According to the Atradius Payment Practices Barometer 2026, nearly four in five Western European firms are currently experiencing late payment, with 47% of all B2B invoices reported as overdue. In Central and Eastern Europe, 83% of suppliers are affected. For cross-border creditors and international companies operating within the European Union, this data signals a material and immediate risk to cash flow, contractual stability, and the enforceability of commercial claims.
What the 2026 Data Shows – and Why It Matters Now
The Atradius Payment Practices Barometer 2026 presents a stark picture of trade credit conditions across the EU. Nearly four in five Western European firms report that at least one of their counterparties has failed to pay on time in the current trading period. The share of overdue B2B invoices stands at 47% – a figure that directly translates into working capital pressure, elevated insolvency exposure, and a growing caseload for cross-border debt collection.
The situation in Central and Eastern Europe is more acute: 83% of suppliers in that region are affected by late payment, according to the same survey. For multinational groups, funds, and investors with supply chains or receivables portfolios spanning multiple EU jurisdictions, these proportions are not statistical abstractions – they represent real, quantifiable risk.
The Allianz Trade Global Insolvency Outlook 2026–27 compounds the concern. It forecasts a 5% rise in global business insolvencies in 2026 – the fifth consecutive annual increase – placing current insolvency levels approximately 24% above the pre-pandemic average. When debtors become insolvent, unsecured trade creditors often recover only a fraction of what is owed. Acting before formal insolvency proceedings commence is, in most jurisdictions, the only reliable way to preserve priority or enforce security.
For more on the structural drivers behind these trends, see our detailed analysis: Late Payment Culture in Europe – 2026 Data.
Who Is Affected Within the European Union
The EU's existing legal framework on late payment – rooted in Directive 2011/7/EU – sets maximum payment periods and entitles creditors to late payment interest and compensation for recovery costs in B2B and B2G transactions. However, the Atradius data makes clear that the existence of these rights has not, by itself, resolved the culture of delayed payment.
The European Commission has acknowledged this enforcement gap in its ongoing review of the Late Payment Regulation, and further legislative developments remain subject to the EU institutional process. Companies should not assume that the current framework will remain unchanged; monitoring outputs from the Commission, EUR-Lex, and, where financial counterparties are involved, guidance from EBA and ESMA is advisable.
Those most directly exposed include:
- Exporters and manufacturers selling on open account terms into Western or Central/Eastern European markets
- Service providers with long project cycles and milestone-based invoicing
- Private equity and credit funds with portfolio companies reliant on prompt receivables collection
- Foreign investors with contractual claims against EU-based counterparties that are showing signs of financial distress
- Intragroup creditors in structures where subsidiary insolvency could trigger cross-default or parent liability
Legal Mechanisms Available to Creditors in the EU
EU law provides a range of tools for cross-border enforcement that creditors with unpaid invoices should consider without delay. The choice of mechanism depends on the value of the claim, the debtor's jurisdiction, and whether a judgment already exists.
European Payment Order (EPO). Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006 allows creditors to obtain a payment order through a simplified procedure for uncontested pecuniary claims in cross-border cases. Once issued, the EPO is enforceable across all EU Member States without the need for a declaration of enforceability.
European Account Preservation Order (EAPO). Regulation (EU) No 655/2014 provides a mechanism for asset freezing – specifically, the preservation of funds held in bank accounts across the EU – before or after a judgment is obtained. This is particularly valuable where there is a risk that the debtor may dissipate assets. The creditor does not need to notify the debtor in advance of the preservation order being granted.
Enforcement of judgment through national courts. Where a judgment has been obtained in one Member State, Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 (Brussels Ia) governs its enforcement of judgment in another Member State. Enforcement then follows national procedural rules, which vary materially between jurisdictions.
Insolvency and restructuring proceedings. Where a debtor is insolvent or approaching insolvency, Regulation (EU) 2015/848 on cross-border insolvency proceedings applies. Creditors should consider whether filing a proof of claim or seeking to influence the proceedings is in their interest. Our bankruptcy and restructuring practice advises creditors on strategy in these proceedings across multiple jurisdictions.
Late payment interest and recovery costs. Under Directive 2011/7/EU, creditors are entitled to claim late payment interest at a statutory rate (linked to the European Central Bank's reference rate plus a margin, subject to national implementation) and a fixed minimum sum for recovery costs, without the need to demonstrate actual damage.
If you are managing overdue receivables or evaluating enforcement options against an EU-based counterparty, the team at Ferraz & Whitmore is available to assist. Please contact us at info@ferrazwhitmore.com or visit our contacts page to arrange an initial discussion.
Five Immediate Actions for International Companies
Given the scale of the problem documented in the Atradius 2026 survey, companies with EU receivables exposure should treat the following steps as a priority review:
- Audit your overdue receivables book now. Identify which invoices have passed contractual and statutory payment deadlines, and in which jurisdictions the debtors are domiciled. Limitation periods for debt collection actions vary by Member State and, in some jurisdictions, are relatively short.
- Assess debtor financial health. Cross-reference your debtor list against publicly available insolvency filings, credit insurance signals, and any early-warning indicators provided by your trade finance or credit monitoring arrangements. The Allianz Trade and Atradius data suggest systemic stress – individual debtors may be more fragile than their payment history implies.
- Secure your contractual position. Review whether your contracts contain enforceable jurisdiction clauses, late payment interest provisions, and security or retention of title clauses. Deficiencies in these terms are more consequential when enforcement becomes necessary.
- Consider preventive asset preservation. Where there is evidence that a debtor may be moving or dissipating assets, an application for a European Account Preservation Order under Regulation (EU) No 655/2014 can be made on an ex parte basis. Speed is often decisive.
- Review exposure to secondary insolvency risk. If a key customer or counterparty enters restructuring or insolvency proceedings, the impact on your business may extend beyond the unpaid invoice – particularly where the relationship involves ongoing supply obligations, set-off arrangements, or parent guarantees.
Cross-Border Dimension: Beyond Western Europe
For companies whose receivables exposure extends beyond the EU – for instance, into markets in Asia – the legal framework for enforcement differs substantially. Cross-border debt collection in jurisdictions such as China involves separate procedural regimes, and judgments obtained in EU courts are not automatically enforceable without local recognition proceedings. Our China debt recovery practice addresses these cross-jurisdictional challenges for clients with exposure in that market.
Where a debtor group has entities in multiple jurisdictions, coordinating enforcement strategy across those jurisdictions – including understanding where assets are held and which courts have jurisdiction – is often more efficient than pursuing claims in isolation.
The Regulatory Outlook: What to Monitor
The European Commission's review of the late payment legislative framework is ongoing. Any revision to Directive 2011/7/EU or its replacement by a directly applicable Regulation would affect payment terms, interest entitlements, and enforcement obligations across the EU. Companies should monitor EUR-Lex for legislative updates and track any guidance issued by national transposition authorities.
Separately, where financial sector counterparties are involved, supervisory expectations from EBA and ESMA on credit risk management and non-performing exposures may be relevant to how those counterparties manage and disclose overdue obligations.
The CJEU continues to issue rulings that clarify the interpretation of EU payment and enforcement instruments. Notable decisions affecting the scope of the European Payment Order procedure and the Brussels Ia enforcement regime should be tracked by in-house counsel and external advisers managing cross-border portfolios.
For a review of your current receivables exposure or enforcement strategy across EU jurisdictions, Ferraz & Whitmore's dispute resolution and debt recovery teams are available to advise. Reach us at info@ferrazwhitmore.com or through our contacts page.
Disclaimer: This publication is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information herein should not be relied upon as a substitute for professional legal counsel tailored to your specific circumstances. Ferraz & Whitmore assumes no liability for actions taken or not taken based on the contents of this material. For advice regarding your particular situation, please contact info@ferrazwhitmore.com.