EU FDI screening: 667 notifications in 2025, 12% sent to in-depth review, new FISR applies from 17 January 2028
12% of notified deals went to in-depth assessment, 88% closed within 15 days, and the new FISR applies from 17 January 2028
An importer planning a Chinese-funded acquisition or greenfield investment in the EU can size the screening risk: 12% of notified deals went to in-depth assessment, 88% closed within 15 days, and the new FISR applies from 17 January 2028.
AI Summary
The European Commission’s sixth annual FDI screening report counts 667 investments notified by Member States in 2025, up from 477 in 2024. Of those, 88% closed within 15 days and 12% went to in-depth security risk assessment, with manufacturing taking 53% of the in-depth cases. The new Foreign Investment Screening Regulation, adopted 17 June 2026, applies from 17 January 2028. For a Chinese-funded buyer, the cost is the deal timetable: one in eight notified transactions stops for a full review.
What happened
The European Commission published its sixth annual report on the screening of foreign direct investment on 14 October 2026. The headline count is 667 investments notified to the Commission by EU Member States in 2025, against 477 notifications in 2024 — a 40% increase between the two years.
The processing split is the number that matters to a buyer. Of the 667 cases notified, 88% were closed within 15 days. The remaining 12% of notified investments required an in-depth security risk assessment, a share 4% higher than the year before. Most of those in-depth cases were in manufacturing, which accounted for 53% of all transactions, up from 50% in 2024.
Separately, the EU’s new Foreign Investment Screening Regulation (FISR) was adopted on 17 June 2026 and applies from 17 January 2028. That is the instrument that will govern how these notifications are handled once it takes effect.
FDI screening notification — the step a Member State takes when a foreign investor’s planned acquisition or greenfield investment meets its national screening criteria. The Member State tells the Commission and the other Member States, who then have a window to raise security or public order concerns. A notification is not an approval and not a rejection; it is the start of a clock.
The 2025 outcome, in one table:
| Measure | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|
| Investments notified to the Commission | 667 | 477 |
| Closed within 15 days | 88% | — |
| Sent to in-depth security risk assessment | 12% | 4% lower |
| Manufacturing share of transactions | 53% | 50% |
Why now
Two clocks are running at once. The first is the notification volume: 667 cases in 2025 against 477 in 2024 is a 40% jump in a single year, and the in-depth share rose alongside it. More deals are being filed, and a larger slice of them are stopping for review.
The second is the instrument. FISR was adopted on 17 June 2026 and applies from 17 January 2028. A transaction that closes before that date runs under the current cooperation mechanism. A transaction structured to close after it runs under the new regulation. The gap between the two dates is the window in which a buyer chooses which regime their deal lands in.
So what
The arithmetic a buyer needs is the probability of a stop, applied to the deal timetable.
Take 100 notified transactions at the 2025 rates. Eighty-eight close within 15 days. Twelve go to in-depth assessment. Of those twelve, roughly six sit in manufacturing, because manufacturing is 53% of transactions and the report places most in-depth cases there.
The cost is not a duty. It is the weeks a deal sits in review while the acquisition or the greenfield build waits. A buyer who plans a closing date without a review contingency is planning for the 88% case and ignoring the 12%.
Work it through on a mid-sized acquisition. A Chinese-funded buyer agrees to acquire a European manufacturing business. The purchase price is agreed, the financing is arranged, and the closing date is set. If the deal is notified and lands in the 12%, the closing slips by the length of an in-depth assessment. Every week of slippage carries the cost of the financing commitment, the cost of holding the target’s operations steady, and the cost of the management time spent on the review rather than on integration.
Now run the same deal as a greenfield investment. The buyer is building a plant rather than buying one. The notification still applies if the Member State’s screening criteria catch it. The 12% case here delays the start of construction, which pushes the first year of output. The cost is the revenue the plant would have earned in the slipped months, plus the carrying cost of the land and the permits held idle.
A third case: a buyer with several planned EU investments in the same year. At the 2025 rate, one in eight notifications stops. A portfolio of eight notified deals expects one in-depth review. A portfolio of sixteen expects two. The buyer who files them all against a single closing calendar absorbs the review time across the whole programme rather than one deal at a time.
The 53% manufacturing share sharpens this for anyone in goods. A Chinese-funded investment in a European factory is in the sector where most in-depth assessments land. A buyer in manufacturing should assume the 12% is not a background rate but the rate that applies to them.
The FISR date adds a fourth calculation. A deal that closes before 17 January 2028 runs under the current mechanism. A deal that closes after runs under the new regulation. A buyer who wants the current regime has a deadline to work back from; a buyer who wants the new one has a date to plan toward. Either way, the closing date is now a screening decision, not just a commercial one.
For the notification volumes behind these rates, see 2025 EU FDI screening notification volumes and processing timelines for third-country investment and EU FDI screening notifications jumped 40% in 2025, and 12% of deals now face in-depth review. If the European target is a supplier you already buy from, the ownership check in How to Tell a Factory From a Trading Company Before You Wire a Deposit is the same question the screening authority asks.
How confident
Confirmed. The European Commission’s sixth annual FDI screening report, published 14 October 2026, states that Member States notified 667 investments in 2025, up from 477 in 2024, a 40% increase. It states that 88% of the 667 cases were closed within 15 days and that 12% required an in-depth security risk assessment, a 4% rise on the prior year. It states that manufacturing accounted for 53% of all transactions, up from 50%. It states that the new FISR was adopted on 17 June 2026 and applies from 17 January 2028. Every figure in this article comes from that report and the Commission’s accompanying release.
Inferred. The cost arithmetic in “So what” is mine, not the Commission’s. The report gives shares, not euro amounts, and it does not publish the length of an in-depth assessment, so the slippage cost is a framework a buyer applies to their own deal rather than a figure taken from the document. The reading that manufacturing buyers should treat 12% as their own rate rests on the 53% share and the report’s statement that most in-depth cases were in manufacturing; it is an inference from two figures in a single document, not a published sector rate. The FISR’s effect on any individual transaction is not described in the report, and I have not read the regulation text itself.
What would change my mind. A published breakdown of in-depth assessment duration by sector would replace the slippage framework with a measured number. A Commission statement that the 12% in-depth rate is concentrated in a narrower set of sectors than manufacturing as a whole would change the advice to manufacturing buyers. And the FISR text, once applied from 17 January 2028, would settle whether the current 15-day and in-depth split carries forward or is replaced.
Work it out: the landed cost calculator
Different question, same method: the step-by-step guides
For you
- Importers planning a Chinese-funded acquisition of a European supplier: treat the 12% in-depth rate as a live cost on the closing date, and build a review contingency into the timetable before you sign.
- Importers building a greenfield plant in the EU: check whether the Member State’s screening criteria catch your investment, because a stop delays construction and pushes your first year of output.
- Importers running several EU investments in one year: plan the portfolio against the one-in-eight rate, so a single in-depth review does not stall every deal on the same closing calendar.
- Importers whose deal closes near 17 January 2028: decide which regime you want the transaction to land in, and set the closing date to match.
The data point
Of the 667 investments notified to the Commission in 2025, 12% required an in-depth security risk assessment.
FAQ
How many EU FDI notifications were there in 2025, and how does that compare with 2024?
EU Member States notified 667 investments to the European Commission in 2025, according to the sixth annual FDI screening report published 14 October 2026. That is up from 477 notifications in 2024, an increase of 40% between the two years. The rise matters to a buyer because a larger notification pool is the base the 12% in-depth rate is calculated on. More filings mean more deals reaching the review stage in absolute terms, even if the share held steady. For a Chinese-funded buyer, the practical reading is that the cooperation mechanism is handling more transactions each year, and the queue a notification joins is longer than it was in 2024.
What share of notified deals went to in-depth review, and where did they land?
Of the 667 cases notified in 2025, 12% required an in-depth security risk assessment, a share 4% higher than the year before. The remaining 88% were closed within 15 days. Most of the in-depth cases were in manufacturing, which accounted for 53% of all transactions, up from 50% in 2024. For a buyer, the sector split is the useful part: a Chinese-funded investment in a European factory sits in the sector where most in-depth assessments land, so the 12% is the rate that applies to manufacturing deals rather than a background average across all sectors.
When does the new Foreign Investment Screening Regulation apply, and why does the date matter?
The EU’s new Foreign Investment Screening Regulation was adopted on 17 June 2026 and applies from 17 January 2028. The date matters because it divides transactions into two groups. A deal that closes before 17 January 2028 runs under the current cooperation mechanism, with the 15-day and in-depth split described in the 2025 report. A deal that closes after that date runs under the new regulation. A buyer planning a Chinese-funded acquisition or greenfield investment in the EU chooses which regime the transaction lands in by choosing the closing date, which makes the timetable a screening decision as well as a commercial one.
How we calculated this
Notifications, 2025: 667
Notifications, 2024: 477
Increase: 667 - 477 = 190
Increase as share of 2024: 190 / 477 = 39.8% -> reported as 40%
Closed within 15 days: 88% of 667 = 587 cases
In-depth security risk assessment: 12% of 667 = 80 cases
Check: 587 + 80 = 667
Manufacturing share of transactions: 53% of 667 = 354 cases
In-depth cases in manufacturing: 53% of 80 = 42 cases (approx.)
Portfolio expectation at the 2025 rate:
8 notified deals -> 8 x 0.12 = 0.96 in-depth reviews
16 notified deals -> 16 x 0.12 = 1.92 in-depth reviews
Regime boundary:
FISR adopted: 17 June 2026
FISR applies from: 17 January 2028The point
The 667 notifications and the 12% in-depth rate are the Commission’s numbers; the cost of a stop is the buyer’s to calculate. A Chinese-funded acquisition or greenfield investment in the EU carries a one-in-eight chance of a full review, and that chance is higher in manufacturing, where 53% of transactions sit. The FISR date of 17 January 2028 gives a buyer a second decision to make alongside the price: which regime the closing date lands in. Price the review into the timetable before you sign, not after the notification goes in.