International regulatory headwinds: how general counsel can navigate uncertainty in Europe

Regulation is an inescapable feature of modern business: whether in consumer markets, financial services, technology or telecoms, rules are proliferating at pace and often carry extra territorial reach. The challenge facing general counsels (GCs) is to keep growth ambitions on track while navigating complex demands without runaway cost or distraction – and to steer through uncertainty with confidence. 

The question for GCs doing business internationally will, therefore, often concern what practical approaches legal teams can adopt to prepare for the unknown, stay agile and support their long-term priorities.

Roadmap for the way ahead

A clear operating model is the foundation of any strategic approach. How an organisation identifies, interprets and implements regulatory change will need to be set out, as must the ownership of each decision at every stage. 

Leading legal teams maintain a forward view through disciplined horizon scanning that filters for material developments across jurisdictions. They anticipate implementation headwinds early, from overlapping rules and cross-border effects to finite resources and interdependent delivery. 

The most sophisticated operations plan for breaches and enforcement as a capability, enabling the business to triage incidents, assess impact, engage with regulators and remediate effectively. The best GCs treat regulatory change as a lever to strengthen trust and sharpen operation and, in the right circumstances, as a route to competitive advantage.

Early clarity, less confusion

Clarity at the outset can prevent cost and confusion later. Successful legal teams define outcomes in commercial terms, focusing on the decisions that need to be made, the investments to prioritise and a board "narrative" that ties action to strategy. They are explicit about scope, including the markets, products and jurisdictions that matter most. Many maintain a regulatory taxonomy and repository so teams work from a common language and a single source of truth. 

The most effective approaches distinguish impact assessment from risk analysis and weight attention towards the largest markets or areas of greatest commercial significance, calibrated to risk appetite. Clear governance follows with decision rights, escalation triggers and accountability. Implementation terms of reference typically set a global baseline and avoid unnecessary gold-plating, then add local requirements where they genuinely add value. 

The mapping and engaging of stakeholders – both inside and outside the organisation – can align communications across legal, compliance, product, operations, investor relations and customer teams. The most successful GCs treat regulation as a change programme with realistic timelines, milestones and pragmatic reporting.

Planning to delivery

As programmes move from planning into delivery, consistency will become the differentiator. Framing the method as a practical policy, a well-used checklist or a principles-based approach creates continuity across cycles and jurisdictions, even as teams evolve and priorities shift. Institutionalising the method enables faster execution with fewer surprises.

The value of principles

Principles can prove vital when facts are incomplete or change quickly. Proportionality keeps effort aligned with risk and reward. A graduated response can also allow controls and remediation to scale with severity and likelihood, while the principles of leveraging existing resources before building new ones ensures efficiency by using existing controls, language and training before investing in new tools. A global baseline with local add-ons maintains coherence while meeting jurisdiction-specific obligations. 

Strategy can also anchor choices to revenue, reputation and resilience. People matter because frontline teams operationalise compliance, while prepared incident responses, assurance and oversight close the loop and build confidence. Effective risk management embeds regulatory risk into the enterprise view so it is neither siloed nor overlooked.

Horizon scanning 

Effective horizon scanning starts with boundaries. Successful teams will agree on the geographies and regulatory domains that matter most – privacy; environment, social and governance (ESG) matters; cyber; competition; and product safety. They rely on credible sources from statutes and formal guidance to speeches and enforcement actions; while materiality thresholds, decision rights and timelines prevent analysis paralysis. Grouping related measures can promote convergence and build efficiencies. 

The focus for these teams will be on what is required, by when and for whom; the likely impact on operations, products, disclosures and resourcing; the extraterritorial effect of new rules; a clear sense of priority; and defined triggers for escalation to senior executives or the board.

Implementation headwinds

However, volume without clarity is a common pitfall: the plethora of regulation around sustainability illustrates this challenge, with frameworks ranging across the Task Force on Climate Related Financial Disclosures, Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive, the United Kingdom's Sustainability Disclosure Requirements and the EU Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation that overlap but are not identical. Without a consolidation strategy, teams can end up spending their energy "reconciling acronyms" rather than improving disclosures and controls. 

Other headwinds include operational tensions between growth targets and compliance timelines; territoriality, where laws bite beyond borders; the accuracy of impact assessments that guide resource allocation; governance effectiveness, including who decides and on what information; outsourced and third-party relationships that extend obligations beyond contractual boundaries; interdependencies across global supply chains where data, ESG and product requirements cascade; and geopolitics – from tariffs and sanctions to the priorities of the government of the day – which can change the tempo and direction of regulation. 

And when global standards meet service-line realities, any ensuing friction requires management rather than avoidance.

Cyber regulation leverage

Cyber securing provides a template for "building once and aligning many times". Most regimes converge on familiar fundamentals: policies for the security of network and information systems; risk management and regular testing; robust incident handling with business continuity and crisis management; supply-chain security and third-party assurance; and secure acquisition, development and maintenance of systems with clear vulnerability disclosure; reviews that assess the effectiveness of measures.

There is also the need for "baseline hygiene" and training for employees; the appropriate use of cryptography and encryption; for human resources security with access controls and asset management; multi-factor authentication where it adds protection; and physical and environmental security. 

Programmes anchored on these elements and multiple expectations can be met without rebuilding from scratch each time a new rule arrives.

When things go wrong

When breaches occur, speed and structure shape outcomes. Understanding the sanctioning powers that apply in one's sector will prove paramount – whether financial penalties and restrictions or suspensions, settlements and the publicity of regulatory action – as does knowledge of the difference between disclosure and notification obligations, with some regimes requiring action as soon as practicable while others demand formal notices with prescribed content. 

Cross-jurisdictional considerations are critical when products or services cut across markets. Looking at financial services as an example, financial regulators such as Germany's BaFin, the US Securities and Exchange Commission and the Dutch Authority for Financial Markets may all have an interest and regulatory pressure can rachet up quickly. 

Early assessment of cross-contagion risk and geographical reach will prove vital. A breach impact assessment should quantify harm to the business, customers and operations; potential censure reputational effects should be clarified and precedent decisions and industry practice drawn on to calibrate strategy.

Engaging with regulators

Tactics matter in regulatory engagement. Striking the right balance between transparency and tactical disclosure protects trust while safeguarding legal position. Communication management can keep internal and external messaging consistent and credible, while technology and analytics help to scope incidents, preserve evidence and track remediation. Root causes should be the target of remediation, which should validate effectiveness and be documented thoroughly. 

But governance for decision-making under pressure needs to be explicit, with rapid access to the right information and people. Understanding penalty exposure and negotiation routes, options for settlement and the likelihood of public action will prove essential. Mapping obligations to notify or disclose across jurisdictions matters because multi-market distribution can increase the impact of a single event, as highlighted by recent UK enforcement in the credit-referencing sector and the operational lessons that followed.

Osborne Clarke comment

Regulation has moved from a backdrop to a strategic force – and the most effective GCs treat change as a disciplined portfolio. The first judgement is whether a development represents a growth opportunity or a potential destruction of value in a sector: and that call will set the pace and posture. 

Standardising an approach through a proportionate policy or checklist avoids reinvention and accelerates delivery. The best teams leverage what the business already has, identify convergence where risks and requirements overlap with existing controls and take carefully calculated compliance risks rather than chasing perfection. 

They stay close to the detail while keeping a high-level view of the wider landscape to spot interdependencies and emerging trends and pressure points. They know when to brace for and when to build resilience; when to lean in and move first to earn trust with customers, investors and regulators. They remain alert to geopolitics because the government of the day increasingly sets the regulatory tempo. In our work across consumer markets, financial services, technology and telecoms, this blend of disciplined method, pragmatic risk taking and situational awareness is what turns regulatory headwinds into momentum.

The content from this Insight was drawn from discussions at the breakfast briefing "Regulatory headwinds: how are GCs steering business through uncertainty with confidence?" held by Osborne Clarke's partners Noline Matemera and Jonathan McDonald at the 22nd annual General Counsel Summit UK with Economist Impact in London on 4 November.