In press releases sent out by industry and trade following the failure of the EU Supply Chain Act, there is talk of "good news". After all, "considerable legal uncertainty" has been averted. This is a very idiosyncratic interpretation. After all, the fact that no EU regulation is likely to come about for the time being definitely does not mean more legal certainty – at least for internationally active companies. They will have to comply with a whole host of national rules – and there will certainly be even more, because the Dutch, for example, were prepared to waive their (incidentally quite strict) requirements in anticipation of an EU directive.

Many opponents of the EU Supply Chain Act also ignore the fact that this new regulation would have bundled many things that have long had to be observed anyway. Now companies have to go to great lengths to check what they can and cannot do as soon as they use wood or batteries. Or or or. In addition, some of the arguments put forward against the EU supply chain law are more based on suspicion of everything that comes from Brussels than on a reliable risk assessment. In any case, the fear of an EU Commission that seizes every opportunity to bully companies should be viewed with a question mark.

The intervention of Christian Lindner and Marco Buschmann has ensured that the Belgian EU Council Presidency will probably no longer manage to organize a majority. From the summer, it will be the turn of the Hungarians, who have no ambition for the subject. And for the growing group of anti-Europeans in the EU Parliament, the now miserably maligned supply chain law will be an invitation to make a name for themselves against EU legislation in general. Added to this is the political damage. Germany has shown that it can overturn an EU law even after everyone has agreed on it. All those who are celebrating the failure today should not complain in the near future that the reliability of the German government – and thus its influence on future dossiers – has suffered.