According to the Atradius Payment Practices Barometer 2026, 83% of suppliers operating in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) report being affected by late payments, with 47% of B2B invoices across the broader European market currently overdue. This level of payment disruption exposes international companies and their CEE counterparts to serious liquidity risk, escalating debt collection costs, and potential insolvency exposure – particularly as the Allianz Trade Global Insolvency Outlook 2026–27 forecasts a further 5% rise in global business insolvencies in 2026, marking the fifth consecutive annual increase and placing insolvency levels approximately 24% above their pre-pandemic average. Companies with cross-border supply chains involving CEE counterparties should review their payment enforcement posture without delay.
The Scale of the Problem: What the Data Shows
The Atradius Payment Practices Barometer 2026 presents a striking picture of commercial payment behaviour across Europe. In CEE specifically, 83% of suppliers indicate that late payment is a routine feature of their trading relationships – a figure that materially exceeds even the already-elevated Western European average, where nearly four in five firms report similar difficulties. Taken together, these findings suggest that overdue invoices have become structurally embedded in B2B transactions across the continent.
At the same time, the Allianz Trade Global Insolvency Outlook 2026–27 projects that global business insolvencies will rise by 5% in 2026, continuing a trend that has now persisted for five consecutive years. With insolvency volumes running roughly 24% above pre-pandemic averages, the window for recovering unpaid invoices through informal pressure alone is narrowing. When a debtor enters insolvency proceedings, an unsecured creditor's prospects of full recovery are typically diminished; acting early on overdue accounts is therefore directly correlated with recovery outcomes.
Who Is Affected in Central and Eastern Europe
The exposure is not confined to any single sector or company size. Suppliers of goods, service providers, and subcontractors active in CEE markets – whether headquartered locally or operating through cross-border commercial arrangements – are all within scope. Foreign companies selling into CEE jurisdictions on standard trade credit terms are particularly vulnerable, as the procedural landscape for enforcement of judgment and payment order proceedings varies considerably between national legal systems in the region.
Industries with extended payment cycles – construction, manufacturing, distribution and professional services – face compounded risk. When multiple tiers of the supply chain are simultaneously cash-constrained, even well-capitalised suppliers can find themselves carrying significant overdue receivables while remaining unable to pass those delays on to their own obligations without penalty.
Immediate Actions for International Companies: A Practical Checklist
Given the data, international companies with CEE exposure should treat overdue receivables as a matter requiring structured legal attention rather than commercial patience. The following actions are relevant for most affected businesses:
- Audit your receivables book. Identify all invoices overdue beyond agreed payment terms, note the governing law of each contract, and flag any debtor entities showing signs of financial stress – changes in ownership, missed communications or requests for renegotiation are early indicators worth recording formally.
- Calculate and assert late payment interest. Most CEE jurisdictions provide statutory late payment interest mechanisms, typically based on a reference rate published by the national central bank plus a defined margin. These rights often run automatically from the due date, but must be formally claimed in any legal proceedings. Ensure that your invoices and payment terms are drafted to preserve – not inadvertently waive – this entitlement.
- Consider payment order or accelerated collection procedures. Several CEE legal systems offer a payment order (or equivalent summary judgment) mechanism enabling creditors to obtain an enforceable title without full adversarial proceedings, provided the claim is undisputed and documented. Timelines and procedural requirements are subject to national rules and should be verified jurisdiction by jurisdiction.
- Explore interim asset protection. Where there is credible risk that a debtor may dissipate assets before judgment, interim relief including asset freezing orders may be available under national law or, in cross-border situations, under applicable EU regulations. Such measures require prompt action – delay reduces both the practical impact and, in some jurisdictions, the legal availability of the remedy.
- Review insolvency risk and file proofs of debt early. In any case where a counterparty enters formal bankruptcy or restructuring proceedings, creditors are typically required to lodge claims within strict statutory deadlines. Missing those deadlines can result in permanent loss of the right to participate in distributions. Monitor debtor entities in public insolvency registers and act immediately on any notification.
If your organisation is facing overdue receivables in a CEE market and is unsure which legal pathway is most appropriate, our team is available to assist. Please write to info@ferrazwhitmore.com or visit our contacts page to arrange an initial discussion.
Cross-Border Complexity and the Rising Insolvency Backdrop
The intersection of widespread late payment and rising insolvency rates creates a particularly difficult environment for international creditors. Debt recovery across borders involves navigating questions of jurisdiction, recognition of foreign judgments, service of process, and the interplay between EU-level instruments and domestic enforcement law in each CEE country. Where debtors are incorporated in one jurisdiction, hold assets in another, and trade under contracts governed by a third system's law, the complexity escalates sharply.
The trend identified in the Allianz Trade Global Insolvency Outlook 2026–27 – five consecutive years of rising insolvencies, with 2026 projected to extend that sequence – adds urgency. The longer a disputed or overdue invoice remains unaddressed, the higher the probability that the debtor's financial position deteriorates to a point where enforcement becomes theoretically viable but practically ineffective. Early legal intervention, even where the underlying relationship is ongoing, is frequently more effective than waiting for a formal default.
Companies operating across multiple CEE jurisdictions may also wish to consider whether their standard contract templates and general terms and conditions are structured to facilitate rapid debt collection – including clear payment terms, governing law and jurisdiction clauses, interest provisions, and, where appropriate, retention of title or security arrangements.
For context on the broader insolvency environment, our analytics team has published a detailed review of the Allianz Trade findings: Business Insolvencies Rise for Fifth Consecutive Year – F&W Alert.
Enforcement and Recovery: Pathways Available
Once an unpaid invoice progresses beyond informal demand, the available legal pathways broadly fall into three categories, each with different risk and cost profiles:
- Consensual resolution: Structured repayment agreements, commercial mediation, or renegotiation of terms. These are generally faster and less costly, but presuppose a debtor willing and able to engage. They may also require security or guarantees to be commercially viable.
- Judicial enforcement: Payment order proceedings, standard civil litigation, or – in cross-border cases – enforcement under applicable EU instruments or bilateral treaties. This pathway yields an enforceable title, which can then be used to initiate asset seizure or account garnishment. The timing of enforcement of judgment varies by jurisdiction and depends in part on the debtor's asset profile.
- Insolvency-linked proceedings: Filing as a creditor in bankruptcy or restructuring proceedings, or – in appropriate cases – initiating such proceedings as a creditor. This is particularly relevant where the debtor has multiple creditors and a contested individual enforcement action would yield little practical return.
In some cases, a combination of these pathways operates in parallel. The choice of strategy depends on the size of the claim, the debtor's likely financial position, the governing law of the underlying contract, and the jurisdiction in which assets are located. For CEE-based or cross-border matters involving Swiss-connected entities, our debt recovery services in Switzerland may also be relevant where assets or holding structures involve that jurisdiction.
Preparing Your Organisation for the Current Environment
The data from the Atradius and Allianz Trade surveys should prompt companies with CEE exposure to revisit both their contractual frameworks and their internal credit management processes. Key preparatory steps include ensuring that contracts clearly specify payment deadlines, the consequences of delay, and the applicable law and forum; that credit limits are reviewed against current counterparty risk; and that escalation protocols exist so that overdue accounts are referred for legal review within a defined period rather than continuing to age unaddressed.
Companies that export to or operate through CEE markets should also confirm that their contracts are enforceable in the relevant local jurisdiction – in particular, that forum selection and governing law clauses are valid under the applicable private international law rules. An unenforceable clause is worse than no clause, because it may create false confidence about the ease of recovery.
Ferraz & Whitmore advises international companies on cross-border debt recovery, enforcement strategy, and insolvency-related creditor rights across European jurisdictions. If you have outstanding receivables in CEE markets or wish to review your contractual risk position, please contact 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.