rules. If the Regulation is adopted, it would apply two years after it enters into force (Article 149 of the proposal).
For bidders, the proposed changes that matter most are:
- Award: quality would carry a minimum weight, though buyers could derogate.
- Selection: a much lower cap on turnover requirements.
- Exclusion: more mandatory grounds, with no self-cleaning for them.
- Proving eligibility: an electronic eligibility service would replace the ESPD.
- Time limits: a 20-day minimum in the new open procedure.
- Origin: optional âEuropean preferenceâ measures.
- Contract changes: new rules on modifications.
Parliament and the Council can change any of these.
Where the proposal stands on 10 October 2026
- Document: Commission proposal COM(2026) 590 final, dated 9 September 2026, procedure 2026/0265(COD). It follows the ordinary legislative procedure, so the European Parliament and the Council must both agree a text.
- Stage: the Parliamentâs Legislative Observatory lists one key event, the publication of the proposal on 9 September 2026. It gives the stage reached as âPreparatory phase in Parliamentâ.
- Dates: none are fixed. The proposal says it would enter into force on the twentieth day after publication in the Official Journal and apply two years later. Its own text leaves both dates as placeholders (Article 149). The two-year delay is explained by âthe scale and novelty of the reformsâ, including the new digital ecosystem (recital 65).
This page describes the proposal as published. If the text changes during the procedure, the comparison below will no longer hold.
EU law ¡ What applies to your tenders today
- The Directives, as transposed. Directive 2014/24 and the national laws implementing it govern every tender above the thresholds. Nothing in the proposal changes that before adoption.
- The Remedies Directive. The proposalâs title lists the Regulations and Directives it would amend, and Directive 89/665 isnât among them. The proposed open procedure refers to âthe standstill period established in Directives 89/665/EEC and 92/13/EECâ (Article 35(2)). Our guides on after the award decision and challenging an award decision arenât affected by the proposal as drafted.
- No transitional rule. The final provisions (Articles 146â149) contain no specific rule for procedures already under way on the date the Regulation would start to apply.
Proposal ¡ What would change for bidders
The left column is the law in force, verified against the consolidated Directive. The right column is the Commissionâs proposal, which isnât law.
| Topic | Today (Directive 2014/24) | Proposed (COM(2026) 590) |
|---|---|---|
| Legal form | A Directive, applied through each country's transposing law | A Regulation, directly applicable in all Member States (Article 149) |
| Thresholds | âŹ5,404,000 works; âŹ140,000 or âŹ216,000 supplies and services; âŹ750,000 social services (2026â2027) | The same figures, plus âŹ432,000 for utilities, which would move into the same act (Article 2(1)) |
| Procedures | Open, restricted, competitive procedure with negotiation, competitive dialogue, innovation partnership, negotiated without prior publication (Articles 26â32) | An open procedure and a dynamic procedure, each with or without selection criteria and with or without negotiation, plus an innovation procedure. Award without competition only in the cases listed (Articles 31, 34, 36â48) |
| Open procedure: minimum time | 35 days for tenders, from the date the contract notice was sent (Article 27(1)) | 20 days for expressions of interest submitted with a tender, from publication of the "public summary of competition" (Article 34(2)) |
| Negotiation | Only in the procedures that allow it | Possible in every procedure, on "all non-essential characteristics", but not on exclusion grounds, selection criteria or award criteria. The buyer must state what isn't negotiable (Article 33(2)) |
| Award criteria | Price only, cost, or best price-quality ratio. Member States may restrict price-only awards (Article 67(2)) | Best price-quality ratio. Quality at least 30% of the points, and at least 50% for labour-intensive contracts. A buyer may derogate where specifications or contract conditions ensure quality, and must say which in the summary (Article 98(1), (4) and (5)) |
| Turnover requirement | At most twice the estimated contract value, unless justified (Article 58(3)) | At most 50% of the estimated annual contract value, except in duly justified cases (Article 27(7)) |
| Prior public-sector experience | No specific rule | Can't be required unless justified by the complexity of the contract or the nature of the subject-matter (Article 27(6)) |
| Mandatory exclusion | Six kinds of conviction, plus unpaid taxes or social security. Self-cleaning is available for convictions (Article 57(1), (2) and (6)) | Eleven kinds of conviction, adding for example environmental crime and violation of EU restrictive measures, including convictions of a "key person" in the company. No self-cleaning for these, but a buyer may derogate for overriding public interest (Articles 25 and 26(2); recital 13) |
| Optional exclusion | Nine grounds. Without self-cleaning, at most three years from the event (Article 57(4) and (7)) | Eight grounds, including security risks and distortive foreign subsidies. At most five years from the conduct (Article 26(1) and (3)) |
| Proving eligibility | The European Single Procurement Document (Article 59) | An electronic eligibility service and a "digital business credential tool", with a self-declaration where the tool isn't available (Articles 28 and 133) |
| Subcontracting | The buyer may ask for the share and the subcontractors. Direct payment only where national law provides for it (Article 71(2) and (3)) | You must state the share and the proposed subcontractors in your tender. The whole contract can't be subcontracted. Direct payment to a subcontractor at its request, where the nature of the contract allows (Articles 24(1)â(2) and 108(6)) |
| Origin of operators and goods | Equal treatment for operators and goods covered by the GPA and the EU's other agreements (Article 25). No origin-based preference | Optional "European preference". A buyer could restrict participation to EU and covered operators. It could also require EU or covered origin, apply a price reduction or extra points in the evaluation, or reject tenders with under 50% EU or covered content; those measures must be stated in the summary. The Commission could make measures mandatory by delegated act (Articles 73, 75 and 76) |
| Abnormally low tenders | Explanation required where a tender appears abnormally low. The buyer "may only reject" if the evidence doesn't account for the price (Article 69(1) and (3)) | Three benchmarks: the other tenders, the market price or the buyer's estimate, and past contract values. The buyer "shall reject" a tender if the explanation isn't satisfactory (Article 101(1) and (4)) |
| Framework agreements | At most four years, save in exceptional cases (Article 33(1)) | Three years with one operator, five with several. Contracts under the framework can't run past its end by more than 50% of its duration (Article 103(2) and (4)) |
| Specifications and variants | Variants only where the buyer authorises or requires them (Article 45(1)) | Functional requirements as the general rule. A buyer that doesn't use only functional requirements must consider variants and give reasons if it doesn't allow them (Articles 88(3) and 89) |
| Contract modifications | Six routes, including a small-change route below the threshold and 10% or 15% (Article 72) | Changes up to 15% of the initial value count as non-substantial if they don't shift the economic balance. A notice must be published before any modification over 50%. No modification to cover the contractor's own unjustified deficiencies (Article 106(2), (6) and (9)) |
The table covers the provisions we read in full. The proposal also has chapters on green, social and innovation procurement, security, concessions, utilities, data and governance (see what this analysis doesnât cover, below).
Our analysis ¡ Where it would change your work most
1. The turnover cap would fall sharply. Take a four-year services contract worth âŹ1,000,000 a year, so âŹ4,000,000 in total.
| Maximum minimum-turnover requirement | |
|---|---|
| Today | Twice the estimated contract value: âŹ8,000,000 |
| Proposal | 50% of the estimated annual value: âŹ500,000 |
Buyers could still go higher in âduly justified casesâ, and would have to give their main reasons (Article 27(7)). For a smaller firm, this is the change most likely to decide whether you can bid at all (see selection criteria).
2. Quality would count by default, but not always. The 30% and 50% minimums come with a derogation where quality is secured through the specifications or the contract conditions (Article 98(5)). Price-led awards would remain possible. The difference is that the buyer would have to say, in the published summary, which ground it relies on. Read that part first (see how quality is scored).
3. A conviction would weigh more. Today, a company can use self-cleaning even against the mandatory conviction grounds (see exclusion grounds). Under the proposal, that route would close for mandatory grounds, which would also reach convictions of a âkey personâ in the company. What would remain is the buyerâs derogation for overriding public interest (Article 25(4)). Self-cleaning would stay available for optional grounds, but the maximum exclusion period for them would rise from three to five years.
4. Less time, more preparation. A 20-day minimum in the open procedure assumes that your eligibility evidence is ready in the digital tool before the tender appears. Whether that works depends on tools that donât exist yet: the electronic eligibility service and the digital business credential tool (Articles 28 and 133).
5. Origin would become a bidding question. Where a buyer uses European preference, you may have to show the origin of your company, your subcontractors and your goods (Article 28(4)). If you fail to provide that information without a reasonable explanation, and that makes verification impossible or very difficult, your tender may be excluded.
Proposal ¡ What is still open
- The whole text. The Parliament and the Council can amend any provision. None of the figures above is final.
- Dates. Neither the date of entry into force nor the date of application is set (Article 149).
- Detailed rules. Several parts depend on later Commission acts, such as the information in the public summaries (Article 110) and the arrangements for the electronic eligibility service (Article 133).
- Procedures in progress. As drafted, the proposal has no transitional rule for them.
Practice ¡ What to do now
- Keep bidding under the current rules. For every tender open today, the documents, the national law and the guides on this site apply.
- Check figures in the proposal itself. Summaries can be wrong in small but important ways. The 30% and 50% quality minimums, for example, both come with a derogation.
- Follow the procedure. Its reference is 2026/0265(COD) in the European Parliamentâs Legislative Observatory.
What this analysis doesnât cover
- Parts of the proposal: concessions (Part IV) and the special rules for utilities; the chapters on green, social and innovation procurement, security and resilience; the digital ecosystem beyond Articles 28 and 133; data spaces and governance. We read their headings, not their full text.
- Annexes and accompanying documents: the annexes, including the correlation table, and the impact assessment documents SWD(2026) 590 to 592. We didnât read them.
- The future: any position the Parliament or the Council may adopt, and any national plans to prepare for the Regulation.
Guides this affects
- EU procurement procedures, from the bidder's side
- How your price becomes points in an EU tender
- Selection criteria: proving you can do the job
- Exclusion grounds: when a buyer can or must exclude you
- The ESPD: who fills it in, and what it commits you to
- Bidding with partners: consortia and subcontractors
- Abnormally low tenders: preparing your explanation
- Framework agreements and dynamic purchasing systems
- Changing a public contract after signature
- Challenging an award decision: EU remedies
Sources checked for this page
- European Commission, Proposal for a Regulation on public contracts and concessions (Public Procurement Act), COM(2026) 590 final, 9 September 2026, explanatory memorandum, recitals and Articles 1â5, 21â40, 46â48, 70â77, 88â108, 146 and 149
- European Parliament, Legislative Observatory, procedure file 2026/0265(COD), consulted 10 October 2026
- Directive 2014/24/EU, consolidated text of 1 January 2026 (Articles 25, 27, 33, 45, 57, 58, 59, 67, 69, 71, 72)
- Directive 89/665/EEC (Remedies Directive), consolidated text of 17 April 2014
Spotted an error? See how corrections work.