Member States must transpose it into national law by 11 May 2028. For Dutch practice, the key change is Article 6, which criminalises "trading in influence" for the first time. This blog is relevant for compliance officers, general counsel and organisations that engage with public officials or lobbyists in the Netherlands.
Key facts at a glance:
- Adopted: 26 March 2026 by the European Parliament.
- Entered into force: 11 May 2026.
- Transposition deadline: two years to transpose it into national law, meaning until 11 May 2028, (with a 36-month deadline for provisions on risk assessments and national strategies).
- Maximum fines for legal entities: at least 5% of worldwide annual turnover or EUR 40 million.
- New for the Netherlands: Article 6 criminalises "trading in influence" for the first time.
The Directive entered into force on 11 May 2026. Member States have two years to transpose it into national law, meaning until 11 May 2028, with a 36-month deadline for provisions on risk assessments and national strategies and replaces Framework Decision 2003/568/JHA and the 1997 Convention on the fight against corruption involving public officials, bringing public and private corruption together under a single framework. Below, we outline the core of the Directive and examine the implications of Article 6 in more detail.
A broad catalogue of criminal offences
The Directive harmonises a wide range of corruption offences, including:
- bribery in the public and private sectors
- misappropriation by public officials
- trading in influence
- misuse of public office
- obstruction of justice
- enrichment through corruption offences
- concealment of assets
The Directive also harmonises sanctions. For legal entities, maximum fines for core offences must be at least 5% of worldwide annual turnover or EUR 40 million. Effective internal controls and genuine compliance programmes may mitigate sanctions, provided they are not merely cosmetic. Prompt disclosure and corrective measures may also reduce the sanction.
The Directive also requires Member States to apply the EU Whistleblower Directive to corruption reports and to protect persons who report offences or cooperate with investigations.
Article 6: trading in influence as a new criminal offence
Article 6 concerns a triangular relationship between an initiator, an intermediary and a public official: the initiator offers an advantage to induce the intermediary to improperly influence the public official. Both the active form (promising or giving an advantage) and the passive form (requesting or receiving one) are criminalised. It is irrelevant whether the influence was actually exerted or achieved the intended result.
The offence targets improper influence, not legitimate lobbying. However, the Directive draws no clear line between lawful and unlawful influence: concepts such as "undue advantage" and "improper influence" remain open-ended and will need clarification in practice. For example: a company pays a consultant, who in turn uses personal connections to persuade a civil servant to award a permit or contract on favourable terms. Whether this crosses the line into an offence under Article 6 depends on the specific circumstances.
Lobbying fees may constitute an undue advantage if the activities meet the other elements of the offence, including by breaching applicable lobbying rules. Organisations should therefore scrutinise both the substance and manner of their contacts with public officials. Supplementary rules on conflicts of interest, revolving-door arrangements and political financing may also help avoid grey areas and prevent undue influence.
The Dutch dimension: a new gap filled?
The Netherlands has historically had no separate offence of trading in influence, considering existing corruption provisions sufficient. It was the only EU Member State to maintain a reservation on this point to the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC). That position is no longer tenable: the Directive builds on UNCAC, the most comprehensive international anti-corruption instrument, and goes beyond its minimum requirements. The Dutch government raised concerns about the Directive, including the lack of an impact assessment and aspects such as the review period and implementation deadline.
Beyond Article 6, the Directive requires Member States to adopt and publish a national anti-corruption strategy, conduct periodic sector-based risk assessments, and ensure that anti-corruption bodies can act without unjustified interference. These new obligations will require meaningful legislative and institutional effort in the Netherlands.
Conclusion: timely preparation is essential
The Directive marks a new step in the EU’s approach to corruption, and its impact on Dutch practice should not be underestimated. For organisations active in the political or administrative sphere, the key question is which contacts with intermediaries fall within the new standards and how compliance programmes should be adapted. In our view, organisations that engage lobbyists or intermediaries should review these contacts now, well ahead of the 2028 transposition deadline, rather than wait for the Dutch implementing legislation.
Want to learn more?
Do you want to know whether your organisation's contacts with public officials or lobbyists fall under the new trading in influence offence? Contact our Corporate Crime & Business Integrity team for a tailored risk assessment.
