Executive Summary: Unlocking Opportunities in EU Public Procurement

The European Union's public procurement market, valued at approximately two trillion Euros annually (around 14% of the EU's GDP), represents a significant opportunity for businesses across various sectors.¹ While unified by overarching EU directives promoting transparency, equal treatment, and competition, the practical implementation of public procurement varies considerably across member states. This report delves into the specific nuances of public procurement in Czechia, Slovakia, Romania, Ireland, Germany, Austria, and Italy, highlighting the distinct legal frameworks, procedural requirements, financial thresholds, e-procurement landscapes, and legal remedies in each country. Understanding these national specificities is paramount for businesses to effectively navigate the complexities, mitigate risks, and successfully secure public contracts within the diverse EU market. The analysis reveals a common foundation of principles but also significant national divergence, particularly in the treatment of smaller contracts, the maturity of digital platforms, the emphasis on strategic procurement goals, and the accessibility of legal redress.

1. Introduction: The EU Public Procurement Landscape

Public procurement within the European Union is a cornerstone of its single market, designed to ensure efficient public spending, foster competition, and promote innovation and sustainable development. This section outlines the foundational EU directives and principles that establish a common framework, before exploring the specific thresholds that determine the application of EU-wide rules.

Overarching EU Directives and Principles

The legal foundation for public procurement across the EU is primarily established by a suite of directives. These include Directive 2014/24/EU, governing public sector contracts; Directive 2014/25/EU, applicable to the utilities sector; and Directive 2014/23/EU, which covers concession contracts.² These directives are not directly applicable but must be transposed into the national law of each member state, ensuring a harmonized baseline for procurement procedures. Central to the EU procurement framework are several core principles: transparency, equal treatment, non-discrimination, proportionality, and mutual recognition.² Transparency, for instance, is achieved through the mandatory publication of various notices in the Official Journal of the EU (OJEU), including Prior Information Notices (PINs) for advance information, Contract Notices to invite tenders, and Contract Award Notices (CANs) to announce successful bidders.¹⁰ This public disclosure aims to increase competition and provide valuable market signals. The principle of equal treatment mandates that contracting authorities apply identical rules and criteria to all economic operators, fostering fair competition irrespective of nationality.² Beyond mere economic efficiency, EU policy increasingly promotes the strategic use of public procurement. This involves leveraging public spending to achieve broader societal objectives such as fostering innovation, promoting sustainability, and supporting inclusive economic development.¹ A notable development in this regard was the introduction of a binding social clause in Directive 2014/24/EU, which provides a stronger basis for trade unions to advocate for adherence to collective bargaining agreements and other social criteria in public contracts.¹

EU Public Procurement Thresholds (2024-2025)

The application of EU-wide procurement rules is triggered when the estimated value of a contract exceeds specific financial thresholds. These thresholds are periodically revised by the European Commission to account for economic changes and currency fluctuations, with the latest revisions applicable from January 1, 2024.⁷ Contracts at or above these thresholds necessitate advertising in the Official Journal of the EU, ensuring broad competition across all member states. The current EU thresholds (exclusive of VAT) applicable from January 1, 2024, are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1: EU Public Procurement Thresholds (2024-2025)

Source: Adapted from EU Commission Directives and national publications ⁷

The consistent adoption of these EU thresholds across all member states establishes a common baseline for significant public contracts. This means that for high-value procurements, businesses can expect a broadly similar regulatory environment and a level playing field, regardless of the specific country within the EU. However, this commonality primarily functions as a minimum standard. Member states retain considerable autonomy to implement their own, often less stringent, rules and procedures for contracts falling below these EU thresholds. This dual regulatory landscape implies that while an understanding of the EU framework is essential for large tenders, success in the broader market often hinges on a granular understanding of specific national regulations, particularly for smaller contracts that may not trigger EU-wide publication but still represent substantial commercial opportunities. This necessitates a dual strategy for businesses: ensuring broad EU compliance for major tenders while developing specialized national expertise for smaller-scale engagements.

2. Country-Specific Public Procurement Deep Dive

While the EU directives provide a harmonized foundation, each member state has transposed these rules into national legislation, leading to distinct procedural nuances, financial thresholds, e-procurement landscapes, and specific business considerations. This section provides a detailed examination of public procurement in Czechia, Slovakia, Romania, Ireland, Germany, Austria, and Italy.

2.1. Czechia: Balancing Price and Responsibility

Public procurement in the Czech Republic is governed by a legal framework that aims to align with European legislation, yet exhibits unique characteristics in practice. The primary legal instrument is Act No. 134 from the Year 2016 (Public Procurement Act), which fully transposes Directive 2014/24/EU into Czech law.¹³ A notable addition came with Act No. 543 from the Year 2020, which, effective January 1, 2021, introduced a general legal obligation for public contracting authorities to consider environmental, social, and innovative potential in every tender.¹³ The Public Procurement Act outlines various procedures, including open, restricted, competitive dialogue, and innovation partnership, with open and restricted procedures being generally permissible without specific restrictions.¹⁹ For contracts below the EU thresholds, a simplified below-the-threshold procedure allows contracting authorities to invite a minimum of five specific candidates, particularly for social and other specific services.²⁰ National thresholds for "small-scale public procurement" (SSPP) were significantly increased effective April 3, 2025, to CZK 3 million (from CZK 2 million) for supplies and services, and CZK 9 million (from CZK 6 million) for construction works, both exclusive of VAT.²¹ Contracts below these limits can be awarded with less formal procedures, offering greater speed and flexibility for municipalities and other public entities.²¹ The threshold for publishing contracts on the contracting authority's profile also increased from CZK 500,000 to CZK 1 million.²¹ For particularly large contracts, termed "significant public contracts" (approximately EUR 11,000,000 in value), additional obligations apply, such as requiring a nine-member evaluation committee with at least two-thirds subject matter experts.²² Digitalization is a key aspect of Czech procurement. Since October 18, 2018, electronic means are mandatory for written communication throughout the procurement procedure, with some statutory exceptions.²⁰ Electronic catalogues and auctions are supported for bid submission and evaluation.²⁰ The "Information System on Public Contracts" provides public disclosure of procurement information, including final values and evaluation criteria, while the "ROZZA Platform" aims to offer a unified approach for suppliers to public procurement tools.²² A notable dynamic in Czech public procurement is the apparent tension between legal intent and practical application. While the legal framework explicitly incorporates EU directives and mandates consideration of environmental, social, and innovative aspects, bids are predominantly evaluated based on the lowest price.¹³ This suggests that despite the progressive legal provisions, the prevailing procurement culture and awareness of the broader benefits of responsible procurement are still developing. For businesses, this implies that while they should be prepared to demonstrate value beyond just cost, a strong emphasis on price competitiveness remains crucial. This also presents an opportunity for businesses to proactively educate contracting authorities on the long-term value and societal benefits that can be derived from considering non-price criteria. For businesses operating in Czechia, the dominance of lowest-price evaluation is a significant factor. The government, however, is striving to increase the share of high-added-value projects and research/development through its SME Support Strategy (2021–2027), and is working to expand methodological support to encourage consideration of quality and overall societal benefits.²⁵ Regarding legal remedies, the Office for the Protection of Competition (ÚOHS) serves as the primary administrative body for reviewing procurement procedures and handling complaints.²⁶ Decisions by the ÚOHS can be appealed to the administrative courts.²⁶ A distinctive feature of the Czech system is its notably high appeal fees, which can reach up to CZK 10,000,000 (approximately EUR 400,000) and are determined as a percentage of the estimated procurement value.²⁷ This substantial cost can act as a significant deterrent for economic operators, particularly smaller businesses, from pursuing legitimate challenges, even when they have a strong case. This high financial barrier potentially undermines the effectiveness of the national remedy system in ensuring compliance with public procurement principles, thereby risking an uneven playing field where only well-resourced entities can afford to contest decisions. This situation could inadvertently reinforce the "lowest price" focus by discouraging bids that might entail more complex evaluation and potential disputes. Appeals against decisions must typically be filed within 15 days of receiving the decision, and filing an appeal suspends the decision's effect until the appeal commission renders its ruling.²⁸

2.2. Slovakia: Streamlined Processes and Centralized Efforts

Slovakia's public procurement system has undergone recent reforms aimed at enhancing efficiency and simplifying administrative processes. The central legal framework is the Public Procurement Act No. 25/2006.²⁹ A significant amendment, approved in June 2024, introduced several changes to streamline procedures and reduce complexity.¹¹ A major change introduced by the 2024 amendment is the increase in the financial threshold for "small-scale contracts"—those that do not fall under the Public Procurement Act—from EUR 10,000 to EUR 50,000.¹¹ For contracts below this new limit, contracting authorities are not obligated to follow the PPA and can select a supplier at their discretion.¹¹ This change, while simplifying administration for authorities, potentially reduces transparency and competition for a larger segment of smaller contracts. For businesses, especially small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), this means that opportunities under EUR 50,000 might be less visible and more reliant on direct relationships or being known by contracting authorities, rather than formal competitive tendering. This could make market entry more challenging for new or unknown suppliers in this segment, despite the general principles of efficiency, proportionality, equal treatment, non-discrimination, and transparency that contracting authorities must still adhere to.¹¹ For "below-threshold contracts" (estimated value of EUR 50,000 or more), two primary procedures apply: selection without publishing a call for tenders (requiring invitations to at least three economic operators via an electronic platform) or selection with a published call for tenders (which is voluntary, but requires a simplified procedure for commonly available goods/services).¹¹ For below-threshold construction works valued at EUR 800,000 or higher, a public call for tenders to an unspecified group of operators is mandatory.¹¹ Specific thresholds also apply to the defense and security sector, with below-threshold contracts set at EUR 300,000 for goods/services and EUR 800,000 for construction works.¹¹ For very low-value contracts, less than EUR 1,000, direct purchase without publication is permitted.³⁰ Slovakia has a relatively centralized procurement system, with the Ministry of the Interior (MoI) acting as a central purchasing body for commonly available goods and services.³⁰ The MoI utilizes a dynamic purchasing system called the Electronic Contracting System (EKS), which is mandatory for most widely available supplies, services, and works above EUR 1,000, with groceries being a notable exception.³⁰ E-notification of contract notices is mandatory for all contracts above EUR 1,000 on the national electronic public procurement system, EVO, and in the national Journal of Public Procurement.³⁰ Contracting authorities are also required to publish a contract report within 10 days of registering a signed contract in the Central Register of Contracts.¹¹ In terms of legal remedies, the recent amendment to the Public Procurement Act entirely removed the "request for remedy mechanism," as it is not mandated by EU regulations.¹¹ Furthermore, restrictions have been introduced on filing objections for certain below-threshold contracts, including supplies or services, construction works below EUR 1,500,000, and defense/security contracts below specific thresholds.¹¹ This removal of the general remedy mechanism and the imposition of objection restrictions for a significant segment of contracts mean that businesses have fewer formal avenues to challenge procurement decisions for these values. While simplifying procedures, this could lead to reduced accountability and transparency for these contract values, potentially favoring established relationships over new market entrants. This might contradict the EU principle of effective remedies and could disproportionately impact SMEs who rely on a fair and accessible review system. For higher-value contracts or in cases where objections are still permitted, Slovakia maintains a multi-stage process for aggrieved bidders. Issues must first be brought to the attention of the relevant contracting authority. If unresolved, the matter can be escalated to the Public Procurement Office (UVO), which acts as a first-instance appeal body, followed by the Council of the UVO, and ultimately, administrative claims can be lodged before the Regional Appeal Courts and the Supreme Court.³⁰ Penalties for violations of the Public Procurement Act have been reduced to a range of 0.1% to 5% of the contract value, allowing for more proportionate sanctions.¹¹

2.3. Romania: A Framework of Principles and Specific Rules

Romania's public procurement system is deeply rooted in EU legislation, transposing key directives into its national legal framework. The core of Romanian public procurement legislation (PPL) includes Law no. 98/2016 on public procurement, Law no. 99/2016 on utilities procurement, and Law no. 100/2016 on works and services concession contracts.² Additionally, Law no. 101/2016 specifically addresses remedies and review procedures.² Law no. 98/2016 establishes core principles such as non-discrimination, equal treatment, mutual recognition, transparency, proportionality, and accountability, which underpin all procurement procedures.² Romania employs a variety of award procedures, including open, restricted, competitive procedure with negotiation, competitive dialogue, innovation partnership, and design contest.² A negotiated procedure without prior publication is available under exceptional circumstances.² Simplified procedures are applied for contracts that fall below EU thresholds but exceed direct purchase thresholds.² Financial thresholds determine whether a contract notice must be published in the Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU) or solely in the Electronic System for Public Procurement (ESPP). For instance, works contracts of RON 27,334,460 or above require OJEU publication, while supply or services contracts for central government entities at RON 705,819 or above also trigger OJEU publication.² Simplified procedure notices are published exclusively in the ESPP for supply and services contracts exceeding RON 270,120 and works contracts exceeding RON 900,400.² Direct purchases are permitted for contracts below these simplified procedure thresholds.² Specific thresholds also apply to defense and security sector procurements.³¹ The Electronic System for Public Procurement (ESPP) is the central e-procurement platform in Romania.² Contract notices for simplified procedures are published here, and the European Single Procurement Document (ESPD) is completed by tenderers directly within the ESPP.² The National Public Procurement Agency (ANAP) plays a key role in issuing guidelines and providing practical guidance.³¹ Romania is actively pursuing digitalization in public administration, with investments in eForms and system interoperability outlined in its Recovery and Resilience Plan.² The SEAP system, for example, is designed to be interconnected with other national databases such as the National Trade Register Office and the National Integrity Agency.³³ Romania's public procurement system demonstrates a strong commitment to transparency and anti-corruption efforts, which creates a more trustworthy environment for legitimate businesses. Measures such as the ability for contracting authorities to request identification data of beneficial owners for joint stock companies with bearer shares ², and the implementation of the PREVENT integrated IT system for integrity checks at the start of an award procedure ², highlight a proactive approach to preventing illicit activities. For businesses, this means being prepared for rigorous scrutiny regarding ownership structures and potential conflicts of interest. Compliance with anti-corruption measures is not merely a legal formality but a significant operational requirement that can directly impact eligibility and success. Specific business nuances include special rules for defense procurement, technical specifications, transportation, and green public procurement, with a guide setting minimum technical specifications for environmental protection.² Contracting authorities are also mandated to secure necessary funds before initiating any procurement procedure, ensuring financial viability.³¹ To support SMEs, Romania reinforces the incentive to split tenders into lots and reserves a 20% quota of subcontracting for SMEs, which can only be waived for specific, justified reasons.³⁴ The legal remedies process in Romania involves a two-phase approach: a complaint filed with either the National Council for Solving Complaints (NCSC) (an administrative jurisdictional body) or a tribunal (a judicial body), followed by an appeal against that decision to the Court of Appeal.² A significant aspect of the Romanian system is the requirement for high complaint bonds or judicial fees. These are calculated as 2% of the estimated contract value, with caps that can reach RON 2,000,000 for NCSC complaints at or above OJEU thresholds, and up to RON 100,000,000 for tribunal complaints, the latter being non-refundable.² This substantial cost of challenging procurement decisions can act as a significant barrier, particularly for SMEs or businesses with limited legal budgets, even if they possess a strong legal case. This financial hurdle can effectively limit access to justice for smaller players, potentially reducing overall market fairness and the effectiveness of the remedy system in ensuring compliance with public procurement principles. It might lead to fewer challenges, even for legitimate grievances, thereby reducing external oversight on contracting authorities and potentially fostering a less competitive environment for certain contract values. Limitation periods for complaints are typically 7 to 10 days from the acknowledgment of the illegal act, with appeals to be filed within 10 days of the ruling's communication.² NCSC rulings generally occur within 20 days (extendable), while tribunal and appeal rulings typically take around 45 days.²

2.4. Ireland: Efficiency, Digitalization, and Strategic Planning

Ireland's public procurement system is characterized by a strong emphasis on efficiency, digitalization, and the strategic use of procurement to achieve broader policy goals. The legal framework is built upon the transposition of EU Directives (2014/23/EU, 2014/24/EU, 2014/25/EU, 2009/81/EC) into national law via Statutory Instruments.³ The Procurement Act 2023, which commenced on February 24, 2025, further introduced significant changes to the national procurement landscape.³ Contracting authorities in Ireland can utilize various procedures, including Open, Restricted, Competitive Dialogue, Competitive Procedure with Negotiation, Innovation Partnership, and Negotiated Procedure without Prior Publication.³ The EU thresholds, applicable from January 1, 2024, are consistent with the EU-wide figures presented in Table 1.³ For national thresholds, advertising on the eTenders platform is required for all goods and services contracts of €50,000 (exclusive of VAT) and upwards, and for works contracts with an estimated value of €200,000 (exclusive of VAT) or greater.³⁵ Ireland has made a substantial shift towards digitalization in public purchasing. Since October 2018, it has been mandatory for all public bodies to handle procurement communication and information exchange electronically.³ The eTenders platform serves as Ireland's official digital hub connecting public sector buyers with potential suppliers, with a new version launched in May 2023 to improve features and user experience.³ Dynamic purchasing systems are required to operate as fully electronic processes.³ Exceptions to electronic communication exist for jobs requiring special tools, those with security risks, or sensitive information handling.³ A key differentiator in Ireland's approach is its strong adoption of the Most Economically Advantageous Tender (MEAT) approach. Unlike countries that predominantly rely on the lowest price, Ireland explicitly allows contracts to be awarded based on multiple weighted criteria beyond just price, such as quality, technical merit, aesthetic and functional characteristics, accessibility, social aspects, environmental factors, and innovation.³ This stands in contrast to approaches observed in countries like Czechia, where lowest price evaluation remains dominant. For businesses, this is a crucial distinction: focusing solely on price might be insufficient in Ireland. Companies should instead emphasize their holistic value proposition across a broader range of criteria, including sustainability, innovation, and social impact. This encourages more sophisticated bidding strategies and can lead to higher-quality outcomes for public services, signaling a more mature adoption of the EU's strategic procurement objectives. The Office of Government Procurement (OGP) plays a central role as a policy developer, a Central Purchasing Body (CPB) for common items, and a reform leader, actively developing Ireland's first National Public Procurement Strategy.³ Emphasis is placed on essential pre-tender planning, including detailed needs assessments and market research, to ensure optimal outcomes and value for money.³ The OGP also supports green practices and new ideas, and provides circular guidance for SMEs within its procurement guidelines.³ The legal remedies system in Ireland is designed to be robust and transparent. It offers both informal (negotiation, mediation, conciliation) and formal (adjudication, arbitration) approaches for dispute resolution.³ A significant protective measure for aggrieved bidders is that initiating proceedings before contract signing automatically halts the award process until the dispute is resolved.³ Furthermore, for contracts above EU thresholds, specific and detailed feedback is mandatory for unsuccessful bidders. This feedback, typically provided in a "standstill letter," must include the successful tenderer’s name, the scores of both successful and unsuccessful tenderers, and a clear explanation of the winning bid's characteristics and relative advantages.³ This proactive transparency, coupled with the 14-day standstill period between award notification and contract signing, significantly strengthens the fairness and effectiveness of the Irish procurement system. It reduces the need for speculative challenges and empowers businesses to make informed decisions about pursuing legal recourse, fostering greater trust in the system compared to jurisdictions where such detailed feedback or automatic halts are not explicitly guaranteed. Strict timelines apply for launching procurement proceedings, typically 30 days, which are rarely extended.⁴

2.5. Germany: Decentralized Efficiency with Strong Oversight

Germany's public procurement system is characterized by its federal structure, leading to a decentralized approach, alongside a strong focus on economic efficiency and robust oversight mechanisms. German public procurement law is heavily influenced by EU Directives and the WTO Government Procurement Agreement (GPA).⁵ Key national laws include the Law Against Restraints of Competition (GWB), which sets general principles and governs review procedures.⁵ Specific ordinances like the Vergabeverordnung (VgV) apply to procurements above EU thresholds, while the Unterschwellenvergabeordnung (UVgO) governs below-EU-threshold supplies and services, and VOB/A applies to construction services.⁵ The decentralized nature of the system means procurement activities are distributed across federal, state (Länder), and municipal levels, with each level maintaining independence regarding financial and budgetary matters.⁶ Germany employs various awarding procedures, including the open procedure, restricted procedure (two-step), competitive dialogue, innovation partnership, and, in exceptional cases, direct awards or negotiated procedures without a call for competition.⁹ Open and restricted procedures are generally always permissible.³⁷ The EU thresholds, consistent with Table 1, dictate when EU-wide rules apply.¹⁷ A significant aspect of the German system is the duality of rules: distinct regulations apply above and below EU thresholds. Above thresholds, competition law (GWB, VgV) is paramount, while below thresholds, national budgetary law (UVgO, VOB) governs.⁵ This fragmented regulatory landscape means that businesses cannot rely on a single national portal or central body for all opportunities. They must identify and engage with procurement entities at various governmental levels, potentially requiring localized market intelligence and relationship building. This complexity can pose a barrier for new entrants but offers an advantage to those with established regional networks. Digitalization is mandatory for the entire procurement procedure if EU thresholds are met or exceeded (since October 18, 2018), and also for below-threshold procurements under UVgO (since early 2017).³⁷ Available e-procurement tools include dynamic purchasing systems, electronic auctions, and electronic catalogues.³⁷ Federal government procurements are published on www.evergabe-online.de and www.bund.de.³⁷ E-notification and e-submission are mandatory at the federal level, with federal agencies publishing on the federal portal, which is also available to regional and municipal authorities on a voluntary basis.³⁶ Germany's procurement approach is strongly focused on economic efficiency, rooted in its budgetary systems.³⁶ The law actively promotes opportunities for SMEs by encouraging authorities to divide large contracts into partial or specialized lots, allowing smaller businesses to compete for more manageable projects.⁹ Exclusion criteria for bidders are stringent, mandating exclusion for convictions of specific offenses (e.g., criminal organizations, money laundering, fraud, bribery) and allowing optional exclusion for anti-competitive behavior, bankruptcy, negative track records, or conflicts of interest.³⁷ A "pre-qualification" system allows economic operators to submit paperwork in advance to the Procurement Advisory Office for a one-year certification, streamlining future bid submissions.³⁶ The legal remedies system in Germany is characterized by a dual structure. For contracts above EU thresholds, procurement review chambers (Vergabekammer) serve as administrative review bodies for the first instance.⁵ However, for contracts below EU thresholds, bidders who wish to dispute a decision must file a suit for damages before civil courts.⁵ Some federal states also have specialized VOB or VOL Offices for below-threshold contracts.³⁶ This dual remedy system means businesses need to understand two distinct sets of procedures, rules, and potentially different legal costs and timelines depending on the value of the contract they are challenging. While providing avenues for redress, this duality adds significant complexity for businesses, requiring specialized legal advice to determine the correct forum and procedure. This can increase legal costs and make the remedy process less straightforward, potentially disproportionately affecting SMEs who may lack dedicated in-house legal teams with expertise in both administrative and civil litigation. A formal objection, known as a "Protest (Rüge)," can be raised by a bidder if they believe the process was flawed, typically within 10 to 15 days of becoming aware of the issue.³⁹ The review procedure (Nachprüfungsverfahren) is the formal process by which such complaints are examined.³⁹ First-instance review by a Vergabekammer typically takes 2 to 4 months, while a second-instance appeal before an Oberlandesgericht generally takes 2 to 6 months, depending on case complexity.⁴⁰

2.6. Austria: A Streamlined System with Sustainability Focus

Austria's public procurement system is generally regarded as streamlined and efficient, characterized by a stable regulatory framework and a growing emphasis on sustainability. The system is primarily governed by the Federal Procurement Act (BVergG) 2006/2018, which transposes EU directives into national law.¹² It encompasses government entities at all levels: federal, provincial, municipal, and public institutions.¹⁴ Austria employs two primary procurement procedures: direct award for contracts under €100,000, and formal tendering for contracts exceeding this threshold.¹⁴ For contracts below EU thresholds, direct purchasing and negotiated procedures without prior notice are permitted for values up to EUR 100,000 for supplies, services, and works.¹² Restricted procedures without prior publication are allowed for supplies and services up to EUR 100,000 and for works up to EUR 1 million.⁴² Above EU thresholds, open procedures or negotiated procedures with prior publication are mandatory.¹² Other available procedures include competitive dialogue and innovation partnership.¹² Key players in Austria's e-procurement landscape include Bundesbeschaffung GmbH (BBG), which coordinates procurement processes and offers the BBG E-Shop for direct ordering by public institutions.¹⁴ ANKÖ is another central procurement agency providing a comprehensive tendering platform.¹⁴ Austria's E-procurement Master Plan, developed in 2011, aims to make e-procurement standard practice.⁴² While e-notification and e-access are mandatory, there is no single mandatory e-notification platform; procurement entities publish notices on various public and private platforms.⁴² E-submission is mandatory only for dynamic purchasing systems and e-auctions, remaining voluntary otherwise, while e-invoicing has been mandatory at the national level since 2014.⁴² Despite the overall efficiency of Austria's public procurement system, particularly due to the central role of bodies like BBG, the fragmented e-notification landscape can pose a challenge for businesses seeking all relevant opportunities. Businesses need to monitor multiple platforms to ensure they capture all potential tenders, especially those below EU thresholds, implying that the "efficiency" for contracting authorities does not perfectly translate to "ease of access" for suppliers across all tender types. A significant business nuance in Austria is the increasing focus on sustainability. The government is committed to reducing CO2 emissions and promotes sustainability through subsidies and programs. Prioritizing sustainability factors can provide a competitive advantage for private companies.¹⁴ The BBG plays a central role, managing contracts for a vast range of products and services, with its use mandatory for central federal bodies and available to other public entities.⁴² Austria has also achieved a reduced length of procurement procedures (63 days in 2014) compared to the EU average (120 days).⁴² The government actively supports SMEs through a comprehensive package of measures, including grants and eco-vouchers for CO2 reduction initiatives, and the Business Service Portal assists businesses with information and e-delivery.⁴⁵ For legal remedies, the State Administrative Court handles applications for review of unlawful decisions made during procurement procedures.⁴⁶ Appeals against its decisions can be filed with the Verfassungsgerichtshof (Constitutional Court) and/or an extraordinary appeal lodged with the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Higher Administrative Court).⁴⁶ A powerful feature of the Austrian system is the provision for interim measures. Preliminary injunctions can be issued by the State Administrative Court to temporarily suspend the entire procurement process or individual decisions.⁴⁶ Crucially, a contract awarded contrary to an order in a preliminary injunction is deemed "absolutely void and/or ineffective".⁴⁶ This strong provision for interim measures offers significant protection for aggrieved bidders, as it means that challenging a procurement decision in Austria has a real chance of preventing the contract award, thereby preserving the opportunity for a fair re-tender if the challenge is successful. This enhances trust in the system and encourages legitimate challenges, as the risk of a contract being concluded despite an ongoing challenge is substantially reduced. Due to the complexity of Austrian public procurement and administrative trade law, businesses are strongly advised to contact an attorney specialized in this area if affected by unfair or discriminatory decisions.⁴⁷

2.7. Italy: Digital Transformation and Robust Compliance

Italy's public procurement system is undergoing a significant transformation, driven by a new legal code that emphasizes digitalization and stringent compliance measures. Public procurement in Italy is governed by Legislative Decree No. 36/2023 and its Annexes (the "Code"), which came into effect on July 1, 2023.⁴⁸ This new Code is ambitious, aiming for the complete automation of public contracts' entire life cycles and explicitly advocating for the use of Artificial Intelligence and distributed ledgers (blockchain).⁵⁰ The Code provides for various award procedures, including open, restricted, competitive procedure with negotiation, competitive dialogue, innovation partnership, and a negotiated procedure without previous publication (used only in specific, strict circumstances).⁴⁹ EU thresholds, consistent with Table 1, apply to ordinary and utilities sectors.⁴⁹ For below-threshold procurement, simplified rules apply: direct awards are permitted for works below EUR 150,000 and for services and supplies below EUR 140,000.⁴⁹ For contracts exceeding these direct award thresholds but remaining within EU thresholds, a negotiated procedure (without publication of a tender notice) is required, inviting a minimum of five or ten economic operators depending on the contract value.⁴⁹ Digitalization is a primary focus, with provisions regarding the digitalization of procedures and the national ANAC (National Anti-Corruption Authority) database entering into force on January 1, 2024.⁴⁹ Contracting authorities and economic operators are required to use digital procurement platforms vetted by the Digital Italy Agency.⁵⁰ Key platforms include MEPA (Mercato Elettronico della Pubblica Amministrazione) for low-to-mid value tenders, CONSIP for large ministries and framework contracts, and TED (Tenders Electronic Daily) for high-value and cross-border opportunities.⁵¹ However, despite the strong ambition for advanced digitalization, there are practical implementation challenges. The numerous certified platforms (currently 46) often "use different languages and systems," creating difficulties for economic operators.⁵⁰ Furthermore, some national platforms have experienced outages.⁵⁰ This situation implies that while Italy is pushing for digital efficiency, businesses must be prepared to navigate a complex and potentially inconsistent e-procurement landscape, requiring flexibility, the use of multiple platforms, and robust internal systems to manage diverse digital interfaces and data formats. This could increase initial setup costs for market entry. Italian public procurement includes stringent compliance requirements. Bidders must meet "general morality requirements".⁴⁹ For public works above EUR 150,000, economic operators are required to possess a qualification certificate issued by specific bodies (SOA), with a similar mechanism planned for service and supply contracts.⁴⁹ Law No. 136/2010 mandates the use of "dedicated" bank accounts for all financial transactions related to public procurement to ensure traceability and prevent criminal infiltration.⁴⁹ Abnormally low tenders can be excluded if they do not comply with environmental, social, and employment obligations, including minimum wages.⁴⁹ The Corrective Decree also strengthens protections for workers involved in public contracts.³⁴ These robust anti-corruption and compliance requirements, while beneficial for fostering a fair market, impose a significant burden on businesses. The SOA certificate, for instance, is a specific national hurdle, and the financial traceability demands meticulous record-keeping and strict adherence to banking procedures. Businesses must invest heavily in compliance frameworks and due diligence to operate successfully in Italy's public procurement market, as non-compliance can lead to automatic exclusion or severe penalties. This might favor larger, more established companies with robust compliance departments. To support SMEs, Italy has reinforced the incentive to split tenders into lots and reserved a 20% quota of subcontracting for SMEs.³⁴ Legal remedies fall under the jurisdiction of the Administrative Courts (Regional Administrative Court, Council of State) for disputes related to awarding procedures, including claims for damages.⁴⁹ Civil Courts handle disputes arising after the conclusion of public contracts and relating to their performance.⁴⁹ The Code of the Administrative Trial provides special procedures to halve ordinary time limits for public procurement disputes, aiming for faster resolution.⁴⁹ A mandatory "technical advisory board" is appointed for works above EU thresholds and services/supplies above EUR 1,000,000 to advise parties on contract execution.⁴⁹ Administrative appeals must be filed within 30 days of relevant notification, publication, or acknowledgment of challenged deeds, with appeals to the Council of State also subject to a 30-day limit.⁴⁹ Contract nullity can be declared by the administrative judge in specific cases where the awarding decision is annulled, particularly for contracts concluded without prior publication or in breach of standstill periods.⁴⁹

3. Comparative Analysis: Unpacking the Nuances Across EU Member States

While all EU member states are bound by the overarching principles and directives of European public procurement law, their national implementations introduce significant variations that businesses must understand. This comparative analysis highlights the key differences and commonalities observed across Czechia, Slovakia, Romania, Ireland, Germany, Austria, and Italy.

Comparison of National Thresholds and their Impact

All seven countries adhere to the common EU thresholds for major contracts, which mandate EU-wide publication and competitive procedures (as detailed in Table 1).⁷ This provides a predictable baseline for large-scale procurements. However, significant divergence emerges in the treatment of contracts falling below these EU thresholds, often termed "small-scale" or "below-threshold" procurement. Slovakia recently increased its small-scale contract threshold from EUR 10,000 to EUR 50,000, allowing contracting authorities considerable discretion in supplier selection for these values, effectively bypassing formal Public Procurement Act procedures.¹¹ Czechia also raised its small-scale limits to CZK 3 million for supplies/services and CZK 9 million for construction works, enabling less formal and faster procurement processes for these segments.²¹ Austria permits direct awards for contracts up to EUR 100,000 for supplies, services, and works, indicating a relatively high threshold for simplified procurement.⁴² Romania sets direct purchase thresholds at RON 270,120 for products/services and RON 900,400 for works.² Italy allows direct awards for works below EUR 150,000 and for services/supplies below EUR 140,000.⁴⁹ The implication of these divergent national thresholds is profound for businesses. They dictate the applicable procedures (formal tendering vs. more informal selection), the level of required transparency, and the intensity of competition. Smaller businesses, in particular, might find more accessible opportunities within these national below-threshold markets, but these markets may also offer less formal transparency or robust remedy mechanisms compared to EU-threshold contracts.

E-Procurement Maturity and Platform Variations

A universal trend across the EU is the push towards digitalization in public procurement. All surveyed countries mandate electronic communication for procurement above certain thresholds (Czechia, Germany, Ireland, Austria) or for the entire contract lifecycle (Italy).³ However, the maturity and centralization of e-procurement platforms vary significantly:

• More Centralized Systems: Countries like Ireland (eTenders platform ³), Slovakia (EKS by MoI ³⁰, EVO ³⁰), and Romania (ESPP ²) appear to have more unified or primary e-procurement portals.
• Fragmented Landscapes: Austria has no single mandatory e-notification platform, with entities publishing on various public and private platforms.⁴² Germany operates with a federal portal but also numerous regional platforms.³⁶ Italy, despite its ambitious digitalization mandate, has 46 certified platforms that struggle with interoperability.⁵⁰ While digitalization aims to streamline processes, businesses face varying degrees of complexity in navigating these e-platforms. A unified portal simplifies the process, whereas fragmented systems require monitoring multiple platforms, potentially increasing administrative overhead for cross-border bidders. This suggests that the promise of digital efficiency is not uniformly realized for suppliers across all member states.

Divergent Approaches to SME Support

All countries recognize the vital role of Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs) in economic development and aim to facilitate their participation in public procurement.⁵² However, specific support measures differ:

• Lot Division & Quotas: Germany and Italy strongly emphasize breaking down large contracts into smaller lots to enable SME participation.⁹ Italy further reserves a 20% subcontracting quota for SMEs.³⁴
• Strategic Support: Czechia leverages its general SME Support Strategy to encourage high-added-value projects.²⁵ Austria provides direct financial support through grants and eco-vouchers.⁴⁵ Ireland's OGP incorporates SME considerations into its guidelines and initiatives.³ Despite these policies, SMEs often face disproportionate challenges related to procedural complexity, administrative burden, and high technical/financial capacity requirements.⁵² Furthermore, high appeal fees in countries like Czechia and Romania can deter SMEs from seeking legal remedies, potentially undermining the effectiveness of support measures.² Businesses should actively research and leverage country-specific SME support programs, but also be prepared for persistent market entry barriers.

Differences in Strategic Procurement (Social and Environmental Considerations)

The EU directives promote the strategic use of procurement beyond mere cost, including binding social clauses.¹ However, the practical emphasis on these strategic goals varies nationally:

• Gap Between Law and Practice: In Czechia, despite a new legal obligation to consider environmental, social, and innovative potential, bids are still predominantly evaluated based on the "lowest price".¹³ This indicates a gap between legal mandate and procurement culture.
• Strong MEAT Adoption: Ireland stands out with its strong adoption of the Most Economically Advantageous Tender (MEAT) approach, explicitly considering quality, social, and environmental factors alongside price.³
• Growing Focus: Austria shows an increasing focus on eco-friendly practices ¹⁴, and Romania has a guide on green public procurement.² Italy can exclude abnormally low tenders if they fail to comply with environmental, social, and employment obligations, including minimum wages, and has strengthened labor protections.³⁴ Businesses need to tailor their bid strategies to these national emphases. In countries prioritizing MEAT, a robust sustainability or social value proposition can be a significant competitive advantage. In contrast, in "lowest price" focused markets, such benefits might need to be framed as added value rather than primary differentiators, or strategic considerations may be less impactful on the final award decision.

Variations in Legal Remedy Processes and Timelines

While all countries provide mechanisms for challenging procurement decisions, the practical accessibility, cost, and effectiveness of these remedies differ considerably:

• Erosion of Remedies: Slovakia has abolished its general "request for remedy mechanism" for certain contracts and introduced restrictions on objections, potentially limiting recourse for smaller contracts.¹¹
• Prohibitive Costs: Czechia and Romania impose notably high appeal or complaint fees, which can be prohibitive for many businesses, potentially deterring legitimate challenges and impacting market fairness.²
• Dual Systems: Germany operates a dual remedy system, with administrative review chambers for above-EU-threshold contracts and civil courts for below-EU-threshold contracts, adding complexity for businesses navigating the correct forum.³⁶
• Strong Interim Measures: Ireland and Austria offer robust interim measures. In Ireland, initiating proceedings automatically halts the award process.³ In Austria, preliminary injunctions can temporarily suspend the process, and contracts awarded contrary to such injunctions are declared absolutely void.⁴⁶ These strong provisions provide significant protection for aggrieved bidders, enhancing trust in the system and encouraging legitimate challenges. Understanding these variations in legal recourse is critical for businesses to assess the risk profile of participating in tenders and to plan for potential disputes. The ability to effectively challenge unfair decisions varies significantly, directly impacting the perceived fairness and accountability of the procurement process in each jurisdiction.

4. Actionable Recommendations for Businesses

Navigating the diverse public procurement landscape across the EU requires a strategic and adaptable approach. Businesses aiming for success in Czechia, Slovakia, Romania, Ireland, Germany, Austria, and Italy should consider the following actionable recommendations:

General Strategies for EU Public Procurement

• Master the EU Baseline: Develop a foundational understanding of the core EU Directives (2014/24/EU, 2014/25/EU, 2014/23/EU) and principles such as transparency, equal treatment, and non-discrimination. These principles form the bedrock of all national procurement systems.
• Embrace Digital Readiness: Invest in robust e-procurement capabilities, including systems compatible with various electronic submission formats. However, be prepared for platform fragmentation and technical variations across different countries, necessitating flexibility and potentially requiring registration on multiple national portals.
• Develop Strategic Bid Development: Move beyond solely focusing on the lowest price. Where national frameworks permit or encourage it (e.g., through MEAT criteria), emphasize value, innovation, sustainability, and social impact in proposals. Tailor the value proposition to align with the specific strategic procurement goals of each contracting authority.
• Prioritize Compliance: Meticulously adhere to all legal, financial, and ethical requirements. This includes understanding and fulfilling obligations related to beneficial ownership disclosure, financial traceability (as seen in Italy), and country-specific qualification certificates (e.g., SOA in Italy). Proactive compliance can mitigate risks of exclusion and enhance credibility.

Tailored Advice for Each Country

• Czechia: Focus on competitive pricing, but subtly highlight broader value propositions (e.g., environmental benefits, innovation) even if price remains the dominant evaluation factor. Be aware of the notably high appeal costs, which may influence decisions on pursuing legal challenges.
• Slovakia: Monitor national thresholds closely, especially the increased small-scale contract limit, as opportunities below this threshold may have less formal oversight. Be aware of the reduced formal remedy options for smaller contracts and leverage central purchasing bodies like the Ministry of the Interior's EKS where applicable.
• Romania: Prepare for rigorous anti-corruption checks and be aware of the significant complaint bonds required for legal challenges. Understand and comply with specific rules for defense and green procurement, and be ready to demonstrate beneficial ownership.
• Ireland: Actively embrace the MEAT (Most Economically Advantageous Tender) approach by highlighting quality, innovation, and sustainability in bids. Invest in strong pre-tender planning, utilize the eTenders platform effectively, and understand the 14-day standstill period to manage potential challenges.
• Germany: Navigate the decentralized procurement system by identifying and engaging with relevant procurement entities at federal, state, and municipal levels. Consider leveraging lot division opportunities for SMEs. Be aware of the dual remedy system, which requires different legal approaches depending on the contract value.
• Austria: Prioritize sustainability and eco-friendly practices in proposals, as these factors can provide a competitive advantage. Leverage the centralized services of BBG and ANKÖ platforms. Understand the direct award thresholds for smaller contracts to identify less formal opportunities.
• Italy: Prepare for an ambitious, but currently fragmented, digitalization landscape by ensuring compatibility with various certified platforms. Adhere strictly to stringent financial and morality compliance requirements, including the SOA certificate for works contracts and the use of dedicated bank accounts for financial traceability.

Leveraging E-Procurement Systems Effectively

• Multi-Platform Monitoring: Develop a systematic strategy for monitoring all relevant national and EU portals (e.g., TED, national eTender platforms, specific agency portals) to ensure comprehensive visibility of opportunities.
• Technical Compatibility: Ensure internal systems and IT infrastructure are compatible with various electronic submission formats, digital signatures, and communication protocols used across different national platforms. Conduct test submissions where possible.
• Utilize Advanced Features: Where available, leverage features such as dynamic purchasing systems and electronic catalogues to streamline recurring purchases or participate in specific procurement channels.

Navigating Legal Challenges and Compliance

• Proactive Due Diligence: Conduct thorough due diligence on the national legal frameworks and specific tender documents before submitting bids. This includes understanding exclusion grounds, qualification criteria, and the local interpretation of EU principles.
• Risk Assessment for Remedies: Factor in the potential legal costs, timelines, and the practical effectiveness of remedies in each jurisdiction when assessing the overall risk of a tender. This is particularly important in countries with high appeal fees or limited formal recourse for certain contract values.
• Conflict of Interest Management: Proactively identify and address any potential exclusion grounds or conflicts of interest within the organization and its proposed subcontractors or supporting third parties. Transparency and adherence to local anti-corruption measures are paramount.

5. Conclusion: Seizing Opportunities in the EU Public Procurement Market

The European Union's public procurement market offers immense opportunities for businesses, driven by a commitment to open competition, transparency, and strategic public spending. While the foundational EU directives provide a harmonized baseline, the detailed analysis of Czechia, Slovakia, Romania, Ireland, Germany, Austria, and Italy reveals that national implementations introduce significant nuances. These variations, whether in financial thresholds for smaller contracts, the maturity and fragmentation of e-procurement platforms, the practical emphasis on strategic procurement goals, or the accessibility and cost of legal remedies, create distinct market environments. Success in this diverse landscape hinges on a nuanced, country-specific approach. Businesses that invest in understanding these national particularities, adapt their bidding strategies to local evaluation criteria, navigate the varied e-procurement systems, and meticulously adhere to country-specific compliance and anti-corruption requirements will be best positioned to unlock the vast potential of the EU public procurement market. This informed and adaptive strategy is key to transforming the complexities of cross-border procurement into tangible business growth.

Works cited

1. Public procurement | ETUC, accessed July 8, 2025, https://www.etuc.org/en/issue/public-procurement
2. Public Procurement Laws and Regulations Report 2025 Romania - ICLG.com, accessed July 8, 2025, https://iclg.com/practice-areas/public-procurement-laws-and-regulations/romania
3. Public Procurement in Ireland: Essential Guidelines for 2025 - Tender Search, accessed July 8, 2025, https://tendersearch.org/2025/03/28/public-procurement-in-ireland-essential-guidelines-for-2025/
4. Public Procurement Meaning & Definition | Mason Hayes Curran, accessed July 8, 2025, https://www.mhc.ie/glossary/public-procurement
5. General Public Procurement Law | Public Procurement Law - horak Attorneys| LET US BE YOUR LEGAL ANCHOR | public procurement procedure - open procedure - restricted procedure - negotiation procedure - competetive dialogue - innovative partnership - ppp - EC procurement - specialized procurement attorneys. INTERNATIONALLY | EUROPE-WIDE | GERMAN-WIDE, accessed July 8, 2025, https://procurement-law.de/general-public-procurement-law/
6. Public Procurement in Germany - European Parliament, accessed July 8, 2025, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/cmsdata/138604/06%20-%20SOLBACH%20-%20Public%20Procurement%20in%20Germany.pdf
7. Revision of EU Thresholds applicable from 1 January 2024 - Construction Procurement, accessed July 8, 2025, https://constructionprocurement.gov.ie/revision-of-eu-thresholds-applicable-from-1-january-2024/
8. 1. The Laws | Germany | Public Procurement World - Baker McKenzie Resource Hub, accessed July 8, 2025, https://resourcehub.bakermckenzie.com/en/resources/public-procurement-world/public-procurement/germany/topics/1-the-laws
9. Public Procurement Laws and Regulations Report 2025 Germany - ICLG.com, accessed July 8, 2025, https://iclg.com/practice-areas/public-procurement-laws-and-regulations/germany
10. Government procurement in the European Union - Wikipedia, accessed July 8, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_procurement_in_the_European_Union
11. Changes in Public Procurement Rules in Slovakia - News, accessed July 8, 2025, https://www.devens.sk/en/changes-in-public-procurement-rules-in-slovakia/
12. Public Procurement Law | Bundesbeschaffung GmbH, accessed July 8, 2025, https://www.bbg.gv.at/en/information/public-procurement-law
13. Law Governing Socially Responsible Public Procurement in the CR ..., accessed July 8, 2025, https://www.sovz.cz/en/law-governing-socially-responsible-public-procurement-in-the-cr/
14. Navigating Through Austria's Public Procurement System: A Guide for Private Companies, accessed July 8, 2025, https://www.dhl.com/discover/en-at/industry-insights/life-science-healthcare/navigating-through-austrias-public-procurement-system-a-guide-for-private-companies
15. Germany - European Commission, accessed July 8, 2025, https://ec.europa.eu/assets/rtd/innovation-procurement/country-report-2024-policy-benchm-germany.pdf
16. EU Revised Thresholds 2024 and 2025 - Construction Procurement, accessed July 8, 2025, https://constructionprocurement.gov.ie/wp-content/uploads/EU-Revised-Thresholds-2024-and-2025.pdf
17. Public procurement thresholds | Public Procurement Law - horak Attorneys| LET US BE YOUR LEGAL ANCHOR | public procurement procedure - open procedure - restricted procedure - negotiation procedure - competetive dialogue - innovative partnership - ppp - EC procurement - specialized procurement attorneys. INTERNATIONALLY | EUROPE-WIDE | GERMAN-WIDE, accessed July 8, 2025, https://procurement-law.de/public-procurement-thresholds/
18. www.sovz.cz, accessed July 8, 2025, https://www.sovz.cz/en/law-governing-socially-responsible-public-procurement-in-the-cr/#:~:text=The%20legal%20framework%20governing%20responsible,based%20upon%20the%20lowest%20price.
19. Public tendering rules in the EU - Your Europe - European Union, accessed July 8, 2025, https://europa.eu/youreurope/business/selling-in-eu/public-contracts/public-tendering-rules/index_en.htm
20. 3. Procurement Procedures | Czech Republic | Public Procurement World | Baker McKenzie Resource Hub, accessed July 8, 2025, https://resourcehub.bakermckenzie.com/en/resources/public-procurement-world/public-procurement/czech-republic/topics/3-procurement-procedures
21. New limits for small-scale public procurement: What does the amendment to the PPA bring?, accessed July 8, 2025, https://www.grantthornton.cz/en/news/new-limits-for-small-scale-public-procurement-what-does-the-amendment-to-the-ppa-bring/
22. Public procurement – Study on administrative capacity in the EU Czech Republic Country Profile - European Commission, accessed July 8, 2025, https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/policy/how/improving-investment/public-procurement/study/country_profile/cz.pdf
23. Public procurement - gov.cz, accessed July 8, 2025, https://portal.gov.cz/en/rozcestniky/public-procurement-RZC-45
24. Public procurement - gov.cz, accessed July 8, 2025, https://gov.cz/en/sluzby-verejne-spravy/public-procurement-KAT-460
25. Policy Statement of the Government of the Czech Republic, accessed July 8, 2025, https://vlada.gov.cz/assets/jednani-vlady/policy-statement/Policy-Statement-of-the-Government.pdf
26. Public procurement - Rowan Legal, accessed July 8, 2025, https://rowan.legal/en/specialization/public-procurement/
27. The future revision of the Remedies Directive should address appeal fees - upravno pravo, accessed July 8, 2025, https://upravnopravo.blog/2025/06/17/the-future-revision-of-the-remedies-directive-should-address-appeal-fees/
28. The Legal Effect of Decisions and Appeals - ipc.gov.cz, accessed July 8, 2025, https://ipc.gov.cz/en/administrative-proceedings/appeal/
29. www.ppiaf.org, accessed July 8, 2025, https://www.ppiaf.org/documents/2604#:~:text=In%20the%20Slovak%20Republic%2C%20there,25%2F2006.
30. Public procurement – Study on administrative capacity in the EU Slovakia Country Profile -