In October 2024, the
European Parliament and the Council finally adopted the Internal Market
Emergency and Resilience Act, which was proposed by the Commission two years
earlier as a Single Market Emergency Instrument with the well-defined aim of
ensuring that the functioning of the internal market is guaranteed, even in
times of crises and emergencies. The (then) sharply criticized proposal
underwent significant changes; the most problematic provisions authorizing the
Commission to instruct companies in Member States to prioritize specific orders
without requiring their consent were overwritten, the procedures for activating
vigilance or an emergency mode were finetuned, and institutional involvement at
the various levels and phases of decision-making was rebalanced. The Regulation
seems to be fit for purpose; at least, it tries to handle all of the challenges
that the internal market faced during the COVID-19 pandemic. But will it be
flexible and open-ended enough to handle future crises of various kinds and
scales? Can harmonization lead to the efficient management of crisis situations
or will it instead tie the hands of institutions regarding the identification
of the best answers to real misfunctioning in the internal market? This article
attempts to analyse the newly adopted Internal Market Emergency and Resilience
Act regarding the classic dilemma associated with the internal market: should
we harmonize?