OpenLobby.EU
Explore

International Chamber of Commerce

ICC

The International Chamber of Commerce is a global business organization representing millions of companies.

Lobbying Activity

Response to Detailed procedures for addressing distortive foreign subsidies

6 Mar 2023

The International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) understands that with the Foreign Subsidies Regulation (FSR), the EU aimed to introduce an effective and comparable control mechanism for third-country subsidies to undertakings operating in the EU internal market, in addition to the existing State aid and public procurement rules, putting in place a heavily bureaucratic process. The FSR goes beyond State aid rules and European and non-European companies active in the EU will need to submit a quasi-exhaustive survey of all economic interactions kept with third countries. For large companies, this represents an unmanageably large amount of information, which will quickly overwhelm the European Commissions staff (in addition to companies own staff). Further, companies will not be able to guarantee completeness and accuracy of data production over such a large scale and the European Commission will unlikely be able to make meaningful use of the vast majority of accessed information. It is also important to consider that companies from certain third countries may not have the same level of efficiency in corporate record-keeping as the EU. Similarly, the form and format of corporate records in some countries may be significantly different from the EU standards. This may amplify an already high administrative burden and deter such companies from trading or investing in the EU. Similarly, the bureaucratic red tape may result in an unexpectedly high workload for the EU institutions, causing them to miss out on distortive subsidies while trying to handle the impractical paperwork. For the sake of proportionality and effectiveness, it is therefore crucial that the European Commission focus its own and the industrys efforts on what really matters and avoid imposing such an unprecedented information collection burden on so many companies to purse a handful of cases every year. The Single Market has always been an attractive option for investors from third countries in the region. This provides a competitive advantage to the EU economy. Unlike foreign companies, European companies have already been subject to subsidy regulations for years. The FSR seeks to close this regulatory gap and remedy the imbalance between European and foreign companies. That said, in its current form, the cost of compliance with subsidy restrictions will potentially be higher for foreign companies than the ones in the Single Market. This may create a competitive disadvantage for foreign companies and reverse the imbalance instead of remedying it. In this context, there is significant room for improvement as well as the need to provide greater clarity and legal certainty for the undertakings within and outside the EU that are subject to the FSR, in the Draft Act. In its current form, the Draft Act does not answer key questions regarding various substantive points that are fundamental to understanding and applying the FSR, for instance how to interpret financial contribution or what constitutes a distortive subsidy. By way of example, public support obtained for COVID-19 or green energy initiatives may fall within this scope and make it difficult for the EU authorities to distinguish distortive subsidies from others. Further guidance will be welcome in the envisaged Guidelines or subsequent Notices, but these instruments will come too late for the many undertakings who have to figure out how to comply with the FSR (before 12 October 2023 in case of concentrations and public procurement). It is essential to preserve the EU's fundamental openness to foreign and domestic investment while keeping the bureaucratic hurdles for mergers and participation in public procurement as low and streamlined as possible. In order to prevent unnecessary burdens on business and excessive blocking periods for undertakings, the procedures under the individual instruments must be clear, predictable and unbureaucratic.
Read full response

Meeting with Valdis Dombrovskis (Executive Vice-President)

9 Feb 2023 · Economic impact of Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, WTO reform, Digital initiatives

Meeting with Janusz Wojciechowski (Commissioner)

9 Feb 2023 · Practical ideas on how the EU commission could address issues on EU sanctions against Russia and its impact on food security and the EU industry.

ICC warns BEFIT tax plans risk double taxation and innovation

25 Jan 2023
Topic — The European Commission is consulting on a common framework for EU corporate taxation.
Message — The ICC recommends maintaining the arm’s length principle and making BEFIT rules optional for companies. They advocate for centralized administration through a one-stop-shop to ensure real simplification and avoid double taxation.123
Why — Optionality and administrative simplification would reduce compliance costs and prevent harmful tax mismatches.4
Impact — Research sectors and innovative firms lose out if profit allocation ignores R&D investment.5
Read full response

Meeting with Valdis Dombrovskis (Executive Vice-President)

29 Apr 2022 · Support for Ukrainian businesses, WTO reform and EU’s position on e-commerce and carbon pricing

Meeting with Frans Timmermans (Executive Vice-President)

29 Apr 2022 · Discussion on the implementation of European Green Deal as well as private sector engagement on sustainability topics

Response to Alignment EU rules on capital requirements to international standards (prudential requirements and market discipline)

20 Jan 2022

International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) The International Chamber of Commerce (“ICC”) – the institutional representative of more than 45 million businesses in over 130 countries – warmly welcomes the objectives of the proposed Capital Requirements Regulation (“CRR3”). As a global organization, we fully recognize that a robust and stable financial system is an essential foundation to enable economic growth, entrepreneurship and opportunity for all. Based on extensive consultations in recent weeks – with financial institutions, European multinationals and representatives of small and medium-sized enterprises (“SMEs”) – we are, however, deeply concerned that two provisions in the draft CRR3 may have severe unintended consequences for the provision of cost-effective trade finance to the real economy. While trade finance represents only a small proportion of the assets regulated by CRR, the potential impact of the changes contemplated by the draft regulation could have far-reaching consequences for the competitiveness of EU-based companies trading (or seeking to trade) internationally – and, moreover, for the achievement of the laudable targets set out in the European Green Deal. By way of context: the World Trade Organization (WTO) estimates that over 80% of international trade relies on some form of trade finance.1 This means that any company – from SMEs to large multinationals – require access to trade finance products whenever they need to import essential components, when they market their products abroad and when they try to secure international contracts. Given that international trade will be a vital form of relief for many companies – particularly SMEs – in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic, we encourage EU policymakers to pay careful attention to ensure that trade finance assets are not regulated in a penalizing manner under the final CRR3. In this connection, we would like to highlight two provisions within the draft regulation which, we firmly believe, deserve revision: (i) the increase in CCF for Technical Guarantees from 20% to 50% and (ii) the effective maturity recognition for Trade Finance. based on the imperative to secure the supply of cost-effective trade finance to the real-economy and the available empirical evidence we encourage the policy makers to review these points. A full elaboration of our views follows below.
Read full response

Meeting with Charmaine Hili (Cabinet of President Ursula von der Leyen)

4 May 2021 · Digital Green Certificate Recognition of qualifications and skills of refugees

Meeting with Anthony Whelan (Cabinet of President Ursula von der Leyen) and AOKpass Pte Ltd

18 Mar 2021 · Digital green (pass) certificate

Response to Intellectual Property Action Plan

14 Aug 2020

The International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) is the institutional representative of more than 45 million companies, 12,000 chambers of commerce in over 100 countries. ICC’s core mission is to make business work for everyone, every day, everywhere. Through a unique mix of advocacy, solutions and standard setting, we promote international trade, responsible business conduct and a global approach to regulation, in addition to providing market-leading dispute resolution services. Our members include many of the world’s leading companies, SMEs, business associations and local chambers of commerce. ICC welcomes and supports the European Commission on this call for feedback. A strong and predictable IP framework is key for a successful EU industrial strategy and recovery, promoting sustainable innovation in an increasingly competitive economy. ICC supports an ambitious EU trade agenda, based upon a strong IP system. ICC further appreciates the centrality of improved coordination between businesses and IP authorities within the action plan. Coordination will also be crucial when defining the European approach on AI, both with the private sector and with the EU’s trading partners. ICC supports the efforts to address the fragmented nature of the EU’s IP system. ICC awaits the entry into force of the Unitary Patent (UP) system and supports the creation of a unitary Supplementary protection certificate (uSPC). This can simplify the application procedure, reduce duplication, and facilitate a consistent application of the SPC Regulations. A single application portal and a unified grant mechanism can be helpful steps towards a uSPC. The limited uptake of IP is an important addition to the list of problems to tackle, and one in which ICC is actively involved by promoting IP as a tool for business. SMEs and research centers could benefit from targeted campaigns, with information about the types of IPRs and ways to develop a business strategy around them, and in cooperation with Intellectual Property Offices (IPOs) and user associations. Such projects can leverage the resources of existing EU initiatives such as the European IPR Helpdesk and the IPR SME Helpdesks for China, South East Asia, and Latin America. The EU Commission’s action plan could place greater emphasis on the need to strengthen enforcement against online counterfeiting, piracy, and cybertheft. Online intermediaries and platforms have made significant efforts on this front including enhanced report processing, improved response times, and automated reviews. In this context, ICC encourages the EU Commission to support practical business-to-business solutions that enable effective action to combat piracy and counterfeiting. We encourage legislators to carefully consider the potential for enhanced due diligence requirements while having regard to existing industry best-practices and any practical implications such regulatory requirements may have on the supply of key business services. Furthermore, the COVID-19 crisis has only highlighted the need for stepping up the fight against counterfeiting. Health authorities have reported a recent surge in fake medicines, which represent a threat to patient’s health and safety. ICC encourages further cooperation between manufacturers, supply chain operators, intermediaries, and law enforcement. IP Information management and availability continue to be areas with potential for improvement. IP databases should be upgraded, including functionalities for users with disabilities and improving the collection of data on Utility Models, where these are available. Better case-law databases are needed, with more widespread multi-lingual availability of these documents. Information availability also has an impact on enforcement, as demonstrated by the difficulties brought about by the challenges to the WHOIS database. A balance needs to be found between data protection regulation and the need for uniform and centralized databases.
Read full response

Meeting with Tom Snels (Cabinet of Commissioner Ylva Johansson)

6 Aug 2020 · Presentation of an initiative to help opening up the economy through frictionless cross-border transport through an App allowing recognition of COVID-19 compliance.

Meeting with Thierry Breton (Commissioner) and

29 Jun 2020 · Speech/debate - "Politique industrielle dans un contexte de mondialisation post-Covid"

Meeting with Anthony Whelan (Cabinet of President Ursula von der Leyen) and AOKpass Pte Ltd

18 Jun 2020 · Digital issues

Response to EU 2030 Biodiversity Strategy

20 Jan 2020

In response to the European Commission’s call for comments on the 2030 EU biodiversity objectives and measures, ICC is pleased to attach its submission on the Convention on Biological Diversity Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework which contains recommendations relevant also to the development of the EU Biodiversity Strategy. We highlight below some points from that paper. The consultation document sets out certain overall objectives for the EU 2030 biodiversity strategy – we suggest consideration of the following additional objectives: • Foster innovation that contributes to achieving the objectives of the CBD, the SDGs and the European Biodiversity Strategy by supporting relevant public and private research and development activities, and by fostering information exchange and scientific collaborations, in keeping with the trend towards open science and open data. • Ensure a holistic and integrated systems-based approach including by encouraging closer collaboration and information sharing between all stakeholders. • Raise awareness across all segments of society, including business, of the urgency of halting biodiversity loss. The overall aims and strategy should recognise and take into account the interdependency of people and nature, and the need to reconcile the needs of both, using the Sustainable Development Goals as a framework. Business is an important stakeholder group and can play an important role in helping attain biodiversity objectives. To engage business, it is essential that the strategy define an ambition and goals that are relevant to and resonate with business, and that a coherent policy framework is defined that supports and provides a level playing field and incentives for the scaling up of business efforts to use biodiversity in a sustainable way. Working with business to define such a framework would help ensure that it is supportive of business actions towards this end. To encourage businesses to contribute to biodiversity objectives, ICC recommends that the strategy should: • provide for biodiversity and ecosystem policies and regulation that are based on and congruent with scientific and economic principles and evidence; • define specific, measurable, attainable, realistic and time bound (SMART) targets that can help guide companies for implementing their own biodiversity plans and initiatives; • encourage research and scientific collaborations, both public and private, which can help inform business decision-making to achieve beneficial outcomes for biodiversity conservation; • support closer collaboration and information sharing between all stakeholders, including policy makers, business, economists and scientists, to achieve a more holistic and integrated approach to biodiversity conservation and sustainable use, including exchange of relevant data and practices, as well as information on indicators and methodologies between different stakeholders and disciplines; • provide incentives and support for business by promoting the integration/mainstreaming of biodiversity considerations in investment decisions and measurement tools; and • encourage an ‘action agenda’ that would seek to identify leaders from business and other non-State actor groups to help increase awareness of biodiversity issues and develop and share best practices. All biodiversity-related policies and regulation should apply the principles and aims of the overall strategy to ensure coherence and a holistic approach. ICC hopes that these comments will be of assistance and would be pleased to contribute to the future development of the strategy.
Read full response

Meeting with Margrethe Vestager (Commissioner)

11 Oct 2019 · Meeting on trust in digital services

Meeting with Phil Hogan (Commissioner)

20 Feb 2019 · Agri Matters

Meeting with Johannes Laitenberger (Director-General Competition)

11 Dec 2018 · Exchange on a number of competition policy issues

Meeting with Cecilia Malmström (Commissioner)

15 Nov 2018 · Trade reform efforts and WTO and OECD

Meeting with Johannes Laitenberger (Director-General Competition)

22 Nov 2017 · To review current competition trends

Meeting with Günther Oettinger (Commissioner)

21 Sept 2016 · Industry 4.0

Meeting with Johannes Laitenberger (Director-General Competition)

11 Dec 2015 · To make acquaintance and to review competition policy trends

Meeting with Andrus Ansip (Vice-President) and

16 Mar 2015 · Digital Single Market strategy

Meeting with Renate Nikolay (Cabinet of Commissioner Věra Jourová)

16 Mar 2015 · Digital economy

Meeting with Cecilia Malmström (Commissioner)

13 Mar 2015 · European Policies; Business in Global Markets

Meeting with Cecilia Malmström (Commissioner)

13 Mar 2015 · TTIP