Sadly, the law has a loophole which allows flagship phones, which keep 80% of their capacity after 1000 cycles and have at least an IP67 rating, to be exempt from this. So it’s unlikely because right now there are some phone manufacturers which claim this durability. :(
“Appliances specifically designed to operate primarily in an environment that is regularly subject to splashing water, water
streams or water immersion, and that are intended to be washable or rinseable, may be designed in such a way as to make
the battery removable and replaceable only by independent professionals”
"From 20 June 2025, manufacturers, importers or authorised representatives shall ensure that the process for battery replacement:
(…)
or, as an alternative to point (i), ensure that:
(…)
the battery endurance in cycles achieves a minimum of 1 000 full charge cycles, and after 1 000 full charge cycles the battery must, in addition, have in a fully charged state, a remaining capacity of at least 80 % of the rated capacity;
the device is at least dust tight and protected against immersion in water up to one meter depth for a minimum of 30 minutes."
I could be too paranoid, but I found it always best to assume the most malicious interpretation when it comes to corporate law.
the battery endurance in cycles achieves a minimum of 1 000 full charge cycles, and after 1 000 full charge cycles the battery must, in addition, have in a fully charged state, a remaining capacity of at least 80 % of the rated capacity;
the device is at least dust tight and protected against immersion in water up to one meter depth for a minimum of 30 minutes."
Tbh, that completely defeats the whole law.
Doesn’t even have to be a flagship. It’s any phone really. The 1000 charge cycles thing is quite easy to do. All you have to do is to limit the capacity of the cell from the beginning. So for example, if the battery originally has 5000mAh capacity, sell it as a 4000mAh battery. That way the battery can lose 1800mAh of capacity (=> go down to 64% of the total maximum capacity) without going below the nominal 80% mark.
Then waterproof the phone, as most phones already are, and that’s it, done. No change at all needed to be done to the physical phone.
No, not the complete law, but it severely gimps it. No one’s going to make a car or a laptop submersible. But phones and tablets are easy to glue together.
Ok, reading this it will be replaceable by a ‘generalist’ which can mean anything really. I guess we’ll see how many phone makers will use this rule to still soldier in the battery. This exemption looks pretty stupid.
It’s fine by me, I just want to have the possibility to buy a phone with interchangeable battery and 2 SIM cards. As long as the phone has that, it’s good for me.
I used to require dual sim, but at this point I’m happy with 1 physical sim and a couple of e-sims in rotation. I’m quite happy not to have to buy a sim after landing in Bangkok or wherever and instead buying a package for the global sim on file.
Only 1 physical Sim slot is fine, as long as there are 2 modems. In Germany at least you pretty much need to have two different Sim cards from 2 different networks to have good coverage in rural areas
I hope you’re right. I 100% respect your right to want a phone with a replaceable battery; but I equally absolutely want the slimmest phone possible and really really don’t want the compromises that a user-replaceable battery calls for.
Both are valid choices, and that clause would seem a good way of ensuring both are provided for.
Just fyi the law doesn’t make the batteries replaceable like on old phones, where you had to pop the entire back off, but just reasonably replaceable, meaning an end user with normalish tools (they don’t specify which afaik) should be able to open it. I imagine we will see thin designs like the iPhone Air where all the non-replaceable parts are in a plateau and the battery is easily reachable with a bunch of screws and maybe some prying. At least that’s what I hope for.
Sadly, the law has a loophole which allows flagship phones, which keep 80% of their capacity after 1000 cycles and have at least an IP67 rating, to be exempt from this. So it’s unlikely because right now there are some phone manufacturers which claim this durability. :(
I hope I’m wrong, though.
Where did you take this from?
The rules I found (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ%3AC_202500214) say that:
“Appliances specifically designed to operate primarily in an environment that is regularly subject to splashing water, water streams or water immersion, and that are intended to be washable or rinseable, may be designed in such a way as to make the battery removable and replaceable only by independent professionals”
It’s in Article 11 here: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/1542/oj/eng
I don’t see any info about this being amended later.
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/1670/oj/eng
Section 5C point 2:
"From 20 June 2025, manufacturers, importers or authorised representatives shall ensure that the process for battery replacement:
(…)
or, as an alternative to point (i), ensure that:
(…)
I could be too paranoid, but I found it always best to assume the most malicious interpretation when it comes to corporate law.
Tbh, that completely defeats the whole law.
Doesn’t even have to be a flagship. It’s any phone really. The 1000 charge cycles thing is quite easy to do. All you have to do is to limit the capacity of the cell from the beginning. So for example, if the battery originally has 5000mAh capacity, sell it as a 4000mAh battery. That way the battery can lose 1800mAh of capacity (=> go down to 64% of the total maximum capacity) without going below the nominal 80% mark.
Then waterproof the phone, as most phones already are, and that’s it, done. No change at all needed to be done to the physical phone.
No, not the complete law, but it severely gimps it. No one’s going to make a car or a laptop submersible. But phones and tablets are easy to glue together.
Watch them do it.
Ok, reading this it will be replaceable by a ‘generalist’ which can mean anything really. I guess we’ll see how many phone makers will use this rule to still soldier in the battery. This exemption looks pretty stupid.
This is still a good start nonetheless as it would normalize removable battery in the market.
It’s fine by me, I just want to have the possibility to buy a phone with interchangeable battery and 2 SIM cards. As long as the phone has that, it’s good for me.
I used to require dual sim, but at this point I’m happy with 1 physical sim and a couple of e-sims in rotation. I’m quite happy not to have to buy a sim after landing in Bangkok or wherever and instead buying a package for the global sim on file.
Only 1 physical Sim slot is fine, as long as there are 2 modems. In Germany at least you pretty much need to have two different Sim cards from 2 different networks to have good coverage in rural areas
Six seven!!
I hope you’re right. I 100% respect your right to want a phone with a replaceable battery; but I equally absolutely want the slimmest phone possible and really really don’t want the compromises that a user-replaceable battery calls for.
Both are valid choices, and that clause would seem a good way of ensuring both are provided for.
Just fyi the law doesn’t make the batteries replaceable like on old phones, where you had to pop the entire back off, but just reasonably replaceable, meaning an end user with normalish tools (they don’t specify which afaik) should be able to open it. I imagine we will see thin designs like the iPhone Air where all the non-replaceable parts are in a plateau and the battery is easily reachable with a bunch of screws and maybe some prying. At least that’s what I hope for.