A working document from the Council General Secretariat, published on 25 June 2026, compiles written replies from 17 Member States on the proposed EU Talent Pool Regulation, following a request at the 6 February 2024 meeting of the Working Party on Integration, Migration and Expulsion (Admission). The replies reveal broad support for voluntary participation but significant demands for flexibility on withdrawal, employer definitions, national adjustments to shortage lists, and reduced administrative burdens.
Denmark raises concerns about posting third-country nationals to other Member States, citing CJEU case law (C-43/93, Vander Elst; C-91/13, Essent) requiring the worker's main activity to be in the employer's Member State. Denmark proposes clarifying Article 13 to reflect this, noting the European Labour Authority has flagged posting as a priority due to risks of fake postings and exploitation.
Estonia suggests adding a withdrawal provision to Article 3, amending the "employer" definition in Article 4(1)(3) to exclude private employment agencies and labour market intermediaries, changing "may" to "shall" in Article 11(1) for Europass profile creation, and allowing adjustments to the shortage occupation list more than once a year in Article 15(1).
Finland (preliminary comments, scrutiny reserve) stresses voluntary participation, cost-effective IT interoperability with its national platform (Työmarkkinatori), flexible national adjustments to the EU-level shortage occupation list, scalable digital services for jobseekers, and no binding provisions on entry conditions.
France (scrutiny reserve) questions the legal basis, supports voluntary participation with explicit withdrawal/suspension rights, opposes including private employment agencies in the "employer" definition, proposes allowing two national contact points, seeks to delete Article 10(2g) and Article 17(2), and suggests making employer compliance language more prescriptive (changing "should" to "shall" in recitals 23 and 37). France also requests clarifications on the Talent Partnerships pass (Article 12) and accelerated immigration procedures (Article 19).
The document signals that Member States are pulling in different directions on key provisions, with Denmark and France flagging posting and compliance risks, while Estonia and Finland push for greater flexibility and reduced administrative burdens. The Council will need to reconcile these positions before proceeding with the legislative file.