OpenLobby.EU
Explore

Electrolux Home Products Europe

Electrolux

The Electrolux Group is a Swedish based global household appliance manufacturer founded 1919.

Lobbying Activity

Meeting with Jessica Polfjärd (Member of the European Parliament) and APPLiA (Home Appliance Europe)

29 Jan 2026 · CBAM

Meeting with Isabella Lövin (Member of the European Parliament)

22 Jan 2026 · CBAM

Meeting with Beatrice Timgren (Member of the European Parliament)

21 Jan 2026 · CBAM

Meeting with Arba Kokalari (Member of the European Parliament)

10 Dec 2025 · Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition

Meeting with Anna Vernet (Cabinet of Executive Vice-President Teresa Ribera Rodríguez) and Confederation of Swedish Enterprise and

3 Jun 2025 · Strengthening the Swedish voice in EU policymaking processes

Meeting with Olivia Gippner (Cabinet of Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra), Patrice Pillet (Cabinet of Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra) and APPLiA (Home Appliance Europe)

31 Mar 2025 · CBAM

Meeting with Luis Planas Herrera (Cabinet of Commissioner Jessika Roswall) and APPLiA (Home Appliance Europe) and BSH Hausgeräte GmbH

10 Feb 2025 · Circular economy

Meeting with Arba Kokalari (Member of the European Parliament)

8 Jan 2024 · Digital and green policy

Response to The reporting obligations during the transitional period of the carbon border adjustment mechanism.

11 Jul 2023

The complexity of CBAM is now a significant operational risk for many EU based manufacturing companies that rely on complex international supply chains and global trade for the parts needed for their production in the EU. The full use of the default values, which can be set on a high level by the European Commission, would ensure that EU based manufacturing companies do not run into import restrictions and operational supply bottlenecks for the necessary parts to keep their EU based manufacturing running. Default values: EU based manufacturing companies need to complete the quarterly reporting obligation during the transitional reporting period, and thereafter keep their EU production operational from 2026 when CBAM certificates have to be surrendered at import. To ensure this, it needs to be possible without any restrictions to use default values for the calculation of embedded CO2 emissions, per CN code item, per production process, per source country, etc. The necessary Default values need to be published by the EU Commission. The use of default values should not be restricted to a maximum of 20% of the emissions as proposed in the draft implementing legislation Article 5. Default values can be set by the Commission on the highest level to ensure that CO2 obligations of companies will not be underestimated. This means that from 2026 companies will have a clear financial incentive to find the real numbers, where possible, from their supply chain. Applying this strategy for default values also means that the revenues from CBAM will be higher, which is to the benefit of the EU own financing, which is one of the objectives of this policy. We kindly ask the Commission to publish the necessary default values at the earliest convenience and not limit their use in time or limit their use to a percentage level. The reporting methodology (degree of detail) and emission calculation specifically requiring primary data is highly complex and risk becoming an operational bottleneck for many EU based manufacturing companies that rely on global complex supply chains to supply parts to their EU factories. We kindly ask the Commission to make the planned common spread sheet for data collection in the supply chain available without delay so this can start to be used in the supply chain. This needs to be distributed to suppliers as soon as possible, who in turn will have to distribute this to their suppliers, etc. Need for more clarity on the IT solutions provided by Commission regarding the CBAM Transitional Registry: 3rd country installations must have direct access to the transitional registry from the beginning to be able to insert data directly to allow reporting declarants a smooth reporting with less manual or additional effort. Declarants need to get clarity on system specifications in order to be able to assess if individual IT solutions need to be created in order to fulfill reporting requirements efficiently and effectively. The XML format for uploading reports needs to be made available without delay so company IT system can be prepared. The CBAM portal and reporting tool needs to allow EU companies consisting of several different legal entities with different EORI numbers, based in the various EU Member States, to operate only one account in the CBAM system.
Read full response

Meeting with Arba Kokalari (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur)

4 Jul 2023 · Right to Repair

Meeting with Martin Hojsík (Member of the European Parliament)

28 Mar 2023 · Substances of Concern, Electrical and electronic waste, performance standards

Meeting with César Luena (Member of the European Parliament)

15 Feb 2023 · MEP Luena's Team on Ecodesign

Meeting with Biljana Borzan (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur) and The LEGO Group

12 Oct 2022 · Empowering consumers for the green transition

Meeting with Sandro Gozi (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and ClientEarth AISBL and Vinted

12 Oct 2022 · empowering consumers

Meeting with Arba Kokalari (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur)

12 Oct 2022 · Empowering consumers for the green transition

Meeting with Frans Timmermans (Executive Vice-President) and Neste Oyj and

9 Jun 2022 · climate leadership from businesses

Response to Sustainable corporate governance

20 May 2022

Electrolux is in favor of a corporate due diligence legislation at the EU level. It has the potential to reduce differences between EU Member States requirements as some Member States are considering own legislation in this area. A common EU legislation would help to prevent a potential patchwork of national legislation. In the attached document we would like to highlight our main points and concerns as input and suggestions ahead of the upcoming procedure in the European Parliament and the European Council.
Read full response

Response to Review: Restriction of the use of hazardous substances in electronics

11 Mar 2022

Electrolux is a leading global appliance company that has shaped living for the better for more than 100 years. Under our brands, including Electrolux, AEG and Frigidaire, we sell approximately 60 million household products in approximately 120 markets every year. First of all, we would greatly support the policy option called ’Simplify and clarify the RoHS Directive by introducing and revising legislative (’hard’) measures and soft measures’, as laid down in the Call for-Evidence for an Impact Assessment. Secondly, regarding the proposal to transform the RoHS Directive into a Regulation, we would like to support this latter. Indeed, EU-harmonising requirements across Member States would be the most appropriate way forward to effectively control, through risk assessment and further management, hazardous substances in Electric and Electronic Equipment (EEE). Nevertheless, we would like to point to a current loophole existing in the RoHS Directive, and for which we believe it should be tackled as a top priority during its review process: There is a current lack of clear legal-obligations for suppliers of EEE components to provide the appropriate (RoHS proof-of-compliance) technical-documentation to their downstream users. For the purpose of resolving this latter problematic situation, we would highly recommend clarifying ‘how’ to prove compliance with the RoHS Directive (e.g. self-declarations, test reports, etc.), thereby consequently clarifying the proof-of-compliance process across a supply chain, across all its different actors. As an example of clarifying existing compliance-tools, there is a strong need to set clear EU-harmonised rules regarding the technical-documentation requirements of the RoHS legislation. Indeed, any actor of a EEE supply chain should be fully liable in providing the appropriate evidence-of-compliance to the RoHS Directive downstream. For this purpose, risk-assessment methodologies of sub-material suppliers should be clearly defined, and the outcomes mandatorily shared downstream along all different and relevant supply-chain actors, with a view of pragmatically prove compliance to the overall RoHS legislation. Lastly, Electrolux would be against the two next proposals as laid down in the Call-for-Evidence: - Repealing the RoHS Directive and incorporate its provisions under the REACH Regulation; - Repealing the RoHS Directive and address product requirements through the Sustainable Products Initiative (SPI); Indeed, we believe that the RoHS Directive’s provisions, either remaining in the form of a Directive, or embedded in an EU-Regulation, should remain the primary legislation and keep the leading role to further manage hazardous substances in materials as part of complex EEE. Concerning REACH, we would like to remind that the RoHS Directive has its own scope, specific to EEE, whereas REACH touches a much broader scope. This divergence is capital, and both legislations should stay separated. Combining them would make little sense. Further, regarding the SPI, legislators should abstain from setting specific chemical requirements to products’ components, since an inappropriate overlap with the existing chemical-related framework of legislations, including REACH and RoHS, would be unavoidable. Legislating chemicals through the SPI, and/or in Ecodesign rules of specific product categories would only create more complexity on the existing set of rules, thereby impacting manufacturers of home appliances. It would also complexify the task of Market Surveillance authorities, by generating a general atmosphere with a lack of legal clarity and certainty when it comes to general chemical-compliance.
Read full response

Response to Commission Delegated Regulation on taxonomy-alignment of undertakings reporting non-financial information

2 Jun 2021

In the attached document we comment in further detail on the following: -Extent of CAPEX reporting obligation potentially being sensitive competitive information about company strategic future plans. -Article 9, financial reports to include KPIs for the previous five years. Does that apply also to the first years of reporting starting in 2022 ? -Article 11 refers to company “total activities”. What is the geographical implication of this for EU based companies having global operations ? -And two question on the Annex 1 & 2 of the delegated Regulation for climate mitigation and adaptation, hopefully suitable for a coming guidance document: 3.5 in Annex 1 and Annex 2 refers to “household appliances falling into the highest two populated classes of energy efficiency classes in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2017/1369 and the delegated acts adopted under that Regulation;" For predictions about investments for future activity, at what time shall the relation to the populated energy classes be considered, is it at the moment of applying for the investment, or is it the future situation when the development project has been completed ? How should “populated” be considered in relation to the appliance categories ? In a broad or a narrow sense ?
Read full response

Meeting with Elina Melngaile (Cabinet of Executive Vice-President Valdis Dombrovskis) and Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft and

20 Apr 2021 · - EU-US relations - Cooperation on trade and technology - Trade disputes