The leaked EU Procurement Regulation aims to ban full subcontracting. A contractor will no longer be allowed to pass an entire contract on to subcontractors, but must carry out a substantial part itself. The presentation is expected on 9 September 2026. For organisations with integrated FM contracts, this means you must be able to demonstrate, throughout the entire term, which party delivers which part of the service.
You have tendered an integrated facility contract. The main supplier handles cleaning, grounds and security. On paper, you know exactly who your contractor is. But who actually provides security at the South location? And since when? For many buyers and contract managers, the honest answer is: I am not entirely sure. If this proposal goes ahead, that uncertainty suddenly becomes a problem you need to be able to prove.
What does the EU Procurement Regulation say about subcontracting?
The leaked draft of the replacement EU Procurement Regulation contains a ban on full subcontracting. The official presentation is expected on 9 September 2026. At this stage, this is a draft, not established law. The wording may still change, and the proposal has yet to go through the entire European legislative procedure.
The intent, however, is clear. A contractor will no longer be allowed to pass the entire contract on to subcontractors. Whoever wins the contract must carry out a substantial part itself. For sectors working with integrated FM contracts, this is a break with current practice. Where a main contractor can now tender for a complete package and then pass each component on to specialist parties, that arrangement would no longer be permitted under the proposal.
How is subcontracting currently arranged under the procurement rules?
Under the current Directive 2014/24/EU, subcontracting is actually permitted. The main contractor remains fully responsible for delivery, including the work carried out by subcontractors. Member states must ensure that subcontractors comply with the rules, but passing work on is allowed in itself.
In the Netherlands, the contractor is in principle free to choose its subcontractors. The contracting authority may not impose unreasonable restrictions on this. In practice, however, engaging subcontractors after award often requires the client’s consent or approval. That contrast is the whole story. Where passing work on is now the norm, the proposal seeks to rein it in.
Why does the real problem lie in delivery, not in the award?
A ban on full subcontracting affects more than just the moment of award. It affects the entire term of your contract. Over several years, you must be able to show which party carries out which part of the service. That is not a one-off check at the start, but an ongoing monitoring question.
Take a contract manager in healthcare with dozens of contracts spread across locations. The main contractor passes catering on to a new party. Without registration or an approval flow, that change only surfaces after the fact, often through an invoice or a complaint. During an audit, they cannot quickly show which parties are involved. That costs time with every question and creates uncertainty with every liability issue.
There is something else at play. If you do not know who carries out what, you cannot assign performance. An SLA breach at one location: does it lie with the main contractor or with an unknown subcontractor? Without a visible chain, that question stays unanswered. And without an answer, you cannot justify an indexation or a penalty towards the right party.
Why do the public sector, healthcare and education feel this hardest?
These sectors are subject to procurement obligations and often work with integrated contracts in which cleaning, grounds, security and catering all come together with one main supplier. That supplier passes parts on to specialist subcontractors. Add multiple locations and the chain quickly becomes hard to oversee.
A municipality or educational institution knows on paper who the main contractor is. But the question of who actually delivers which service at which location is a different matter. If a ban on full subcontracting soon obliges you to demonstrate this, you are left empty-handed when that knowledge sits only in people’s heads or in scattered files. On the page for municipalities and government, you can read how these organisations make their contract chain visible. The page for healthcare also shows how multi-location contract management works.
Why does Excel not help you with this question?
At many organisations, the subcontractor chain sits in people’s heads or in scattered Excel files. Three problems come with that.
- There is no registration of who carries out which part of the contract, so you cannot make the chain visible.
- There is no approval flow, so changes in subcontracting escape you until they become a problem.
- There is no way to demonstrate anything, so during an audit or a new obligation you cannot show anything quickly.
As long as the chain remains invisible, the arrival of a new rule changes nothing about your control. It only makes explicit what is already a gap. The solution therefore does not start with following the regulation, but with contract data that is in order before a rule obliges you to show it.
What can you already do now, regardless of the proposal?
Whether this proposal goes ahead or not, the steps that give you control are the same. Start by making the chain visible.
- For each contract, register not only the main contractor, but also which subcontractors carry out which part and at which location.
- Record the terms under which they work: KPIs, SLAs and responsibilities per part of the contract.
- Set a point at which changes in subcontracting are recorded, so you are not caught out afterwards.
- Monitor open agreements and performance centrally, so you can assign a breach to the right party.
A contract dashboard brings this information together in one place. For each contract, you see who is involved, which agreements are running and which actions are open. That saves time with every question and gives you something tangible to show when needed.
Where does GRIP fit in with the Procurement Regulation, and where does it not?
Being clear helps more here than making big promises. GRIP is not a procurement or compliance tool and makes no one regulation-proof. You resolve the procurement law side with your lawyer and your procurement adviser.
What GRIP does do: give you control over the contract side. Knowing which parties are in your outsourced contracts, which agreements are open and whether performance is on track. That is the foundation you need before a new rule obliges you to demonstrate it. GRIP works to ISO 27001 and ISO 9001, so your contract data is secure and structured.
Want to see how you make your subcontractor chain visible before a ban makes it mandatory? See how GRIP solves this or book a demo.
Frequently asked questions
Does the EU Procurement Regulation ban subcontracting entirely?
No. The leaked proposal aims to ban full subcontracting, where a contractor passes on the entire contract. Partial subcontracting is expected to remain possible. Moreover, this is a draft, not established law.
When will the EU Procurement Regulation be presented?
The official presentation is expected on 9 September 2026. After that, the proposal still has to go through the entire European legislative procedure, so the final text and start date are not yet fixed.
What is the current rule for subcontracting in procurement?
Under Directive 2014/24/EU, subcontracting is permitted. The main contractor remains fully responsible. In the Netherlands, the contractor is in principle free to choose its subcontractors, although engaging them after award often requires the client’s approval.
Why does this affect the public sector, healthcare and education so strongly?
These sectors are subject to procurement obligations and often work with integrated FM contracts across multiple locations. Within these, services are passed on to subcontractors, which makes the chain complex. A ban forces them to have that chain demonstrably in view.
Why is subcontracting a contract data question?
Because throughout the entire term you must know who carries out which part. If that information sits only in people’s heads or in scattered Excel files, you cannot demonstrate anything. Control over the contract content is the foundation, regardless of which rule arrives.
Does GRIP make my organisation regulation-proof?
No. GRIP is not a procurement or compliance tool. GRIP gives you control over the contract side: which parties are in your contracts, which agreements are open and whether performance is on track. You handle procurement law with your lawyer and adviser.