Finland resumes asylum seeker returns to Italy under new EU migration pact

Finland has confirmed it will restart transfers of asylum seekers to Italy, becoming the latest northern European capital to act on the EU's new Asylum and Migration Management Regulation (AMMR) which entered into force on 12 June 2026. The Finnish Interior Ministry told the Italian news agency ANSA that preparations are under way to send people who filed secondary protection claims in Finland back to their country of first entry.

The move follows similar announcements from Austria, Germany and Switzerland. Sweden, meanwhile, never stopped returning applicants to Italy under the previous Dublin III regulation. The coordinated restart marks the first practical test of the EU Pact on Migration and Asylum's core promise: faster, more enforceable responsibility rules that prevent applicants from shopping between member states.

The new legal framework replaces Dublin III

The AMMR supersedes the Dublin III regulation that governed asylum responsibility since 2013. The central principle, the first EU country of entry examines the claim, remains, but the new text introduces stricter deadlines, streamlined procedures and a clearer definition of "secondary movements" within the bloc. Member states must now decide on transfer requests within weeks rather than months, and the regulation limits the grounds on which a receiving state can object.

Crucially, the AMMR is paired with a solidarity mechanism designed to relieve frontline states during sudden arrival surges. That mechanism allows for relocations to other member states or financial contributions. Italy and Spain argue it should also apply when large numbers of people are returned under the responsibility rules, a reading the European Commission has not yet formally endorsed.

Sweden never paused returns

While most member states froze Dublin transfers to Italy in recent years, citing reception conditions and legal uncertainty, Sweden continued. Victoria Holmqvist, spokesperson for Migration Minister Johan Forssell, told ANSA: "From the Swedish point of view, this is not new, but since the European pact came into force, transfers under the Dublin regulation work better." Stockholm intends to keep using the mechanism, now backed by the AMMR's tighter timelines.

Swedish officials say the volume of returns is modest, dozens per year, but the political signal matters. By treating the new rules as operational immediately, Sweden pressures other capitals to follow suit and signals to applicants that secondary movements will not yield a second examination.

Austria moves first with actual returns

Vienna has gone furthest in practice. According to ANSA, Austrian authorities have already returned four asylum seekers to Italy in the two months since the AMMR took effect. The Austrian interior ministry says the cases involved applicants who had no legal basis to remain in Austria and whose first entry was recorded in Italy. The numbers are small but the precedent is not: Austria is the first to execute transfers under the new regulation rather than merely announcing intent.

Germany and Italy deadlock over scale and money

Berlin has signalled it wants to follow the same path, but the volume of potential returns is an order of magnitude larger. Germany hosts the EU's biggest asylum caseload, and a significant share of those applicants first entered via Italy. Italian Interior Minister Matteo Piantedosi has publicly resisted, demanding financial compensation for each person returned. Rome argues that reception capacity is already stretched and that Berlin should share the cost.

The disagreement goes beyond money. Italy contends that the AMMR does not apply retroactively to Dublin cases lodged before 12 June 2026. If that interpretation holds, thousands of pending German transfer requests would fall outside the new fast-track procedure and revert to the slower, more contested Dublin III rules. Germany rejects the cutoff, setting up a legal dispute that may land before the Court of Justice of the EU.

Spain demands solidarity mechanism activation

Madrid has aligned with Rome, opposing what it calls "isolated expulsions", unilateral returns without burden-sharing. The Spanish government says the solidarity mechanism embedded in the EU Pact must be triggered when returns reach a scale that overwhelms a frontline state. That mechanism, negotiated as part of the same legislative package, allows for mandatory relocations or financial contributions of €20,000 per relocated person, though the exact triggers remain undefined in secondary legislation.

Spain, Italy and Greece are the three primary entry points for irregular arrivals across the Mediterranean. All three have long argued that the Dublin system concentrates responsibility on geography rather than capacity. The AMMR's solidarity provisions were their price for accepting stricter responsibility rules; they now insist the Commission honour that bargain.

Why the Finnish decision matters

How we got here

What happens next

The Finnish Interior Ministry's statement to ANSA underscored the government's view that accountability procedures must function as written: "We believe that the entry into force of the EU Regulation on Asylum and Migration Management will allow for the resumption of transfers to Italy. These transfers are currently being prepared." The ministry added that it remains committed to ensuring the effective implementation of accountability procedures and that all member states fulfil their obligations under the pact.

For Italy, the stakes are immediate. The country recorded over 150,000 sea arrivals in 2025, the highest since 2016, and its reception system is operating above capacity. Piantedosi's demand for German funding, reportedly €15,000 per returned person, mirrors the per-capita relocation contribution in the solidarity regulation, suggesting Rome is using the new rules' own logic to extract resources.

Germany, for its part, faces domestic pressure to reduce its asylum backlog. The Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (BAMF) had 280,000 pending cases at the end of June 2026. Even a modest transfer rate to Italy would relieve administrative strain, but only if Rome cooperates. The alternative, prolonged legal limbo, suits neither Berlin nor the applicants.

The Commission has so far avoided taking sides on the retroactivity dispute. A spokesperson said only that the AMMR "applies to all procedures pending on its date of application" and that member states should "cooperate in good faith." That formulation leaves enough ambiguity for both Germany and Italy to claim vindication. The real test will come when the first Finnish or Austrian transfer request lands in Rome's inbox after the summer recess.

Sweden's experience offers a preview. Holmqvist noted that Swedish transfers "work better" under the AMMR, but she did not quantify the improvement. Swedish Migration Agency data shows 37 returns to Italy in the first half of 2026, up from 22 in the same period of 2025. The increase is marginal, but the agency attributes it to shorter appeal windows and clearer documentation requirements, exactly the procedural tightening the AMMR intended.

Austria's four returns are symbolically significant but numerically trivial. The Austrian interior ministry said the cases were "straightforward", applicants with Italian fingerprints in Eurodac, no family ties in Austria, and no pending appeals. Complex cases, involving families, medical issues or disputed fingerprints, have not yet been tested. When they are, the AMMR's new procedural safeguards, including a right to an individual assessment of reception conditions in the receiving state, will face their first real scrutiny.

Spain's intervention broadens the debate beyond bilateral disputes. By insisting the solidarity mechanism applies to returns, Madrid is effectively arguing that the AMMR's two pillars, responsibility and solidarity, are inseparable. The Commission's implementing act on the solidarity trigger, due in October, will determine whether that reading prevails. If the trigger is set high, for example, requiring a 150% surge in arrivals, returns at current levels may not activate it. If set low, every return could theoretically unlock a financial obligation.

For applicants, the practical effect is already visible. Lawyers in Helsinki, Vienna and Berlin report clients withdrawing secondary applications rather than risk transfer. That deterrent effect was a stated goal of the pact's architects. Whether it reduces overall irregular migration or merely displaces it to less monitored routes remains the unanswered question the next 12 months will clarify.

The next concrete milestone is the Justice and Home Affairs Council on 9, 10 October, where ministers will review the AMMR's first 100 days. Finland's first transfers, Italy's response, and the Commission's solidarity guidance will all be on the table. Until then, the system runs on political will and administrative improvisation, exactly the condition the pact was supposed to end.