EU Passenger Rights Reform: What's Changing and What It Means for You

After more than a decade of political stalemate, EU air passenger rights are finally being rewritten. On 15 January 2026, the European Parliament voted overwhelmingly, 632 to 15, to adopt its negotiating position on the reform of Regulation 261/2004, the law that gives passengers the right to compensation when flights are delayed, cancelled, or overbooked. The vote was decisive, but the reform is far from finished. The Parliament's position must now be reconciled with a substantially weaker proposal from the Council of the EU, which represents national governments. What emerges from that negotiation will shape the rights of hundreds of millions of air passengers for years to come.

Why is this reform happening now?

The European Commission first proposed updating EC261 back in 2013. The original regulation, adopted in 2004, had become one of the most litigated pieces of EU consumer law. Airlines argued it was outdated, disproportionate, and punished them for disruptions beyond their control. Consumer groups countered that the regulation worked precisely because it held airlines financially accountable for operational failures they would otherwise dismiss with a shrug.

For eleven years, the file sat in legislative limbo. The Council could not agree on a position, and without one, trilogue negotiations between Parliament, Council, and Commission could not begin. That changed in June 2025 when the Council finally adopted its general approach. Parliament followed with its own position in January 2026. The two sides are now heading toward conciliation, with the Cyprus Presidency of the Council expected to manage the process.

Parliament vs Council: where they disagree

The two institutions agree on the broad principle that EC261 needs modernising, but they diverge sharply on what that should look like in practice. The Parliament has taken a firmly pro-consumer stance, while the Council's position reflects heavy lobbying from the airline industry.

The delay threshold is the most consequential difference. Under the current regulation, as interpreted by the Court of Justice, passengers are entitled to compensation when they arrive at their final destination three or more hours late. The Council wants to raise this to five hours for intra-EU flights and six hours for longer routes, with four hours for medium distances. Consumer organisations estimate that such a change would eliminate compensation eligibility for roughly 60% of currently qualifying passengers.

The political landscape

Within the Council, member states are divided. Germany, France, Spain, Belgium, and the Netherlands have signalled support for the Parliament's stronger position. These are countries with large passenger populations and well-established consumer protection traditions. On the other side, countries with major airline hub interests or national carriers under financial pressure have favoured the weaker Council approach.

The airline industry, represented by IATA, Airlines for Europe (A4E), and the European Regions Airline Association (ERA), has lobbied aggressively against the Parliament's position. Their core argument is that delays have increased by 114% over the past 15 years due to factors like air traffic management failures and airport infrastructure constraints, issues they say are beyond airline control. They also point out that on short regional routes, compensation can reach two to three times the ticket price, creating what they call a perverse incentive structure.

What about the free hand luggage rule?

One of the most attention-grabbing elements of the Parliament's position is the requirement that airlines allow passengers to bring one personal item and one cabin bag, with combined maximum dimensions of 100 centimetres and a weight limit of 7 kilograms, at no additional cost. This provision directly targets the fee structures of budget carriers like Ryanair, Wizz Air, and easyJet, which charge passengers extra for anything beyond a small personal item that fits under the seat.

The Council's position includes no equivalent provision, which means it will be a major point of negotiation during conciliation. Read more about this in our dedicated article on free hand luggage.

What happens next?

With both institutions having adopted their positions, the file moves to conciliation, a structured negotiation process where Parliament and Council attempt to reach a compromise. This process has a strict timeline under EU rules but can be extended. Given the wide gap between the two positions, reaching agreement will not be straightforward.

The Cyprus Presidency of the Council will steer the negotiations on the Council side. If conciliation succeeds, the agreed text goes back to both Parliament and Council for a final vote. If it fails, the entire reform process collapses and the current regulation remains unchanged.

For passengers, the stakes are clear. The Parliament's position would strengthen and modernise existing rights while adding new protections around baggage fees and airline transparency. The Council's position would weaken the most important consumer protection in European aviation. What emerges from conciliation will determine which vision prevails.