Aruanne - COM(2026) 260

EN EN

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Brussels, 8.5.2026

COM(2026) 260 final

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND

THE COUNCIL

on the application of Directive 2009/52/EC of 18 June 2009 providing for minimum

standards on sanctions and measures against employers of illegally staying third-

country nationals

1

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND

THE COUNCIL

on the application of Directive 2009/52/EC of 18 June 2009 providing for minimum

standards on sanctions and measures against employers of illegally staying third-

country nationals

1. Introduction

The Employers Sanctions Directive1 (the Directive) sets out minimum standards for Member

States to detect and sanction employers of irregular migrant workers2, implement inspections

in sectors with a high risk of illegal employment, and provide safeguards for those workers,

including complaint mechanisms and back-payments. In line with the scope of the Directive,

this report focuses on the illegal employment of third-country nationals, who do not have the

right to stay in the EU.

The Directive contributes to the EU’s comprehensive approach to managing migration, by

preventing and deterring the employment in the EU of third-country national workers without

the required legal status, one of the key drivers of illegal migration, hence reducing the

attractiveness of illegal migration to the Union. The European Asylum and Migration

Management Strategy adopted in January 20263 stresses the importance of promoting labour

mobility and stepping up the fight against illegal employment and abuse of third-country

national workers in the EU, particularly in the sectors more exposed to those risks. Several

Member States have outlined measures in their national asylum and migration management

strategies to combat exploitation and reduce illegal employment in accordance with the

Directive4.

Illegal employment also damages the EU economy causing losses in public finances, unduly

depressing wages, worsening working conditions, creating unfair competition among

economic actors and businesses, and significantly increasing the risks of exploitation of

workers. The Directive helps boost the competitiveness of the EU economy and ensure a level

playing field for employers and workers on the European labour market, enforcing collection

1 Directive 2009/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2009 providing for minimum

standards on sanctions and measures against employers of illegally staying third-country nationals, OJ L 168,

30.6.2009, p. 24. 2 The Directive prohibits the employment of ‘illegally staying third-country national workers’. Moreover, the

Directive defines ‘illegal employment’ as the employment of an illegally staying third-country national (Article

2(d)). Therefore, the wording ‘illegal employment’ will be used with this connotation throughout the document,

but for reasons of brevity and clarity, the text will refer to ‘irregular migrant workers’. 3 European Asylum and Migration Management Strategy - Migration and Home Affairs. 4 14 Member States, who have submitted their national asylum and migration strategies to the Commission, have

detailed their measures to counter illegal employment and step up enforcement of the Directive (Bulgaria, Cyprus,

Croatia, Czechia, France, Germany, Italy, Lithuania, Latvia, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Slovenia, Sweden,

Slovakia). Another five Member States (Greece, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Spain) have referred in their national

strategies to their plans to counter labour exploitation, particularly in relation to trafficking in human beings for

labour exploitation purposes.

2

of legitimate tax revenues and social contributions, back payment of wages owed and fair

working conditions. The Directive also contributes to combatting trafficking in human beings

and the Quality Jobs Roadmap5 by improving detection and prevention of labour exploitation,

particularly for non-EU workers.

Although it remains difficult to quantify the extent of illegal employment of irregular migrant

workers in the EU6, Eurostat data gives some indications on its scale. The number of irregular

migrant workers detected in the EU rose from 679 730 in 2021 to 1 265 350 in 2023, with

provisional estimates of 918 925 in 2024.

The previous implementation report on the Directive was adopted in 20217 and called for more

effective application of the key provisions on inspections, penalties and protective measures,

and laid the ground for addressing data gaps. Since then, the Commission has stepped up its

efforts on implementation and enforcement of the Directive, notably promoting mutual

learning and exchange of best practices within the Irregular Migration Expert Group, including

on inspection methodologies, annual national targets for inspections, maximising successful

risk management strategies in inspections, financial sanctions deterrence, and strategic

prioritisation of enforcement in sectors at particular risk of illegal employment. Within the

Expert Group and the Labour Migration Platform8, the Commission has also further facilitated

cooperation with national labour and immigration authorities, social partners, civil society and

international organisations, also to improve effective access to rights for third-country national

workers.

In 2022 the Commission set up a dedicated IT tool and database under the European Migration

Network’s information exchange system, to streamline and facilitate reporting by Member

States, and delivered dedicated training. This has contributed to significant improvements, such

as a more timely, better and harmonised data collection, and a new data repository.

The Commission has promoted cooperation with the European multidisciplinary platform

against criminal threats, in particular for actions against labour exploitation, including

trafficking in human beings. Multidisciplinary and multi-agency cooperation approaches to

addressing labour exploitation have been applied in some Member States, building up on

collaboration among labour inspectors, police, tax authorities, non-governmental organisations

(NGOs), and trade unions.

The Commission has supported Member States, including through EU funding, in carrying out

information campaigns, specifically targeting employers active in the sectors most at risk of

illegal employment and workers in a situation of illegal stay. In addition, the European Labour

Authority (ELA) carried out EU-wide information campaigns for the hospitality, construction,

and transport sectors, and seasonal work.

5 COM(2025) 944 final. 6 Kierans, D. & Kraler, A. (eds.). Handbook on Irregular Migration Data. Concepts, Methods and Practices. Krems:

University of Krems Press, 2025. https://doi.org/10.48341/g31s-vq79. 7 COM(2021) 592 final. 8 See Labour Migration Platform - Migration and Home Affairs. The Expert Group has been meeting twice a year

since 2021.

3

This report, which covers the 2021-2024 period9, is based on the Commission’s duty to

periodically report to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of the

Directive and, where appropriate, propose amendments. The report is being presented in

parallel with the report on the implementation of the Seasonal Workers Directive10 and will

also feed into the upcoming Strategy on Combatting Trafficking in Human Beings in 2026.

The report examines how inspections have been planned and carried out, their results, the

financial and criminal sanctions and other administrative measures taken against non-

compliant employers since 2021, as well as the implementation of the measures to protect

irregular migrant workers. It then presents concrete follow-up measures to address the main

issues identified.

2. How the Directive is applied across the concerned 25 Member States11

2.1 Inspections

Inspections are the primary tool for detecting employers hiring irregular migrant workers and

uncovering exploitation and trafficking in human beings. They enable authorities to hold

employers accountable and apply sanctions, and to provide protection for workers facing

particularly exploitative working conditions.

a. Risk management

Under Article 14(2) of the Directive, Member States must regularly identify, based on risk

assessments, sectors with a high incidence of illegal employment, and report related inspection

figures and results to the Commission.

In line with this, all Member States have developed risk assessment methods. Some Member

States12 incorporate research, socio-economic indicators, and migration trends into their

inspection planning. Cross-referencing of databases, including those held by tax authorities,

national statistical offices, the police and immigration services, is also widely used13.

Complaints by individuals, co-workers, trade unions, and third-country nationals are taken into

account in risk analyses in many Member States14. All these elements are regarded as

contributing to more effective risk management strategies.

Inter-agency cooperation is increasingly embedded in broader inspection strategies. Some

Member States15 conduct joint inspections involving labour inspectorates, law enforcement

bodies, tax authorities and immigration services, while others16 apply regional risk models

tailored to local economic conditions and past compliance trends.

9 2025 data will only be available after mid-2026. 10 COM(2026)261. 11 Denmark and Ireland opted out. 12 For example, Latvia, Netherlands and Sweden. 13 For example, Belgium, Hungary and Slovenia. 14 For example, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Greece, Netherlands and Sweden. 15 Belgium, Bulgaria, Finland, Romania and Slovenia. 16 Hungary, Sweden.

4

Member States have different approaches to devising their strategies to better target sectors for

inspections. A few17 carry out broad, sector-wide inspections. By contrast, others18 prioritise

sectors with a high incidence of undeclared work and employment of third-country nationals,

especially (i) agriculture, (ii) construction, (iii) transport, (iv) wholesale and retail trade, (v)

accommodation and food services, and (vi) manufacturing. Some Member States apply flexible

approaches19 focused on seasonal, labour-intensive sectors where exploitation risks are highest.

A large majority of Member States require inspectors to report detections to law enforcement

and migration authorities20. In almost all Member States21, immigration and law enforcement

authorities systematically participate in inspections. To a lesser but still significant extent, tax

and revenue authorities are also regularly involved, while other bodies, including social

security and anti-fraud authorities22, customs administrations23 and social insurance

institutions24 may also participate.

Member States also reported on joint inspections25, unannounced inspections26 and regional

coordination27. These developments are part of a broader trend towards more integrated,

intelligence-led, and data-driven enforcement.

b. Inspections carried out in 2021-2024

Over the 2021–2024 period, Member Statessteadily increased labour inspectionsunder the

Directive, reaching almost 600 000 in 2024 (see graph 1 in annex). However, significant

disparities remain between Member States.

Most Member States focused inspections on a limited number of sectors, characterised by low-

skilled, labour-intensive jobs that tend to be occupied by the highest proportion of third-country

nationals. All Member States carried out inspections in construction and accommodation and

food service. 18 Member States prioritised agriculture, 16 prioritised transport, 12 wholesale

and retail trade activities and 11 manufacturing. This reflects an increasing prioritisation of the

sectors most at risk of illegal employment.

These trends are confirmed by the findings of the 2025 Fundamental Rights Agency survey of

civil society and trade unions 28, which identified (i) construction, (ii) manufacturing, (iii)

accommodation and food service, and (iv) transportation and storage, as the sectors with most

violations of labour rights of third-country nationals, regardless of their immigration status.

17 For example, Austria. 18 Croatia, Malta, Romania, Slovakia. 19 Belgium, Bulgaria, Greece. 20 All Member States bound by the Directive except France, Greece, Luxembourg, Netherlands and Sweden. 21 21 Member States out of 25 concerned by the Directive. The exceptions are France, Greece, Luxembourg and

Sweden. 22 Respectively Czechia and France. 23 Czechia, France, Italy, Portugal. 24 Austria. 25 For example, Bulgaria, Finland and Slovenia. 26 Belgium, Greece, Luxembourg, Slovenia. 27 Hungary, Sweden. 28 Facilitation of complaints and back-payment of third-country workers in an irregular situation – Fundamental

Rights Agency small-scale survey with trade unions civil society – main results, 5 June 2025.

5

The survey also pointed to additional sectors at risk, such as cleaning, the meat industry,

childcare, domestic work and agriculture.

c. Results of inspections: detections

The percentage of inspections leading to the detection of irregular migrant workers also grew

over the 2021-2024 period. The absolute number of inspections leading to detection increased

significantly, from 17 100 in 201929 to over 28 000 in 2023 and 202430. The number of

detections during inspections rose by over 70% between 2021 and 2024 (see graph 2 in annex).

Some Member States consistently reported the highest detection rates, both in absolute terms

and relative to the number of employees in key sectors31. These trends underscore the increased

volume of inspections and better targeting of enforcement activities in labour-intensive sectors,

such as construction, accommodation and food services, and retail.

Data for 2021-2024 indicate anupward trend in proceedings32 opened as a result of inspections,

from 30 660 in 2021 to 40 661 in 2024, however with only a few Member States33 accounting

for much of the increase (see graph 3 in annex).

2.2 Financial sanctions

Between 2021 and 2024, 14 Member States34 made legislative changes relevant to the

Directive, either increasing the minimum and/or maximum level of financial sanctions or

revising upwards their amount. This indicates a trend towards more dissuasive sanctions35,

although significant differences in the levels of fines persist across Member States.

Member States base their financial sanctions on minimum or hourly wages36, base price37, or

set fixed amounts38, or use a graduated scale based on proportionality, employer circumstances

and the option of not issuing a sanction39.

All Member States take into account the number of irregular migrant workers employed and

most increase fines for repeated infringements. Around half40 take the seriousness of the

infringement into account (e.g. number of workers concerned, presence of minor workers).

Seven Member States41 reported that the financial sanction is reduced where the employer is a

natural person and where no particularly exploitative working conditions are involved.

29 2019 is taken as a point of comparison in the previous reporting period, as 2020 was exceptionally affected by

the COVID-19 pandemic. 30 18 700 in 2021, 22 800 in 2022, 28 800 in 2023 and 28 406 in 2024. 31 Austria, Germany, France, Italy, Netherlands, Spain. 32 Proceedings means any action taken by Member State authorities following an inspection, leading to an

administrative or criminal sanction. 33 Austria, Spain, followed by Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, Netherlands. 34 Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Estonia, Finland, France, Hungary, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland,

Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden. 35 The partial exceptions are Slovakia, which lowered the penalty rate but continues to have amongst the highest

maximum financial penalties, and Portugal, which left the amount of financial sanctions unchanged. 36 Estonia, France, Hungary, Lithuania, Poland, Portugal. 37 Sweden. 38 Luxembourg. 39 For example, Estonia. 40 Belgium, Bulgaria, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Netherlands, Poland, Slovakia. 41 As provided for by Article5(3): Cyprus, Czechia, Finland, Hungary, Lithuania, Netherlands and Slovenia.

6

In terms of fines imposed on employers per irregular migrant employed, the minimum

sanctions range from below EUR 50042 to EUR 1 000 -2 00043 and as high as EUR 5 000 and

10 00044. By contrast, some Member States do not provide for a minimum sanction45. The

maximum sanctions range from EUR 3 00046 to EUR 25 000-90 00047 and up to EUR 200 000-

500 00048. In one case49, the financial sanction is EUR 5 000 plus imprisonment.

The overall amount of financial sanctions actually imposed on employers across the EU in the

reporting period rose from EUR 126.2 million in 2021 to over EUR 170.4 million in 2022 and

well over EUR 200 million in 2023-2024 (EUR 220.8 million in 2023 and almost EUR 212

million in 2024; see graph 4 in annex).

Most fines were imposed on employers in Member States with higher levels of financial

sanctions set out in national legislation, matched by a large number of proceedings opened50.

In parallel, several Member States reported few fines imposed. This was sometimes explained

by relatively low levels of undeclared work and illegal employment of third-country nationals,

and thus fewer detections and fewer proceedings opened after inspections51.

Some Member States reported not having applied financial sanctions or detected any

significant number of irregular migrant workers52, while others prioritised criminal

prosecutions and penalties. Three Member States reported sanctions following criminal

proceedings without providing details of the administrative fines imposed53.

Overall, the majority of Member States54 increased both the number and amount of sanctions

against non-compliant employers.

2.3. Criminal sanctions

According to Article 9 of the Directive, criminal sanctions are applied in cases of: (i) illegal

employment with repeated and persistent violations, (ii) a significant number of irregular

42 EUR 210 in Latvia, EUR 234 in Poland and around EUR 384 for natural persons in Bulgaria. 43 Austria EUR 1 000, Belgium EUR 2 400, Cyprus EUR 1 500, Finland EUR 1 250, Czechia EUR 2 000 (for

legal persons), Hungary twice of the minimum wage for natural persons and 10 times that amount for legal

persons, Portugal EUR 2 000, Romania EUR 1 981.

44 France, Luxembourg, Slovenia. 45 Czechia for natural persons, Estonia, Germany. 46 Belgium, Cyprus and Hungary. 47 EUR 26 000 (Slovenia), EUR 28 000 (Belgium), EUR 30 000 per employee for natural person employers

(France), EUR 37 530 (Finland) and EUR 90 000 (Portugal). 48 EUR 200 000 (France, Slovakia) and EUR 500 000 (Germany). 49 Italy. 50 The main examples are Austria, France, Romania and Spain, followed by Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg,

Netherlands, and then by Greece, Hungary, Latvia, Portugal, Slovenia, and Sweden. Italy did not provide data on

the actual financial sanctions applied. The Italian National Labour Inspectorate applies an administrative monetary

fine for undeclared work, which is increased by 20% also in cases involving the irregular employment of non-EU

nationals without a residence permit in accordance with Article 3 of Decree-Law No 12 of 22 February 2002. 51 For example, Estonia, Finland, Lithuania and Latvia. 52 Finland, Malta and Slovakia. 53 Cyprus, Italy, Malta. 54 Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Estonia, France, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands,

Romania, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden.

7

migrants, (iii) particularly exploitative working conditions, (iv) knowingly employing victims

of trafficking in human beings and (v) employing minors.

Since 2021, some Member States have informed the Commission of legislative changes

increasing or decreasing prison time and/or criminal fines in the circumstances mentioned

above.

In France, the employment – including through an intermediary – of any third-country national not authorised to

work is a criminal offence. This includes knowingly using, directly or indirectly, the services of an employer of a

foreign national not authorised to work. In addition to a prison penalty of five years, a 2024 law increased criminal

fines from EUR 15 000 to EUR 30 000 per employee for natural persons employers. In the context of organised

crime, the penalty goes up to 10 years imprisonment and the criminal fine is increased from EUR 100 000 to EUR

200 000.

In 2024, Latvia also increased penalties for infringing provisions set out in criminal law55, increasing the

maximum prison term to up to three years, while the existing alternative sanctions – temporary detention,

probationary supervision, community service and a fine – remain applicable.

By a 2023 amendment to the Labour Code, Luxembourg increased the prison term from eight days to up to one

year, in addition to or as an alternative to fines ranging from EUR 2 501 to EUR 125 000 per irregular migrant

worker.

In Slovakia, a 2024 Criminal Code amendment reduced criminal sanctions from imprisonment of up to two years

to one year for simple cases of illegal employment. For the circumstances provided in Article 9, it reduced criminal

sanctions from imprisonment of between three months and three years to imprisonment of up to two years.

Considerable differences however remain between Member States in the severity of criminal

sanctions in terms of length of imprisonment levels. These range from no fixed minimum and

a maximum of one year in cases of illegal employment without aggravating circumstances to

five years imprisonment (10 years for circumstances under Article 9)56, in addition to criminal

fines57. The amount of criminal fines also varies widely, ranging from EUR 2 500 to EUR 200

000 and EUR 500 000, depending on the circumstances.

In addition, significant data gaps remain in the number of criminal proceedings and the actual

fines or prison terms imposed. Most Member States nonetheless reported either exact data or

best estimates of criminal sanctions for aggravated cases of illegal employment listed under

Article 958.

55 Employment of a person, who is not entitled to remain in the Republic of Latvia, if the infringement is

committed by the employer and if a minor is employed, more than five persons are employed, or if a person is

employed in particularly exploitative working conditions, or a victim of human trafficking has knowingly been

employed. 56 Germany. In Slovenia, Article 199 of the Criminal Code provides for a fine or imprisonment for up to one year.

The same article also sets out two more qualified forms of criminal offence. 57 France. In Slovenia, a fine or imprisonment of up to one year is laid down for natural persons, while a fine of

between EUR 10 000 and EUR 1 million is laid down for legal persons. 58 Information gaps partly result from the absence of a disaggregated data collection system that distinguishes

prosecutions and convictions specifically relating to the circumstances listed in Article 9 of the Directive from

criminal prosecutions initiated for all cases of illegal employment or other violations of labour law, and from

proceedings on trafficking in human beings for the purpose of labour exploitation. The lack of a common

information sharing platform or established information channels between Ministries of Labour, Labour

Inspectorates and Prosecutors and Ministries of Justice, Ministries of Interior and police has also had an impact.

The lack of a specific annual reporting duty for criminal sanctions in the Directive also contributes to the data

gap.

8

In particular, in 2021-2024, a total of 14 798 criminal proceedings were opened, leading to 5

951 rulings. Two Member States reported having initiated more than 1 000 criminal

proceedings per year59, one more than 500 per year60 and three recorded a total number of

criminal proceedings ranging from 236 to 45761.

Most criminal cases were initiated for repeated offences and offences aggravated by a

significant number of irregular migrant workers, whereas prosecutions for employment of

minors appear to be extremely rare. Three Member States informed that no criminal sanctions

have been applied62 and three63 that no information was available.

Most financial (administrative and criminal) sanctions, criminal prosecutions and convictions

in the past four years were concentrated in less than half of Member States64.

2.4. Other administrative measures

19 Member States65 confirmed that in 2021-2024 they had applied other measures, such as total

or partial exclusion from public benefits, aid or subsidies, or the recovery of such funding for

up to 12 months preceding the detection of illegal employment66. Other Member States also

excluded employers from participation in public tenders and contracts67, temporarily or

permanently closed their establishments68, or imposed additional measures such as: (i)

revoking agency approvals69, (ii) exclusion from work permits or employment programs70, (iii)

applying additional fines for illegally hiring third-country nationals in public construction

projects71, (iv) exclusion from labour market admission procedures for up to five years72, (v) a

ban on hiring third-country nationals for up to five years73, and (vi) prohibition from exercising

for up to three years the professional or social activity, which served directly or indirectly to

commit the offence74.

59 Belgium initiated 4 422 criminal proceedings (1 444 in 2021, 1 423 in 2022 and 1 555 in 2023) and France 3

684 criminal proceedings for the employment of a third-country national without a work permit, i.e. beyond

merely foreign workers in an irregular situation (1 302 in 2021, 1 250 in 2022 and 1 132 in 2023). 60 Italy initiated in the period 3 135 criminal proceedings for illegal employment of a third-country national

without a residence permit (522 in 2021, 609 in 2022, 870 in 2023 and 1 134 in 2024). 61 Cyprus reported 457 criminal proceedings for illegal employment in general (149 in 2023 and 308 in 2024),

Germany a total of 236 criminal proceedings in cases under Article 9 of the Directive (of which 50% for cases

involving a significant number of employed irregular migrants), and Sweden 397 criminal prosecutions, without

differentiating between prosecutions according to the circumstances listed in Article 9. 62 Estonia, Latvia, Poland. 63 Lithuania, Luxembourg, Portugal. 64 In particular, Belgium, Cyprus, France, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Sweden. To a lesser degree by Czechia,

Romania, Slovenia and Spain. 65 Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czechia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Latvia,

Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia. 66 Austria, Czechia, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Netherlands. 67 Austria, Bulgaria, Finland, Hungary, Lithuania, Netherlands, Slovakia, Slovenia.68 Austria, Croatia, Germany, Greece Finland, France, Hungary, Italy, Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal, Netherlands.

France and Italy reported fewer than 100 occurrences of these measures per year.69 Belgium. 70 Bulgaria, Slovenia. In the latter, a hiring ban can be imposed following the application of fines and rulings. 71 Cyprus. 72 Germany. 73 Netherlands, Slovenia. 74 Luxembourg.

9

In Croatia, employers employing irregular migrants for the third and each subsequent time within a period of six

months, may immediately be banned from carrying out activities on the premises concerned. The decision is

revoked within three days of the date of payment of a fine after 30 days have elapsed. In addition, employers who

illegally hire third-country nationals are listed publicly.

In Germany, where there is evidence that employers are unreliable, they may be excluded from the Federal

Employment Agency’s labour market admission procedure for up to five years. A trade ban and withdrawal of

permits can also be applied to employers, who have illegally employed third-country nationals.

However, bearing in mind significant data gaps in most Member States, available indications

point overall to relatively infrequent application of other measures75.

2.5. Subcontracting – intermediaries

Irregular migrant workers can in some cases be employed under employment relationships

involving sub-contracting arrangements, and through intermediaries, recruiters, temporary

work agencies, and increasingly via online platforms. This makes it more difficult to identify

employers and hold them liable, as confirmed by trade unions, employers’ representatives and

civil society organisations76.

Article 8 of the Directive extends liability to any intermediary employer, where the main

contractor or direct subcontractor knew that the sub-contracting employer had hired irregular

migrant workers77. Since 2021, some Member States have introduced new legislation

strengthening the protection of workers employed by subcontractors in public works contracts.

These measures include: (i) extending liability for financial sanctions applied in subcontracting

chains78, (ii) detailing joint and several liability for unpaid salaries79. (iii) issuing administrative

warnings for financial claims holding contractors and subcontractors jointly and severally

liable80, (iv) and clarifying the legal provisions on joint and several liability of direct

subcontractors81.

75 The highest annual number of applications of these measures is 81 (Croatia). 76 The challenges to enforcement linked to the complexity and length of subcontracting chains, as well as the often

problematic role of intermediaries were consistently raised by Member States, social partners and civil society

organisations in a number of consultations held by the Commission. These include, non-exhaustively, the Labour

Migration Platform on 15 October 2025, the 10th European Migration Forum on 27–28 November 2025

(Roundtable 2: Protecting migrant workers whilst fighting against their illegal employment), the Virtual ad hoc

sector meeting with social partners on the implementation of the Employers Sanctions Directive and the Seasonal

Workers Directive on 2 December 2025, as well as the Expert Group on the Employers Sanctions Directive

meeting on 5 December 2025. 77 The liability is subject to certain limitations in Article 8, as the contractor that has undertaken due diligence

obligations as defined by national law is not liable. Member States may also provide for more stringent liability

rules under national law. 78 Czechia. 79 Croatia, Slovenia. 80 Italy. 81 Luxembourg, Article L. 572-2, 572-3 (4) and 572-10 of the Labour Code.

10

Belgium has introduced a legal provision that frees the contractor from liability for the employment of irregular

migrant workers by its direct subcontractor82. The new provisions stipulate that the contractor must also verify

that certain documents are held by its subcontractor, if the latter belongs to one of the high-risk sectors83.

Other Member States said that they had not introduced new sub-contracting measures84, but

outlined existing provisions enforcing the Directive’s rules on subcontracting85. One Member

State86 reported that information on subcontractor liabilities is disseminated via employers’

organisations.

Several Member States indicated in several consultations that extensive subcontracting chains,

including in cross-border contexts and those involving posting of third-country national

workers, make it difficult to effectively determine liability for illegal employment.

Trade unions and civil society also indicated that the role of recruitment agencies and

intermediaries as conduits to irregular employment is not properly addressed, and long

subcontracting chains in sectors such as construction hinder enforcement, especially of Article

8.

2.6 Protective measures

a. Access to justice and information

In 2021-2024, more than half of Member States reported having implemented measures to raise

awareness and inform employers of their legal obligations87. Around a third carried out broader

information campaigns on financial and criminal sanctions and other measures envisaged in

the Directive - primarily targeting employers, labour inspectors, and law enforcement

authorities88.

Most Member States also reported that they provide information to irregular migrant workers

about their right to lodge complaints, typically through institutional websites. Information may

also be shared by labour inspectors or other state officials at local offices, by phone, or during

workplace inspections. In some cases, this is done by the police or border authorities during

their interactions with third-country nationals89. Several Member States have set up dedicated

services, such as help lines, information hubs or legal consultation to inform irregular workers

of their rights90. In some Member States, information is disseminated by third parties91. Few

82 These provisions apply only in the Flemish region, in line with Belgium’s division of powers. The provisions

are set out in Article 12/4 of the Act of 30 April 1999 on the employment of foreign workers and will enter into

force on a date to be set by the Flemish Government, and at the latest on 1 January 2026. Brussels-Capital and

Wallonia regions have not adopted similar rules introducing this strengthened verification duty. 83 These legal provisions, to enter into force by 1 January 2026, will apply only in the Flemish region. 84 Germany, Malta. 85 Austria, Bulgaria, France, Hungary. 86 Cyprus. 87 Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czechia, Estonia, Finland, France, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg,

Netherlands, Romania. 88 Austria, Belgium, Czechia, Italy, Lithuania, Netherlands. 89 Information provision via institutional websites: Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Estonia, Finland, France,

Greece, Hungary, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Slovenia, Spain; in person, by phone

or, during inspections: Austria, Belgium, Czechia, Estonia, France, Greece, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg,

Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia; by police or border guards: Croatia, Latvia, Portugal, Sweden. 90 Belgium, France, Greece, Slovenia. 91 Austria, Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Sweden.

11

Member States conduct information campaigns targeting irregular migrant workers

specifically92 , but several offer multilingual services93.

Half of Member States reported having set up a specific procedure to ensure that irregular

migrant workers are systematically and objectively informed about their rights (on back

payments and complaints) before the enforcement of any return decision94. However, in most

cases, this information is not provided as part of the return procedure95. The remaining Member

States either have no such procedure to inform irregular migrant workers about their rights or

did not report it96, though over half allow for information to be provided independently of the

return procedure97.

According to the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) and civil society, irregular

migrant workers tend not to be adequately informed about their labour rights by Member State

authorities and, if they are, information is usually provided by third parties, such as trade unions

and NGOs98.

b. Lodging complaints

A key requirement under Article 13 of the Directive is creating specific mechanisms to make

it easier to file complaints with the competent State authority or through third parties (such as

trade unions, workers’ associations, or NGOs), including when the worker is no longer present

in the Member State.

Generally, complaint mechanisms are available to all workers in all Member States, but they

are not specifically tailored to those who are staying illegally. Ten Member States have

introduced new measures to improve access to complaint mechanisms99. Five also reported

new safe-reporting measures, enabling irregular migrant workers to engage with law

enforcement without their migration status affecting the exercise of their rights100.

92 Lithuania, Netherlands, Romania. 93 Bulgaria, Czechia, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Slovenia,

Spain. 94 Austria, Croatia, Estonia, France, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia,

Sweden. 95 Austria, France, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia. 96 Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czechia, Finland, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Netherlands. 97 Information is provided independently of the return procedure:

– during inspections: Austria, Belgium, France, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Portugal, Slovakia.

– by labour or social inspectorates: Belgium, Czechia, Estonia, Greece, Italy, Lithuania.

– by NGOs, trade unions and worker representation bodies: Austria, Belgium, Luxembourg, Portugal, Sweden.

– via information hubs: Slovenia.

– through information campaigns: Lithuania, Netherlands, Romania.

– by the police: Portugal.

In Latvia, information is reportedly provided only within the context of the return procedure. 98 ETUC reports that these services have faced significant funding cuts in recent years, particularly following the

COVID-19 pandemic (ETUC contribution to the Employers Sanctions’ Directive implementation report in June

2025). Similar views were also expressed in several consultations held by the Commission, including at the Labour

Migration Platform meeting on 15 October 2025 (Labour Migration Platform - Migration and Home Affairs), as

well as in the findings of the “Facilitation of complaints and back-payment of third-country workers in an irregular

situation – Fundamental Rights Agency small-scale survey with trade unions civil society – main results”. 99 Belgium, Czechia, Hungary, Italy, France, Germany, Greece, Lithuania, Netherlands, Poland. 100 Austria, Finland, France, Hungary, Italy.

12

Despite progress in several Member States on informing these workers of their rights, FRA,

ETUC and civil society noted that workers were still discouraged from filing complaints

against their employers in the reporting period. This is reportedly because of fears of income

loss, detention, return orders, and retaliation, including employers reporting their irregular

status to avoid paying wages.

In more than half of Member States, complaints can be lodged through both state entities and

third parties101; in one exclusively through third parties102and in the rest solely through state

entities103.

A majority of Member States allow trade unions to file complaints on behalf of irregular

migrant workers104, and more than half allow other associations with a legitimate interest to do

so105. All Member States allow workers to claim unpaid wages, even when they are no longer

residing in the EU, in line with Article 6 of the Directive.

Most Member States offer online complaint options106, accept written complaints107 and allow

in-person submissions108. Almost a third accept complaints in foreign languages109.

In most Member States, in-person complaints can be submitted at labour inspectorates, social

services or related authorities110. Some Member States allow submissions at:

• police or border immigration services111;

• courts or the prosecutor’s office112;

• customs offices113;

• occupational health and safety authorities114;

• enforcement authorities115;

• the company’s works council116 ; or

101 Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Estonia, Greece, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland,

Portugal, Slovenia, Spain. 102 Germany. 103 Croatia, Czechia, Finland, France, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, Sweden; no information for Austria. 104 Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Croatia, Czechia, Estonia, Finland, France, Greece, Hungary, Latvia,

Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden. 105 Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Finland, France, Hungary, Latvia, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Romania, Slovenia,

Spain, Sweden. 106 Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Germany, Estonia Finland, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania,

Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden. 107 Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Estonia, Germany, Finland, France, Greece, Hungary,

Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain,

Sweden. 108 Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Estonia, Germany, Finland, France, Greece, Hungary,

Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain. 109 Belgium, Bulgaria, Czechia, Estonia, Greece, Netherlands, Portugal, Slovakia. 110 Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Estonia, Greece, Hungary, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands,

Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain. 111 France, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal. 112 Austria, Belgium, Estonia, France, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Sweden. 113 Luxembourg, Slovenia. 114 Finland. 115 Sweden. 116 Germany.

13

• human resources departments117.

One Member State allows complaints to be lodged at any state institution118.

Nearly all Member States reported providing training to labour inspectors on the rights of

irregular migrant workers under the Directive, and on identifying cases of labour exploitation

and trafficking in human beings119.

Most Member States apply a statute of limitation for making back-payment claims, ranging

from four months120 to two to six years121. A few reported no limitation period122.

Approximately half of Member States allow anonymous complaints, though some impose

restrictions on this option – for instance, permitting anonymity only for health and safety

concerns, not for labour disputes123.

At the same time, the vast majority of Member States could not provide disaggregated data on

complaints lodged specifically by irregular migrant workers124. Some reported only overall

complaint statistics for the entire population125. Three Member States provided disaggregated

data specifically covering such workers126.

Indicative figures for 2021-2024 range from over 50 and 100 cases, respectively, in two

Member States127, to between 20 and 50 complaints in three128, and fewer than 20 or 10 per

year in others129. Only three Member States reported monitoring the exact number of

complaints submitted by these workers130, while around half provided information on the

follow-up actions taken131.

For 2021-2024,13 Member States reported measures allowing irregular migrant workers to

receive legal counselling from state entities132, with an exemption from, or reduction of court

117 Germany. 118 Croatia. 119 All Member States except Malta. 120 Lithuania. 121 Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Estonia, Finland, France, Greece, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Netherlands,

Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia. 122 Germany, Cyprus, Czechia, Luxembourg, Portugal, Sweden. 123 Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Estonia, Finland, Greece, Hungary, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands,

Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden. 124 Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Germany, Greece, Estonia, Finland, France, Hungary, Italy, Latvia,

Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Sweden. 125 Czechia, Netherlands, Poland. 126 Belgium: 377 complaints submitted to the federal inspection service and 903 reports to the contact point for

fair competition; Czechia: 1931 complaints related to illegal employment, 26 of which filed by third-country

nationals; Slovakia: 85 complaints. 127 Malta, Belgium. 128 Croatia, Lithuania, Slovakia. 129 Bulgaria, Cyprus, Estonia, Finland, Portugal, Romania. 130 Luxembourg (89 in 2024), Slovakia, Slovenia. 131 Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Estonia, Greece, Hungary, Lithuania, Luxembourg,

Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Spain. 132 Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czechia, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Malta, Poland, Portugal.

14

costs or state fees133. Around half134 offer free legal representation and free interpretation

services.

France grants irregular migrant workerslegal assistance under certain conditions, for example habitual residence

in France subject to means-testing. Legal aid applications can be submitted online. Victims of criminal offences,

regardless of their nationality or residence status, are entitled to free, personalised, and multidisciplinary support,

including legal, psychological, and social assistance, from victim support organisations. This includes information

on legal proceedings’ and help with formalities.

13 Member States reported that irregular migrant workers can access legal or social assistance

through NGOs or trade unions135. 10 supported third parties in providing information, legal

assistance, and other services to them136.

According to the Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants (PICUM)

and other civil society organisations, access to justice for irregular migrant workers is

reportedly still limited in many Member States, particularly for court proceedings. This is due,

for instance, to high legal fees or complex procedures. The FRA survey’s findings claim that

there are structural barriers to irregular migrant workers submitting complaints, such as

insufficient recognition of evidence or the absence of safeguards against return137.

c. Access to remuneration: back payments of wages owed

Under the Directive, Member States must ensure that irregular migrant workers can recover

unpaid wages (Article 6) and that third parties with a legitimate interest, such as NGOs and

trade unions, can support or represent workers in related proceedings (Article 13(2)). Article

6(3) also sets out a presumption of at least three months of employment unless, among

others, the employer or the employee can prove otherwise.

In 2021–2024, no Member State reported systematic data on procedures launched by irregular

migrant workers to recover unpaid wages. Very few Member States reported data on recovery

procedures initiated after the third-country national had been returned, confirming very few

cases138 and even fewer successful outcomes139.

The FRA survey confirms the scarcity of data collected by organisations supporting third-

country national workers in claiming back-payments. Very few organisations140 collect

statistics on complaints, and even fewer report specifically on complaints from irregular

migrants or actual back-payments141. While back-payment requests are relatively rare, even

among regularly staying third-country national workers, they are even more rare for those with

133 Belgium, Czechia, Estonia, Finland, France, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania. 134 Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Czechia, Finland, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Luxembourg, Poland, Slovakia, Sweden. 135 Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Czechia, Estonia, Germany, Greece, Finland, France, Lithuania, Netherlands,

Portugal, Sweden. 136 Austria, Cyprus, Czechia, Italy, Finland, Germany, Lithuania, Netherlands, Poland, Slovenia. 137 Facilitation of complaints and back-payment of third-country workers in an irregular

situation – Fundamental Rights Agency small-scale survey with trade unions civil society – main results, 5 June

2025. PICUM input into ESD Implementation Report 2025. 138 Bulgaria (<10), Lithuania (<50), Romania (<10). 139 Bulgaria, Cyprus, Romania (each <10 successful cases). 140 6 out of the 27 organisations who responded to the FRA survey. 141 4 and 3 organisations, respectively.

15

an irregular status, with complaints ranging from 236 and 229142 to as few as 12 and 7

respectively in the same Member States143.

Most Member States calculate back payments based on unpaid wages144, including taxes and

social security contributions145. Over half of Member States factor in the costs of transferring

the back payments to the country, where the third-country national has returned or been

returned146.

Where the employee cannot prove the employment duration, most Member States apply the

presumption of at least three months’ employment, with pay based on the statutory minimum

wage, collective agreements or equivalent practices.

In most Member States, the courts, and in particular civil courts, have jurisdiction to adjudicate

and award back payments147. Labour inspectorates perform this role in roughly one third of

Member States148, and a few Member States rely on specialised bodies149.

In 19 out of 25 Member States, irregular migrant workers can be represented during these

proceedings mainly by (i) trade unions, NGOs or lawyers150, (ii) the Chamber of Labour151,

(iii) the Federal Migration Centre152, (iv) public-interest bodies, (v) family members153 or (vi)

the Equality Ombudsman154.

To facilitate back payments, 10 Member States allow irregular migrant workers to request

recovery without lodging a formal claim155 and in over half temporary residence permits can

be granted or extended until back payments are received or proceedings concluded156. Around

half of Member States also enable back payments to be sent abroad, through (i) deposit

142 Netherlands (236), Belgium (229). 143 Germany (7), Slovenia (12). 144 Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Finland, France, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Latvia,

Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden. 145 Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Germany, Finland, France, Greece, Hungary, Italy,

Latvia, Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden. 146 Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Germany, Finland, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg,

Poland, Slovakia, Sweden.

147 Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Germany, Cyprus, Czechia, Estonia, Finland, France, Greece, Hungary, Italy,

Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden. 148 Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Greece, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Hungary, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia. 149 France – French Office for Immigration and Integration; Hungary – National Tax and Customs Office; Sweden

– Enforcement Authority. 150 Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Czechia, Estonia, Greece, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Latvia,

Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden. 151 Austria. 152 Belgium. 153 Poland. 154 Sweden. 155 Bulgaria, Croatia, France, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Luxembourg, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia. 156 Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Estonia, Finland, France Germany, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Netherlands,

Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden.

16

funds157, (ii) state-managed transfers158, (iii) remote proceedings159, (iv) monitoring by

authorities 160 or (v) legal representation 161.

Additionally, 11 Member States have adopted various measures to discourage withholding of

wages and improve access to back payments, including:

• restrictions on the employers hiring new staff;

• asset freezes;

• state compensation mechanisms;

• state-initiated recovery procedures;

• public lists of non-compliant employers;

• refusing residence and work permit applications;

• joint and several liability; exclusion from public procurement, public contracts and

public funds;

• bans on employment of foreign nationals;

• disqualification from company management roles;

• limits on fulfilment of other obligations; and

• transferring wage-payment responsibilities to another entity 162.

Despite Member State measures to facilitate back payments, FRA, ETUC, PICUM and other

organisations report limited capacity, high legal costs, and barriers to representing workers in

court in many Member States. According to indications from ETUC, the presumption of three

months’ employment is not consistently applied across Member States and gathering evidence

is reportedly challenging in several Member States, particularly where multiple subcontractors

are involved163.

Counselling centres further report that pursuing wage claims from outside the EU is hindered

by language barriers, lack of access to information, and limited legal support164.

Even when a back payment decision is granted, enforcement shortcomings remain. According

to FRA, PICUM, and ETUC, employers often avoid payment through insolvency, asset

transfers, or letterbox companies. Many workers also give up on their claims due to: (i) lengthy

procedures, (ii) high costs, (iii) lack of representation, (iv) unawareness of state compensation

mechanisms or (v) inability to open bank accounts.

d. Granting of temporary residence permits

157 Belgium, Croatia, Greece. 158 France. 159 Bulgaria, Estonia, Lithuania. 160 Luxembourg, Sweden. 161 Austria, Netherlands. 162 These were reported in the ad hoc survey launched by the Commission and aimed at Member States, carried

out between February and April 2025, published at EUSurvey - Overview. 163 Aforementioned ETUC contribution of June 2025; FRA small-scale survey with trade unions civil society of

5 June 2025; PICUM input of June 2025. 164 Aforementioned ETUC contribution, June 2025.

17

Article 13(4) of the Directive requires Member States to define in national law the conditions

under which they may grant to third-country nationals, on a case-by-case basis, permits of

limited duration linked to the length of the relevant national proceedings. Such permits can be

extended until back payments of wages are received, in accordance with Article 6(5) of the

Directive.

Most Member States make no systematic distinction between temporary residence permits

granted to third-country nationals in the context of particularly exploitative working conditions

and the illegal employment of minors under Article 13(4) of the Directive, and those granted

to victims of human trafficking under Council Directive 2004/81/EC. This complicates data

collection and monitoring.

In some Member States, victims of particularly exploitative working conditions and victims of

trafficking in human beings can obtain residence permits under the same legal provision,

without a separate procedure or distinction165. In others, protection for victims of trafficking

may also cover labour exploitation but permits issued under the Directive are not clearly

distinguished166.

The absence of a specific legal basis in several Member States means that cases of exploitative

working conditions are handled under broader migration frameworks or systems often designed

primarily for trafficking victims167.

In 2024, Italy adopted legislation to strengthen protection for third-country nationals, who are victims of labour

exploitation, including enhanced safeguards anda specific residence permit for foreign workers, who are victims

of violence, abuse, or labour exploitation. The permit, issued by the police at the request of the courts, is granted

for one year, is renewable for up to one year or more, and can later be converted into a work or study permit.

Confirmation of exploitation and the worker’s cooperation are required for eligibility. The Labour Inspectorate

identifies cases, refers them, and provides an opinion on the issuing of the permit.

In 2021-2024, 13 Member States168 reported having granted temporary permits under Article

13(4) of the Directive, reflecting a gradual increase in the use of this protective measure. 11

Member States169 said that they had not granted any of these permits during the reporting

period. Across the EU, a total of approximately 5 000 permits were granted in 2021-2024,

mostly concentrated in five Member States170. Several Member States granted fewer than 10

permits per year171.

According to the FRA survey, only 3 of the 76 organisations consulted indicated that residence

permits were often or very often issued to irregular migrant workers, who were victims of

165 For example, France. 166 For example, Belgium. 167 For example, Malta and Portugal. 168 Bulgaria, Czechia, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Lithuania, Netherlands, Poland, Romania,

Spain, Sweden. The majority are concentrated in France, Greece Italy, Netherlands, Spain and Cyprus. 169 Belgium, Cyprus, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Luxembourg, Malta, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia. 170 France accounted for the largest share, granting 2 352 permits overall, including 782 in 2024. Italy granted

678, Greece 540, Spain 466 and the Netherlands an estimated 300, including 230 in 2024. 171 Bulgaria, Czechia, Finland, Germany, Lithuania, Poland, Sweden.

18

particularly exploitative labour conditions172. ETUC member organisations reported that

residence permits are rarely granted for the purpose of claiming unpaid wages through labour

courts. In practice, these permits are generally issued when the worker cooperates in criminal

proceedings and obtains certification from the prosecution; a requirement that can discourage

workers from lodging a claim173.

3. Main findings and next steps

Overall, progress has been made in implementing the Directive since the last report in 2021. In

comparison with previous reporting periods, Member States have strengthened risk assessment

methodologies in inspections’ planning, albeit to varying degrees. This has led to more targeted

inspections in high-risk sectors and increased the number of proceedings opened against

infringing employers and the financial sanctions issued against them. Data quality and

availability have also generally improved compared to the previous reporting period.

However, key shortcomings remain. There are wide discrepancies in how the legislation is

applied across the 25 Member States, including regarding administrative and criminal

sanctions. On inspections, the information available on the coverage of key higher-risk sectors

does not enable us to determine whether there is a sufficient level of enforcement of the

Directive across Member States.

Most importantly, it is not certain whether the various inspections and sanctions applied across

Member States effectively deter the hiring of irregular migrant workers. In this regard,

significant data gaps persist in: (i) criminal sanctions, (ii) the number of claims introduced by

migrant workers, (iii) the issuance of temporary residence and (iv) the number of actual back

payments obtained. Vulnerable irregular migrants are often insufficiently informed of their

rights, while effective access to and use of complaint mechanisms remains limited. The

Directive’s effectiveness in reducing the overall incentives of employers to hire irregular

migrant workers therefore requires further analysis and assessment, also based on better data.

Following up on these findings, the Commission will launch an evaluation of the Directive

in 2026. This will enable a wider in-depth, evidence-based assessment to determine whether

the Directive remains fit for purpose and what lessons can be learned to improve its

effectiveness. This includes the question of whether it may be necessary to review or clarify

the existing rules to overcome specific legal, policy and implementation gaps. The evaluation

will also address the Commission’s simplification efforts by analysing the efficiency and

effectiveness of the Directive, and stress-testing it to ensure that it remains relevant and fit for

purpose. The evaluation will look into further aspects, such as exchange of information and

cooperation among Member States, and cross-border aspects in enforcement and sanctions

172 The remaining organisations who responded to the FRA survey, reported that they either did not have the

information or that residence permits were granted rarely or never. 173 The conditionality of granting a residence permit linked to cooperation with the criminal investigation - not

explicitly required by the Directive - appears in many Member States to be due to the application of Council

Directive 2004/81/EC of 29 April 2004 on the residence permit issued to third-country nationals who are victims

of trafficking in human beings or who have been the subject of an action to facilitate illegal immigration, and who

cooperate with the competent authorities.

19

application, including in relation to document fraud. Based on the results of the evaluation, the

Commission will consider whether there is a need to amend the current legal framework.

In the meantime, the Commission will work with Member States to better apply the legal

standards and requirements set by the Directive in order to:

1) Enhance prevention and detection of illegal employment by (i) stepping up

awareness-raising for employers, (ii) improving migrant workers’ access to information

and justice and (iii) strengthening targeted inspections in high-risk sectors and

geographical areas, supported by effective multi-agency cooperation and, as

appropriate, the coordination and support of the ELA.

2) Strengthen governance, coordination and oversight of implementation of the

Directive by, among others, (i) strengthening interinstitutional cooperation, (ii)

improving reporting and monitoring mechanisms and (iii) ensuring more systematic

and disaggregated data collection.

In parallel, the Commission will support Member States with targeted actions to:

3) Systematically promote cooperation, data exchange and mutual learning among

Member States, including through the Irregular Migration Expert Group, the European

platform tackling undeclared work and other relevant EU fora. Cooperation between

the ELA and FRA will further contribute to an effective implementation of the Directive

including by systematising and disseminating good practices. The Commission will aim

to address data gaps through targeted technical and financial support, including through

Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) support, mentioned under point 6

below.

4) Enhance awareness-raising and enforcement, building on the ongoing work of the

ELA, including, as feasible and appropriate, promoting easier access to information for

workers and employers, guidance, capacity building and training, and promoting the

use of the training manual for labour inspectorates developed by FRA in 2024. A

particular focus is planned on higher-risk sectors, cross-border situations,

subcontracting chains and, where relevant, posted third-country national workers, in

cooperation with Europol’s actions to combat labour exploitation. As part of the

revision of the mandate of the ELA, the Commission will assess how the authority could

better address the challenges related to abuses of working conditions of third-country

nationals, including on how the Authority could better support the labour-related

provisions of the Directive.

5) Support Member States in strengthening enforcement and applying the Directive

more effectively also to protect the rights of migrant workers through funding and

technical support and a reinforced mandate of the ELA. Where appropriate, the

Commission will also consider launching infringement procedures.

6) Leverage EU funding to strengthen compliance and accountability of employers

and strengthen multistakeholder partnerships in order to enhance information

20

provision and complaint mechanisms for third-country national workers. A call for

proposal under the AMIF will be launched in 2026 to support Member States in

protecting third-country workers’ rights, while fighting against the illegal employment

of illegally staying third-country nationals. Where appropriate, the Commission will

incentivise Member States to design national and regional partnership plans to address

relevant challenges under the post-2027 multi annual financial framework174.

174 Proposal for a Council Regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2028 to

2034, COM/2025/571 final.

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52025PC0571&qid=1753801194712.

EN EN

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Brussels, 8.5.2026

COM(2026) 260 final

ANNEX

ANNEX

to the

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND

THE COUNCIL

on the application of Directive 2009/52/EC of 18 June 2009 providing for minimum

standards on sanctions and measures against employers of illegally staying third-

country nationals

EN EN

Statistical Annex

Graph 1: Total number of inspections per year (2019-2024)

EN EN

Table 1. Inspections carried out by Member States and percentage of total employers inspected in 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024

Member

State

2021 2022 2023 2024

Number of

inspections

carried out

Rates of

coverage of

inspections

(%)

Number of

inspections

carried out

Rates of

coverage of

inspections

(%)

Number of

inspections

carried out

Rates of

coverage of

inspections

(%)

Number of

inspections

carried out

Rates of

coverage of

inspections

(%)

Austria 25,525 15.4% 26,053 15.1% 24,925 13.8% 25,296 14.1%

Belgium 15,174 6.4% 14,559 6.0% 15,664 6.6% 78,809 33.3%

Bulgaria 40,727 10.2% 42,319 9.7% 48,567 10.8% 49,600 11.9%

Croatia 8,247 2.1% 8,652 2.1% 7,862 2.0% 7,593 2.1%

Cyprus 5,296 13.1% 7,028 15.9% 5,097 9.4% 6,285 N/A*

Czechia 5,222 4.0% 6,573 5.1% 6,574 5.1% 6,328 0.5%

Estonia 256 1.0% 149 0.6% 364 2.1% 754 3.1%

Finland 2,043 0.4% 2,353 0.4% 2,200 0.4% 2,087 N/A*

France 104,328 9.0% 100,988 6.9% 112,633 38.6% 111,389 N/A*

Germany 46,912 12.4% 53,061 14.0% 42,487 18.3% 25,222 N/A*

Greece 21,285 9.2% 26,495 14.4% 26,611 15.5% 30,150 16.2%

Hungary 14,355 2.7% 13,889 2.6% 13,447 2.6% 13,031 2.6%

Italy 84,901 16.6% 83,416 4.7% 89,098 0.5% 146,595 N/A*

Latvia 563 0.3% 1,031 0.6% 1,065 0.6% 973 0.5%

Lithuania 3,881 3.6% 4,217 3.7% 5,621 1.9% 7,032 4.9%

Luxembourg 11,385 25.4% 10,171 43.2% 17,328 40.4% 16,174 37.7%

Malta 3,630 4.7% 5,110 6.3% 5,314 6.1% 5471 5.9%

The

Netherlands

2,205 0.7% 2,248 0.1% 3,018 0.7% 3,387 1.0%

Poland 8,195 0,13% 10,242 0.17% 10,397 0.20% 10,091 0.19%

Portugal 1,205 0.3% 981 0.2% 508 0.1% 70 0.0%

Romania 1,259 0.2% 2,526 0.3% 5,681 0.8% 3,287 0.1%

Slovakia 17,233 30.4% 17,637 77.4% 18,485 43.9% 18,266 50.3%

EN EN

Slovenia 10,508 4.6% 10,875 48.0% 6,439 26.7% 6,415 N/A*

Spain 13,928 1.6% 17,222 1.9% 17,029 1.8% 18,412 2.1%

Sweden 1,847 0.3% 2,527 0.7% 3,422 0.3% 4,881 0.4%

*Data not available

EN EN

Graph 2: Number of illegally staying third-country nationals detected per year (2019-2024)

EN EN

Table 2. Results of inspections: number of illegally staying third country nationals detected and proceedings1 opened as a result of inspections

Member

State

2021 2022 2023 2024

Number

of

inspectio

ns in

which

illegal

workers

were

detected

Numbe

r of

illegal

worker

s

detecte

d

Proceedin

gs opened

by

Member

States

following

inspection

s

Number

of

inspectio

ns in

which

illegal

workers

were

detected

Numbe

r of

illegal

worker

s

detecte

d

Proceedin

gs opened

by

Member

States

following

inspection

s

Number

of

inspectio

ns in

which

illegal

workers

were

detected

Numbe

r of

illegal

worker

s

detecte

d

Proceedin

gs opened

by

Member

States

following

inspection

s

Number

of

inspectio

ns in

which

illegal

workers

were

detected

Numbe

r of

illegal

worker

s

detecte

d

Proceedin

gs opened

by

Member

States

following

inspection

s

Austria 3,457 5,992 6,695 3,612 6,495 8,045 3,788 5,816 8,278 3,740 5,303 7806

Belgium 900 1,679 2,020 893 2,208 574 1,021 1,511 544 1,778 2,880 546

Bulgaria 10 10 9 9 10 9 12 11 11 14 14 14

Croatia 160 357 389 315 526 551 364 578 486 564 1,002 553

Cyprus 4 5 0 N/A* 507 N/A* 120 263 0 206 307 282

Czechia 41 145 4 48 77 8 41 51 5 49 87 35

Estonia 56 138 3 23 84 17 68 253 34 10 10 39

Finland 33 55 0 23 28 4 23 31 0 18 25 4

France 959 1,644 1,288 885 1,831 1261 993 1,924 1,376 N/A* N/A* 1359

Germany 6,765 5,851 4,628 8,693 7,955 5,268 11,043 9,329 6,411 10,310 9,562 6941

Greece 40 58 40 55 80 55 62 120 62 52 81 52

Hungary 21 31 44 56 107 107 83 253 65 127 333 131

Italy 389 960 522 1,404 2,614 609 1,465 3,196 870 1,641 3,912 1134

Latvia N/A* 4 N/A* 5 10 5 9 15 9 9 21 9

Lithuania 7 19 7 10 27 10 24 35 24 55 86 55

1 Proceedings are intended to be any action taken by Member State authorities following an inspection, leading to an administrative or criminal sanction.

EN EN

Luxembou

rg

52 65 52 105 160 105 167 283 202 124 171 132

Malta 7 18 5 14 28 7 35 73 27 34 65 10

The

Netherland

s

442 673 517 494 928 574 649 1,160 783 871 1,903 1032

Poland 170 364 96 83 146 45 191 290 97 423 1,042 272

Portugal N/A* N/A* 101 N/A* N/A* 93 N/A* N/A* 39 N/A* 7 7

Romania N/A* 1 34 N/A* 73 68 951 597 430 N/A* 602 132

Slovakia 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Slovenia 44 75 40 66 86 58 62 84 67 83 99 73

Spain 3,332 4,893 13,928 5,719 8,637 18,312 7,124 12,176 18,402 8,124 12,806 19,694

Sweden 300 476 237 161 240 274 176 249 269 174 242 349

*Data not available

EN EN

Graph 3: Proceedings opened as a result of inspections per year (2021-2024)

30.660

36.059 38.491

40.661

0

5.000

10.000

15.000

20.000

25.000

30.000

35.000

40.000

45.000

2021 2022 2023 2024

EN EN

Graph 4: Total sum of fines applied against infringing employers per year (2021-2024)

€126.204.316

€170.408.789

€220.828.124 €211.871.780

€0

€50.000.000

€100.000.000

€150.000.000

€200.000.000

€250.000.000

2021 2022 2023 2024