Japan Business Council in Europe

JBCE

The Japan Business Council in Europe represents Japanese companies operating in Europe and advocates for open trade, common regulatory frameworks, and responsible business practices.

Lobbying Activity

Japan Business Council seeks chemical limit exemptions for articles

19 Dec 2025
Message — JBCE requests extending trace contaminant limits to finished articles to ensure regulatory consistency across different EU laws. They also urge a longer transition period because necessary testing standards for certain chemicals are currently unavailable.123
Why — The amendment avoids impossible technical requirements at the manufacturing stage and facilitates global trade.45
Impact — Environmental groups lose momentum toward clean goals as technical barriers prevent immediate chemical removal.6

Japanese Business Council Urges Delays for Chemical Restrictions

19 Dec 2025
Message — JBCE requests longer transition periods and specific derogations for specialized equipment like medical devices. They stress that finding alternatives and re-certifying products requires extensive time and personnel.12
Why — The extension would help firms avoid production delays and preserve limited human resources.34
Impact — Citizens could lose access to medical diagnostics and environmental monitoring during equipment shortages.5

Meeting with Ioan-Dragos Tudorache (Cabinet of Executive Vice-President Stéphane Séjourné)

15 Dec 2025 · EU’s industrial policy

Meeting with Dārta Tentere (Cabinet of Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič) and Fujitsu Technology Solutions B.V. and

11 Dec 2025 · Discussion on EU-Japan trade, competitiveness, and industrial policy.

JBCE Urges EU Taxonomy Alignment With Industrial Policy

5 Dec 2025
Message — JBCE requests full recognition of net-zero technologies and coherence with the Net Zero Industry Act. They seek the clarification or deletion of unclear requirements regarding suitable alternative substances. They also urge alignment between the Taxonomy and REACH standards for hazardous substances.123
Why — These changes would lower administrative costs and prevent companies from losing access to sustainable investment.45
Impact — Environmental groups lose if the Taxonomy allows substances currently restricted beyond basic REACH requirements.6

Meeting with Olivier Bringer (Head of Unit Communications Networks, Content and Technology)

18 Nov 2025 · EU-Japan Digital Partnership and potential areas for further collaboration with JBCE

Japan Business Council urges EU to accept non-EU recycled materials

6 Nov 2025
Message — The organization requests that the EU recognize secondary materials from partner countries with established economic security agreements, rather than mandating EU-origin materials exclusively. They argue that limiting circulation to EU-produced materials would disrupt global supply chains and hinder optimal circular economy systems.123
Why — This would preserve their existing supply chain partnerships and investments in quality assurance and cost efficiency.4

Meeting with Kerstin Jorna (Director-General Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs)

28 Oct 2025 · DG Kerstin Jorna Meeting - Speaking engagement with JP companies

Response to Digital package – digital omnibus

10 Oct 2025

This paper outlines recommendations from Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE) on behalf of Japanese businesses operating in the EU on key digital legislation, focusing on the Data Act, cybersecurity frameworks such as the Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) and the Directive on measures for a high common level of cybersecurity across the Union (NIS2), and the Artificial Intelligence (AI) Act. Our proposals aim to simplify compliance, reduce overlapping obligations, and ensure alignment with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and international standards, thereby enhancing Europes competitiveness and innovation capacity. For the Data legislation, mainly the Data Act, we advocate for clearer protections for trade secrets, proportional obligations, and harmonised compensation rules to avoid excessive burdens on data holders. On cybersecurity, we recommend unified reporting templates, realistic timelines aligned with GDPR standards, and regulatory coherence across CRA, NIS2, and sector-specific rules to prevent duplication. Regarding the AI Act, we advocate for a phased implementation, simplified documentation requirements, and clearer definitionsparticularly of high-risk and substantial modificationto reduce legal uncertainty while fostering innovation. These measures will contribute to greater legal clarity, lower compliance costs, and position the EU as a global leader in secure, interoperable, and innovation-friendly digital ecosystems. Finally, we underscore the strategic importance of EUJapan cooperation in developing interoperable standards and promoting the exchange of best practices. We strongly hope that such collaboration will be further advanced through structured policy dialogues, notably the EUJapan Digital Partnership, thereby contributing to the prosperity of both regions and the strengthening of global digital governance.
Read full response

Japan Business Council in Europe Urges Bold Digital-First Product Rules

3 Sept 2025
Message — The organization advocates for a digital-first approach to labels, marking, and documentation. They request replacing physical postal addresses with digital contact points and prioritizing international standards.123
Why — This would lower logistical expenses and reduce complexity across their global supply chains.45
Impact — EU citizens may face higher prices if new testing requirements increase manufacturing costs.6

Japan Business Council urges digital-first EU product rules

3 Sept 2025
Message — JBCE urges the EU to require digital formats as the default for formal requirements. They recommend prioritising international standards over EU-specific ones to avoid trade barriers.12
Why — Moving to digital documentation reduces compliance costs and logistical burdens like packaging clutter.34
Impact — EU citizens face higher prices if the regulations introduce unnecessary financial and administrative burdens.5

Japan Business Council Urges Simplified CBAM Compliance for Downstream Goods

25 Aug 2025
Message — The organization requests simplified compliance methods for downstream goods importers, clearer threshold rules based only on CBAM-covered materials' weight, and harmonization with other EU carbon calculation methodologies. They argue the current approach creates disproportionate administrative burdens compared to minimal emission reductions.123
Why — This would reduce their compliance costs from hundreds of euros per small component to negligible administrative burden.45

JBCE urges further postponement of battery due diligence rules

30 Jul 2025
Message — The council requests delaying obligations until August 2028 and aligning them with other EU sustainability laws. They also seek early publication of guidelines and recognition of industry schemes to simplify compliance.123
Why — This delay avoids high costs and penalties before a proper verification system exists.4
Impact — Sustainability goals and compliant companies suffer if oversight is delayed or capacity is lacking.5

Japanese business council seeks flexible EU unsold product rules

9 Jul 2025
Message — They argue only goods primarily intended for consumers should be subject to reporting. They also state the limited assurance requirement must be removed to avoid burdens.12
Why — This would reduce the complexity of compliance and remove disproportionate burdens for operators.3
Impact — Public transparency loses out if regulators accept aggregated data or best estimates instead.4

Japan Business Council urges simpler maritime carbon market rules

7 Jul 2025
Message — JBCE argues regulatory simplification is essential to reduce administrative burdens. They request that Ocean Carbon Capture and carbon removal credits be formally recognised as emission reduction solutions.123
Why — Streamlined rules would reduce high entry barriers and compliance risks for international businesses.45
Impact — European maritime companies lose competitive standing if regional rules overlap with global standards.6

Meeting with Mika Aaltola (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur for opinion) and Bureau du Tibet

3 Jul 2025 · EU Affairs

Response to Declaration of conformity and verification by independent auditor

16 Jun 2025

The Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE) appreciates the opportunity to provide feedback on the proposed new template for the F-Gas Declaration of Conformity. We would like to respectfully share several comments, as outlined in the attached document.
Read full response

Meeting with Nicolo Brignoli (Cabinet of Commissioner Valdis Dombrovskis)

4 Jun 2025 · Simplification

Response to International Digital Strategy

21 May 2025

Please find the attachment. Thank you.
Read full response

JBCE urges simplified EU deforestation rules and broader exemptions

12 May 2025
Message — JBCE requests flexible due diligence statements and exemptions for small rubber components. They also propose excluding spare packaging and manuals from the regulation.12
Why — Proposed changes would significantly reduce administrative burdens and compliance costs for machinery manufacturers.34
Impact — Environmental groups lose transparency if regional data replaces specific geolocation for paper products.5

Response to Technical description of important and critical products with digital elements

13 Apr 2025

Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE) represents the interests of more than 100 multinational companies of Japanese parentage operating in Europe. Please find our opinions attached for your review.
Read full response

Meeting with Ralph Schmitt-Nilson (Head of Unit Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs)

7 Apr 2025 · Clean Industrial Deal

Meeting with Michael Hager (Cabinet of Commissioner Valdis Dombrovskis)

25 Mar 2025 · Simplification

Meeting with Eddy De Smijter (Head of Unit Competition)

11 Feb 2025 · Exchange of views on the experience with the enforcement of the Foreign Subsidies Regulation (“FSR”)

JBCE urges EU to include more categories in lead exemptions

10 Feb 2025
Message — The group suggests adjusting the scope to ensure medical devices and monitoring instruments are included. They request a longer validity period for products with long design cycles and certification requirements.12
Why — This extension provides more time to redesign specialized products with long life cycles.34
Impact — Environmental safety suffers as toxic lead remains in the market for longer.5

Japan Business Council in Europe calls for harmonized EU regulations

31 Jan 2025
Message — The organization calls for harmonized customs and digital standards to reduce administrative burdens on businesses. They recommend using Regulations instead of Directives to prevent market fragmentation across Member States.12
Why — Standardized rules and international alignment would lower compliance costs and streamline their operations.34
Impact — National governments lose the flexibility to set their own technical regulations and product requirements.5

Response to Digital Product Passport (DPP) service providers

10 Dec 2024

The Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE) and Japanese 4EE industrial associations (JP4EE: JEMA, JEITA, JBMIA, CIAJ) support the idea that proving and transparently demonstrating the sustainability of an entire product lifecycle using a Digital Product Passport (DPP) would benefit both consumers and users. At the same time, we are keen to understand how the European Commission plans to promote the DPP service providers business model. We also see value in leveraging the EU-Japan Digital Partnership to deepen discussions around the DPP and enhance its cross-border functionality. We outline shared concerns commonly raised by both economic operators registering their own DPPs and service providers supporting these registrations in our feedback document. The table of contents in the feedback document. 1. Certification scheme 2. Clear definitions 3. Implementation from minimal requirements 4. Ensuring information security 5. Ensuring the interoperability of databases supported by each country and sector 6. Sufficient time for implementation
Read full response

Japan Business Council seeks clarity on CBAM declarant procedures

26 Nov 2024
Message — The group seeks clarity on the content of applicant observations. They also request technical details for reactivating closed accounts.12
Why — Clearer rules would prevent redundant administrative steps and ensure stable global supply chains.34
Impact — Ambiguous procedures risk trade disruptions that harm the resilience of global supply chains.5

Response to Evaluation of the EU-Japan Economic Partnership Agreement

28 Oct 2024

The Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE), a cross-sectoral organisation representing companies of Japanese parentage active in Europe, recognises that the EU-Japan Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) has significantly contributed to deepening trade relations between the two regions over the past five years. It has undoubtedly played a key role in promoting global trade through the elimination of trade barriers such as tariffs. On the other hand, JBCE sees additional untapped potential for the EU-Japan EPA in (i) accelerating the green transition, (ii) realising the circular economy, and (iii) ensuring economic security through regulatory cooperation. Hence, we appreciate the opportunity to provide feedback in this call for evidence and to participate in the upcoming evaluation process. For more details, please see attached our position paper.
Read full response

Response to Ecodesign requirements for air heating and cooling products (review)

29 Aug 2024

The Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE), representing companies of Japanese parentage operating in Europe, and the Japan Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Industry Association (JRAIA), representing manufacturers of refrigeration and air conditioning equipment in Japan, would like to commend the efforts of the European Commission and the study teams regarding the revision of the Ecodesign Regulation (EU)2016/2281 on Air Heating and Cooling Products (ENER Lot 21). We are pleased to submit our feedback in the attached document. We are eager to continue contributing wherever it may be valuable, sharing the expertise and insights of our members. We remain available for any further discussions and look forward to providing support throughout this review process.
Read full response

Japan Business Council seeks higher chemical limits and grace period

27 Aug 2024
Message — JBCE proposes a concentration limit of 1,000 ppm to accommodate complex supply chains. They also request a grace period to avoid banning necessary spare parts too quickly.12
Why — This would lower compliance costs and allow companies to use existing stock.34
Impact — Environmental protection efforts are weakened by allowing higher concentrations of toxic chemicals.5

JBCE urges broader spare part exemptions for Dechlorane Plus

24 Jul 2024
Message — JBCE requests that the Commission includes specific exemptions for spare parts in the regulation. They recommend adding outdoor power equipment and analytical instruments to the specific exempt categories.12
Why — Members would avoid manufacturing disruptions and extend the service life of their products.3
Impact — The circular economy suffers as shortened product lifetimes lead to rapidly increasing waste.4

Response to Permanent storage of EU ETS emissions through carbon capture and utilisation

15 Jul 2024

The Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE) appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the European Commissions proposal for a Delegated Regulation for the EU-ETS. JBCE believes that the proposed regulation is an important step towards stimulating carbon removal markets and achieving the goal of carbon neutrality. While the current draft focuses exclusively on the construction sector, particularly cement and concrete, we believe it is crucial to expand this definition to include chemicals, in particular those utilising Carbon Capture and Utilisation (CCU) technologies. Nevertheless, we would like to give our views on the justification for including CCU plastics used in the construction industry in the list of permanently chemically bound products in the proposed Annex and to stress the importance of the following three points: 1. Harmonisation with the CRCF on the categorisation and definition of permanent carbon storage in products and on the lifespan requirements 2. Recognition of recycling in the end-of-life treatment of CCU products to achieve the objective of reducing greenhouse gas emissions 3. Inclusion of plastics used in construction in the Annex as products to permanently chemically bind greenhouse gases
Read full response

Response to EU implementation of recent amendments to the Annexes of the Basel Convention regarding trade in e-waste (2)

2 Jul 2024

JBCE, a cross-sectoral organisation representing companies of Japanese parentage active in Europe, fully supports the EUs efforts to achieve a circular economy. JBCE sees the proposed Delegated Regulations as important to achieve circularity for resources, especially metal resources originating from e-waste or e-scrap, and would like to stress the importance of the following four points. (1) Uniform operation on the classification of Y49 and A1181 (to properly recognise the classification Y49) - We expect that all kinds of e-scrap that has been detoxified in the EU will be uniformly classified as Y49 by the authorities of all Member States. For Member States authorities and operators there should be clear guidance on how A1181 and Y49 should be classified as such in accordance with the Basel Convention. (2) Clear, fair and simplified requirements for the intra-/extra-EU transportation of Y49 and A1181 - Even if PIC procedures are required for Y49, excessive administrative burdens on operators should be avoided, and a clear and simple procedural flow, free from doubt, should be developed. (3) Establishing an adequate transition period - If the adoption of the Delegated Regulation is scheduled for Q4 2024 and the acquisition of a Y49 PIC is mandatory from 1st January 2025, assuming that goods are transported out of the EU in early 2025, operators will only have three months to prepare their applications and authorities to process them. However, in view of previous administrative practices, there have been cases where it took approximately 2-3 months for the exporting country and 2-3 months for the importing country to complete the PIC process. Given that, it may be difficult for the authorities to complete the processing of the rapidly increasing number of Y49 PIC applications within just three months. In order to maintain the intra-EU and extra-EU transportation of e-waste and e-scrap smooth without disruption from January 2025 onwards, we would like to propose establishing an adequate transition period. we consider it appropriate to set a transition period until 1st January 2026 during which goods classified as Y49 can be transported without PIC procedures as long as they have fallen under the category of former GC020. (4) The recycling capacity of trading partners must be harnessed to realise the EU circular economy. We look forward to the creation of an business environment in which e-waste and e-scrap can be distributed seamlessly across borders with due consideration to minimize the environmental concerns, so that businesses within and outside the EU can join hands and work together to realise a circular economy in the EU. Please see the attached PDF for more details.
Read full response

Response to EU implementation of recent amendments to the Annexes of the Basel Convention regarding trade in e-waste

2 Jul 2024

JBCE, a cross-sectoral organisation representing companies of Japanese parentage active in Europe, fully supports the EUs efforts to achieve a circular economy. JBCE sees the proposed Delegated Regulations as important to achieve circularity for resources, especially metal resources originating from e-waste or e-scrap, and would like to stress the importance of the following four points. (1) Uniform operation on the classification of Y49 and A1181 (to properly recognise the classification Y49) - We expect that all kinds of e-scrap that has been detoxified in the EU will be uniformly classified as Y49 by the authorities of all Member States. For Member States authorities and operators there should be clear guidance on how A1181 and Y49 should be classified as such in accordance with the Basel Convention. (2) Clear, fair and simplified requirements for the intra-/extra-EU transportation of Y49 and A1181 - Even if PIC procedures are required for Y49, excessive administrative burdens on operators should be avoided, and a clear and simple procedural flow, free from doubt, should be developed. (3) Establishing an adequate transition period - If the adoption of the Delegated Regulation is scheduled for Q4 2024 and the acquisition of a Y49 PIC is mandatory from 1st January 2025, assuming that goods are transported out of the EU in early 2025, operators will only have three months to prepare their applications and authorities to process them. However, in view of previous administrative practices, there have been cases where it took approximately 2-3 months for the exporting country and 2-3 months for the importing country to complete the PIC process. Given that, it may be difficult for the authorities to complete the processing of the rapidly increasing number of Y49 PIC applications within just three months. In order to maintain the intra-EU and extra-EU transportation of e-waste and e-scrap smooth without disruption from January 2025 onwards, we would like to propose establishing an adequate transition period. we consider it appropriate to set a transition period until 1st January 2026 during which goods classified as Y49 can be transported without PIC procedures as long as they have fallen under the category of former GC020. (4) The recycling capacity of trading partners must be harnessed to realise the EU circular economy. We look forward to the creation of an business environment in which e-waste and e-scrap can be distributed seamlessly across borders with due consideration to minimize the environmental concerns, so that businesses within and outside the EU can join hands and work together to realise a circular economy in the EU. Please see the attached PDF for more details.
Read full response

Response to Update of format for F-gas reporting

10 Jun 2024

Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE), representing companies of Japanese parentage operating in Europe, appreciates the opportunity to provide feedback on the Draft Implementing regulation [Ares(2024)3431222] regarding the updated implementing act on the F-gas reporting format and its updated annex. Please find attached the comments from JBCE for your consideration.
Read full response

Response to Minimum requirements for certification programmes and training attestations for RACHP equipment

10 Jun 2024

Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE), representing companies of Japanese parentage operating in Europe, appreciates the opportunity to provide feedback on the Draft Implementing regulation [Ares (2024)3437233] on the RACHP certification requirements extended to organic Rankine cycles and refrigerated units in mobile equipment. JBCE would like to provide comments on Article 3 : JBCE recommends to maintain a separate category for smaller equipment, similar to today's Category II. Especially in view of the expected growth of the residential heat pump market, such a category remains relevant. It is not necessary for all technicians to be able to work with all types of equipment, this will not support the heat pump uptake in our view. The threshold for this category should be carefully considered, keeping in mind the future heat pump market, as well as future refrigerant solutions. We would like to make further contributions whenever it is useful and needed and share the knowledge and experience of our members. We remain at your disposal and look forward to working with you throughout this review work.
Read full response

Response to Update of format of F-gas labels

4 Jun 2024

Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE), representing companies of Japanese parentage operating in Europe, appreciates the opportunity to provide feedback on the Draft Implementing regulation [Ares (2024)3331253] on the update of format of F-gas labels. Please find attached our comments.
Read full response

JBCE demands changes to battery carbon footprint calculation rules

28 May 2024
Message — JBCE recommends adjusting charge cycles for hybrid vehicles to reflect usage patterns accurately. They propose limiting transport emission measurements to prevent trade barriers for non-EU products. They also support recognizing green electricity certificates.123
Why — These changes would lower reported emissions for Japanese imports and reduce administrative burdens.45
Impact — Domestic EU battery manufacturers lose a competitive advantage gained from penalizing imported battery transport.6

JBCE Demands Confidentiality Safeguards in EU Chemical Data Proposal

2 Apr 2024
Message — JBCE requests a system to prevent accidental release of trade secrets on common platforms. They suggest providing advance notice to companies before their information is made public.12
Why — Protecting trade secrets ensures companies avoid financial damage and maintain their competitive edge.3

JBCE Urges Balanced Risk Assessments in Chemical Regulatory Streamlining

2 Apr 2024
Message — JBCE emphasizes the need for balanced risk assessments that consider diverse regulatory criteria. They request continued opportunities for flexible dialogue between agencies, stakeholders, and industry registrants.12
Why — Including socio-economic assessments helps Japanese companies protect their market access from purely hazard-based bans.3
Impact — Environmental advocates lose regulatory momentum if unified safety assessments are delayed by socio-economic requirements.4

Japan Business Council urges product-level focus in ECHA transition

2 Apr 2024
Message — JBCE demands ECHA evaluates chemicals with a full understanding of electronic products. They seek regular verbal communication and clear, transparent application criteria.123
Why — Maintaining exemptions protects the market position of Japanese medical and measurement equipment.45
Impact — Patients and citizens lose access to life-saving niche medical devices and innovation.67

Japan Business Council urges realistic targets for vehicle recycling

1 Dec 2023
Message — The organization demands achievable timelines and practical targets for using recycled materials. They argue that including industrial waste and bio-based plastics is necessary to meet requirements.123
Why — This would lower costs and reduce the technical burden on manufacturers.45
Impact — Environmental groups lose as the circularity of consumer waste recycling is weakened.6

Japan Business Council urges EU to simplify reporting rules

28 Nov 2023
Message — JBCE highlights that ambiguous definitions and standards cause excessive administrative burden and unnecessary costs. They recommend replacing directives with regulations to create a consistent EU-wide framework and prevent fragmented requirements. They also suggest aligning EU legislation with global standards to ensure clarity for international value chains.1234
Why — Companies would achieve significant cost savings by reducing their dependence on expensive external consultancies.5
Impact — External consultancies lose business as clearer reporting tools reduce the need for specialized advice.6

JBCE calls for B2C focus in Green Claims Directive

20 Jul 2023
Message — The group requests that the scope be limited to B2C commercial practices. They argue that B2B communications should be explicitly excluded to remain workable for global companies.123
Why — Excluding B2B communications reduces compliance costs and operational burdens for global firms.45
Impact — Business clients lose legal protections against misleading environmental claims from their suppliers.6

Japan Business Council urges aligned CBAM and ETS reporting

11 Jul 2023
Message — JBCE demands identical reporting requirements for importers and domestic producers to ensure fairness. They request exemptions for small emitters and involvement of non-EU governments.12
Why — This would prevent Japanese companies from facing higher administrative costs than EU competitors.34
Impact — EU regulators lose the ability to accurately verify emissions if reporting on facility-level data becomes voluntary.5

Japan Business Council Urges Safe Harbor for EU Sustainability Reporting

6 Jul 2023
Message — The group requests a "safe harbour on civil liability" for human rights and forward-looking disclosures. They also urge the Commission to "swiftly define 'equivalent' standards" to prevent duplicative reporting for non-EU firms.12
Why — Alignment with international rules would reduce administrative costs and lower legal risks for parent companies.34
Impact — Stakeholders lose access to specific environmental and social data if definitions are delayed or restricted.56

Meeting with Raphaël Glucksmann (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur)

8 Jun 2023 · APA level - Forced labour

Response to Promoting sustainability in consumer after-sales

25 May 2023

Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE) welcomes and strongly supports the European Commissions Proposal for a Directive on common rules promoting the repair of goods. We believe that the proposal creates a proportionate framework ensuring that consumers have access to safe and high-quality repair. However, JBCE would like to take this opportunity to highlight and provide its insights on a few elements of the proposal. Please find attached the JBCE position paper on the Directive on common rules promoting the repair of goods.
Read full response

Response to Ecodesign for Sustainable Products - Product priorities

12 May 2023

Being a cross-sector association with member companies operating in different industries and across various stages in the supply chain, JBCE welcomes the opportunity to contribute to the public consultation on the new product priorities under the Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation (ESPR). JBCE supports the overall aim of the Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation as it contributes to a sustainable design covering the entire products lifecycle and thus helps achieve a circular economy. However, JBCE would like to emphasize that the requirements for manufacturing a sustainable product should be effective and workable. For this reason, we would like to once more emphasize the need for a product-by-product approach. Indeed, imposing horizontal requirements across sectors and products with different characteristics and requirements does not necessarily lead to improved safety, durability and recyclability. On the contrary, there is also the possibility that the environmental load will increase. Also, we firmly believe that requirements on final product should be limited to direct consumer use, and should not include B2B products. Products that are incorporated as parts or functionalities should be managed via the final product. Each sector and product already have vertical laws applying to them, and these vertical laws should take precedence over the ESPR. Intermediate products are not sold directly to consumers, so they should be excluded from the scope. In addition, many of the intermediate products are reactive and may not return to their original state. We look forward to continuing this open dialogue with stakeholders from all sectors and products and we would very much welcome further guidance and seminars to deepen the understanding of this legislation for the industry. We would like to share further detail our views and provide our insights on the new product priorities under the ESPR proposal as the attachment.
Read full response

Japan Business Council seeks taxonomy inclusion for e-fuel vehicles

3 May 2023
Message — JBCE requests including e-fuel vehicles and harmonizing hydrogen sustainability criteria with other EU policies. They also advocate for removing the worldwide replacement ratio limit for aircraft manufacturing.123
Why — Harmonized standards would prevent investor confusion and facilitate global supply chain operations.45

JBCE calls for flexible EU environmental taxonomy criteria

3 May 2023
Message — JBCE requests deleting the ban on fluorinated gases to protect heat pump investments. They also propose lowering recycled resin targets for packaging and reducing software update support periods.123
Why — This would reduce compliance burdens for manufacturers and protect investments in energy-efficient equipment.45
Impact — Consumers lose a year of guaranteed software support for their electronic devices.6

Japan Business Council urges clearer rules and longer packaging deadlines

24 Apr 2023
Message — JBCE requests transitional periods to avoid supply chain disruptions. They seek exemptions for sensitive industrial goods like semiconductors. They want chemical recycling and bio-based plastics included in targets.123
Why — This would reduce compliance burdens and prevent damage to high-precision equipment.45
Impact — Member States lose the power to implement stricter national environmental labelling.6

JBCE urges EU to align chemical rules with global standards

29 Mar 2023
Message — JBCE calls for aligning chemical regulations with international standards for global supply chains. They request clear guidance and extended transition periods for new hazard classifications. They suggest allowing research materials to be labelled in a common international language.12
Why — Global alignment would reduce high administrative costs and the burden of region-specific labelling.3
Impact — Downstream sectors face unnecessary restrictions on products without a proper socio-economic risk assessment.4

JBCE seeks flexibility for temporary carbon storage certification

22 Mar 2023
Message — JBCE requests flexibility in defining storage periods to include temporary solutions like e-fuels and carbon farming. They also call for better alignment with existing carbon credit systems to simplify compliance for businesses.12
Why — This would reduce regulatory hurdles and lower compliance costs for Japanese firms.3
Impact — Environmental advocates may fear that short-term storage increases the risk of re-emissions.4

Meeting with Axel Voss (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and BUSINESSEUROPE and

25 Jan 2023 · Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence

Japan Business Council in Europe urges longer CRA transition periods

23 Jan 2023
Message — JBCE recommends a transition period of six years for finished products to allow manufacturers sufficient time to adjust. They also advocate for alignment with other product-specific legislation and the NIS2 incident notification approach.123
Why — A longer transition period would reduce administrative burdens and lower immediate product redesign costs.4
Impact — Smaller companies and startups face high costs and difficulty complying with strict 24-hour reporting requirements.5

JBCE Urges EU Incentives for Biofuel Food Waste Technologies

22 Dec 2022
Message — JBCE requests EU incentives for circular technologies or transitional measures for food waste limits. They also want clarity on whether post-industry wastes are included and specific definitions for intermediate crops.123
Why — This would prevent disruption to current internal bioenergy use and external sales.4
Impact — Vague rules could cause confusion and undermine progress toward circular economy goals.5

Japan Business Council Urges Legal Certainty for Forced Labour Rules

30 Nov 2022
Message — JBCE requests high legal certainty and earlier guidelines to properly comply with all requirements. They propose increasing investigation response times to thirty days to reflect supply chain complexity.123
Why — This would lower compliance costs and prevent the immediate loss of complex products.45
Impact — Forced labour victims lose immediate protections if market withdrawal actions are delayed.6

Meeting with Axel Voss (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and EUROPEAN TRADE UNION CONFEDERATION and

7 Nov 2022 · Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence

Japanese industry urges EU chemical rules to align globally

17 Oct 2022
Message — JBCE calls for consistency with international standards to prevent global supply chain confusion. They suggest that new hazard criteria require scientific consensus and clear implementation guidance prior to adoption.123
Why — This would reduce the massive costs and resources required to reclassify and relabel products.45
Impact — Global supply chains face disruption and environmental sustainability is harmed by unnecessary packaging waste.67

Meeting with Axel Voss (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and BUSINESSEUROPE and

17 Oct 2022 · Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence

Meeting with Dragoş Tudorache (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur) and Albright Stonebridge Group LLC

13 Oct 2022 · Artificial Intelligence

JBCE Urges Risk-Based Alignment in Chemical Agency Reforms

10 Oct 2022
Message — JBCE requests excluding substances not deemed hazardous under REACH from RoHS restrictions. They advocate for sector-based assessments where consumers lack direct exposure to internal parts. They also insist on maintaining the current methodology for evaluating product exemptions.123
Why — This would prevent new regulatory burdens and protect existing exemptions for manufacturers.45
Impact — Environmental groups lose the ability to seek broader bans on chemicals in electronics.6

JBCE urges flexible biofuel testing to maintain price competitiveness

20 Jul 2022
Message — JBCE requests financial incentives for radiocarbon testing and more realistic error margins. They also propose relying on existing mass balance methods to verify bio-content.123
Why — Lowering testing standards would reduce compliance costs and prevent significant capital investments.45
Impact — Biofuel operators lose competitive advantage if expensive testing requirements remain in place.6

Japanese business council warns F-gas phase-down threatens heat pumps

29 Jun 2022
Message — JBCE proposes maintaining the current phase-down until 2030 to protect the heating transition. They suggest avoiding new bans on equipment to allow manufacturers flexibility in adopting safer alternatives.12
Why — Delaying the phase-down prevents expensive, rapid equipment redesigns and mandatory retesting requirements.3
Impact — Consumers in older buildings lose because safety standards restrict installing flammable alternative heat pumps.4

Response to Sustainable Products Initiative

22 Jun 2022

The Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE) welcomes this opportunity to provide feedback on the Commission's proposal for the Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation (ESPR). JBCE is a cross-sectoral association of companies with Japanese parentage. We support the EU’s ambition to make sustainable products the norm in the EU and we firmly believe JBCE can contribute to this through the ESPR. However, we emphasise that the requirements for achieving the sustainable product should be workable and feasible. In pursuit of this, we would like to share our concerns below and would appreciate it if you would take our comments into consideration. In addition, JBCE proposes that the Commission offer a workshop and guidance for the respective ESPR requirements in order for stakeholders to better understand the proposal. For our detailed comments, please find the attached paper.
Read full response

JBCE Urges Alignment with International Standards in Due Diligence

23 May 2022
Message — JBCE requests clearer definitions of business relationships to ensure the rules are implementable. They recommend aligning the directive with international standards and allowing a gradual phase-in. The group suggests removing requirements for annual policy updates and climate change plans.123
Why — Limiting liability and sanctions would significantly reduce potential financial and legal risks.45
Impact — Environmental groups lose a mechanism for forcing companies to adopt climate strategies.6

Japan Business Council seeks 36-month grace period for Data Act

13 May 2022
Message — The council requests extending the application deadline from 12 to 36 months to accommodate complex technical requirements. They also advocate for clearer definitions of data scope and stronger safeguards for trade secrets.123
Why — A longer transition period prevents immediate high costs of redesigning established manufacturing processes.45
Impact — Public authorities lose the ability to request business data during non-emergency situations.6

Response to Streamlining EU scientific and technical work on chemicals through the EU agencies

12 Apr 2022

Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE) is a cross sector organisation representing the interests of more than 90 multinational companies of Japanese parentage active in Europe.  We support EU law aimed at protecting human health and the environment. We are also pleased to be able to contribute to “Chemicals-making best use of EU agencies to streamline scientific assessments”. As this issue has been discussed than before, it is necessary to reduce risk by hazard / risk assessment, avoid duplicate assessment by different legislation, reduce unnecessary disruption in the supply chain and reduce the administrative burden. At first, we agree that the assessment of substances and mixtures under such as REACH should be done by ECHA. However, the risks associated with articles should be considered separately. In addition, a socio-economic impact assessment is carefully needed when considering of final products and complex molding materials such as RoHS. Hereafter, we will input the substance assessment from the chemical viewpoint and the assessment of restriction substance for electrical and electronic equipment (hereinafter :”EEE”). ・the substance assessment from the chemical viewpoint -One substance One assessment(OSOA) is important and useful in the hazard assessment of a chemical substance to make use of synergies (phys/chem/tox data available at different EU agencies) and avoid unnecessary double or triple animal tests. -However, a substance assessment should go beyond the mere hazard assessment, that can only be the first in a two or multiple step process. -It is necessary to fully assess a substance by taking into account its actual use(s) and perform a risk assessment related to each specific use. -Based on the available hazard data, potential routes of exposure need to be identified for each use of a substance. Hazards that are irrelevant in certain uses should be neglected, e.g. TiO2 is CMR by inhalation at a certain particle size, but if TiO2 particles are firmly embedded in a matrix like plastics or even toothpaste, inhalation will not be a likely route of exposure to TiO2 particles. -If high risks of exposure can be identified for certain uses, appropriate risk management measures will have to be introduced. Provided that such Risk Management can considerably reduce exposure in an application, the use of the substance should be permitted. ・The assessment of restriction substances for EEE Regarding to the assessment of restriction substances, we support a better alignment across EU legislations. Substances that are not “hazardous” under the REACH Regulation should not be considered for possible restriction under the RoHS Directive. However, for final products level, an assessment from substance perspective is not enough. Instead, sector-based assessments considering the important aspects of a particular type of products should be done. - The possible emission or exposure from an EEE are far lower than from the substance or mixture. Consumers are not directly exposed from the substances which is integrated in EEE. Thus, risk related to EEE should be assessed separately from the chemicals. - We need to weigh the safety and reliability of the EEE against possible chemical hazards. An EEE that bursts into flame because it is “free of flame retardants” is not a safe product. We need accurate medical devices or analytical devices with hazardous substances if there are no alternative. - There are already collection schemes for recycling in the framework of WEEE Directive. If collection and recycling are properly done, the substances are not distributed in the environment - EEE often rely on very unique properties of special elements which bring benefits to our society. Therefore, socio economic assessment on a particular type of products including assessment of alternative is necessary. End
Read full response

Response to Amendment to the Regulation (EU) No 1025/2012 European standardisation

7 Apr 2022

JBCE thanks the European Commission for giving the possibility to comment the new strategy for the European Standardisation. First, we would like to comment that the proposed amendment of the regulation covers a tighter scope compared to the strategy announced by the Commissioner. For example, we believe the exact role of the Standardisation hub of excellence would need to be defined by law to avoid any over-interpretation of its competency’s domain. For instance, creation of parallel technical specification by the hub of excellence conflicting with ESOs work could be a point of concern. Indeed, such possibility would dissolve the competencies in conflicting groups leading to more confusion and may finally weaken European standardisation system. Nevertheless, the contribution of the hub of excellence in the ESOs drafting groups would be an appreciated help as could prevent blocking elements for citation in the Official Journal. About the content of the proposed amendment, we understand it will affect mainly the operations of ETSI, and also its funding model. We appreciate the geostrategic concern highlighted by the Commissioner, but we would like to highlight that thanks to its business driven structure, ETSI has been very efficient for finding solutions on some blocking elements that prevent standards citation in the Official Journal. We are concerned that moving ETSI to a CEN-CENELEC like structure may create new rigidities in the system that could lead to a less dynamic European standardisation works for radio and telecommunication equipment. An alternative solution we would like to suggest could be restricting the voting weight of the ETSI BOARD member to a certain maximum level, rebalancing the power of SMEs and other stakeholders with multinational companies. We would like to also remind that with the current system an ETSI EN standard needs public consultation and approval from the national standardisation committees of the EU Member States before being published already. Also, we have difficulties to identify =(OR: don’t clearly see)= the added value of the amendment for recovering an efficient procedure for citation of harmonized standards in the Official Journal, particularly for standards that are developed at international level. For them presumption of conformity is a key element for mutual recognition of such standards in the EU, in line with the WTO trade agreement on technical barriers to trade, and the EU-Japan trade agreement.
Read full response

Response to Energy labelling requirements for space and combination heaters (review/rescaling)

30 Mar 2022

On March 8th, the European Commission published their key Communication to react to the urgency to move away from EU’s dependency on fossil fuel imports “REPowerEU”. Heat pumps are seen as a central and key technology for reshaping the EU’s heating energy needs, today and in the future. Heat pumps have a huge potential to reduce the EU’s dependency on fossil fuels, support the resilience of the EU-wide energy system and decarbonize the EU’s building stock. The Communication set high ambitions: to double the deployment of heat pumps in the next five years, resulting in a cumulative 10 million units over the next 5 years and to reach a 30 million newly installed heat pumps target by 2030. It is important that these high-level goals are reflected and taken into account in the development of future Eco-design and Energy Labelling requirements for central hydronic space heaters and combination heaters , as well as water heaters . Indeed, looking at these ambitions, heat pump manufacturers will be required to deploy at a fast pace highly energy efficient and renewable technologies to meet the demand and the decarbonization goals. Therefore, any requirements set on the testing and design of the products themselves should not hamper this fast paced and ambitious deployment. Increasing the testing time of such equipment, as well as potentially the cost, will unnecessarily prolong the time to market of these solutions. Therefore, JBCE believes that any new requirement proposed should be read against and matched to complement the EU’s high-level decarbonization goals, thus ensuring access to the market for efficient heat pumps and a level playing versus fossil-fuel based technologies, that still often benefit from less ambitious efficiency requirements and reduced testing points. For these reasons, JBCE would like to reiterate some of its previous positions: On Ecodesign - Testing requirements should be maintained at a reasonable level, which ensures high repeatability, reproducibility and reliability. This is the reason, why JBCE deems that the compensation method is currently not ready for regulatory application. - JBCE support the inclusion of material efficiency requirements and suggests defining an explicit list of spare parts, covering the most critical parts. - JBCE has strong concerns on the proposal to include new monitoring requirements without detailed evaluation and impact assessment. As such proposal would lead to additional costs for end-users for a service that would often not be used. - JBCE recommends reconsidering the approach proposed on the peak temperature. Indeed, requiring heat pumps to reach 55°C, does not reflect today’s domestic hot water usage pattern. It will also increase the overall energy consumption of systems, thus, not responding to the goals set with the REPowerEU Communication for resilience, energy efficiency and energy dependency reduction. On the Energy Label: JBCE support the rescaling of the energy label from A-G, with a simple label understandable by consumers with a single scale allowing the comparison of all space and combination heating technologies. Such an approach will also support the objectives established by REPowerEU to identify and deploy the most efficient technologies. For further details, please refer to latest JBCE-JRAIA JBCE and JRAIA contributions to Consultation Forum on THE REVISION OF THE SPACE AND WATER HEATERS REGULATIONS. 1. Commission Regulations (EU) 811/2013 and (EU) 813/2013 2.Commission (Delegated) Regulations (EU) 812/2013 and (EU) 814/2013
Read full response

Meeting with Dragoş Tudorache (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur)

17 Mar 2022 · Artificial Intelligence

Meeting with Petar Vitanov (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur)

16 Mar 2022 · AI Act

Meeting with Kosma Złotowski (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur)

15 Mar 2022 · Artificial Intelligence Act

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

13 Mar 2022

JBCE has been supporting European Commission and consultants by taking part in consultations and assessments. JBCE is keen to contribute the impact assessment for the review in order to make RoHS Directive more efficient and effective. We upload a file that summarizes JBCE's ideas. We would appreciate it if you could consider it.
Read full response

Response to Waste Framework review to reduce waste and the environmental impact of waste management

22 Feb 2022

JBCE is pleased to contribute by actively taking part in public consultations and hearings. The measures should be functional and effective to achieve the ambitious goal. For that we suggest following points: •Before a new system is introduced, socio impact assessments should be always carried out to find out the most efficient way and figure out whether the benefits excess the burden in the whole society. •The measures (such as labelling) should be harmonized EU-wide. The introduction of labelling of individual Member State can limit the free circulation of goods within the EU. •As for Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) requirements, we welcome an introduction of a feasible and fair system in order to omit free riders or illegal dumping of wastes.
Read full response

Response to Energy labelling requirements for air-to-air conditioners, air-to-air heat pumps and comfort fans [review]

16 Feb 2022

We are pleased to contribute about the labeling requirements for air-to-air conditione. We(Japan Business Council in Europe :JBCE) and Air Conditioning Industry Association (JRAIA) made our position paper in Sep 2021 (attached file). JBCE and JRAIA would like to make further contributions whenever it is useful and needed and share the knowledge and experience of our members. We remain at your disposal and look forward to working with you throughout this review work.
Read full response

Response to Common chargers for mobile phones and similar devices

18 Nov 2021

Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE) appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the amending Directive 2014/53/EU on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to the making available on the market of radio equipment of the Common Charger for Electronic Devices. JBCE welcomes the aim of improving the consumer convenience via a common charging connector and reducing the electronic waste via the suggested unbundling of the external power supply. We’d like to support this aim by providing our recommendations to avoid unintended effects that could lead to less convenience for the consumer, and an increase of electronic waste in the short term. Our response is focusing on providing more clarity on the categories of radio equipment in scope, as well as the items that are covered by the unbundling requirement. In addition, we encourage the legislators to take the environmental aspects of providing information on packaging into account and allow for more environment friendly solutions. Finally, we suggest that a longer transition time is provided for products that typically have a longer lifecycle. Our full response can be found in the attached contribution.
Read full response

Meeting with Silvia Modig (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur)

18 Oct 2021 · Batteries and waste batteries

Response to Review of the general product safety directive

3 Oct 2021

Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE) welcomes the proposal for the Regulation on General Product Safety, which also addresses New Legislative Framework (NLF) and Market Surveillance Regulation and to reduce the costs of transposition with the choice of a Regulation. To contribute to a clearer and more efficient Regulation, JBCE members would appreciate if the European Commission could consider the attached recommendations.
Read full response

Response to Smartwatches and connected toys

27 Aug 2021

Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE) appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the draft delegated act for Articles 3(3)(d), (e) and (f) of the Radio Equipment Directive and supports the initiative to improve the cybersecurity of Radio Equipment. Please find our feedback as attached.
Read full response

Response to Standardisation Strategy

9 Aug 2021

JBCE appreciates the opportunity to share its opinion on the current situation of the European Standardization Strategy. We indeed fully support the joint non-paper of 17 Member States about the context of such need. The EU-Japan economic partnership agreement (e.g. art. 7.5(1)(b), 7.6, 7.8(2)) emphasizes an active contribution to the development and mutual recognition of technical regulations as well as convergence with international standards and the avoidance of unnecessary technical barriers within regional standards. The principle of “presumption of conformity” is meant to support such mutual recognition of international standards. Since 2016 we have been noticing some issues with citation of harmonized standards in the EU Official Journal. It seems, citation of harmonized standards which are based on international standards has become almost impossible without deviation. As a result, we would like to highlight in our position paper as attached.
Read full response

Response to Revision of the Machinery Directive

6 Aug 2021

Proposal for a Regulation on Machinery Products JBCE's position Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE) welcomes the proposal for the Regulation on Machinery Products, new legislative framework (NLF) and to reduce the costs of transposition with the choice of a Regulation. To contribute to a clearer and more efficient Regulation, JBCE members would like the European Commission to consider the following recommendations: Harmonisation & alignment with EU law JBCE is satisfied to see the overall aim of enhancing harmonisation. Indeed, coherence and alignment must be guaranteed, not only with other Directives/Regulations under the NLF, but also with AI and Cybersecurity-related legislative initiatives such as NIS2 . By working towards a maximum harmonisation framework, the co-legislators indeed help provide legal certainty and to lower implementation costs or risks of diverging interpretation of the law between different enforcing authorities. This is very valuable for entities which operate in several Member States, as is the case for many JBCE members. AI and Cybersecurity issues On this topic, it is crucial to avoid overlaps and ensure alignment with the latest EU legislative initiatives. This concern on the application of AI and cybersecurity requirements in sectorial product safety legislation is valid for the proposal for a Machinery Regulation, but from a broader perspective it is also valid for other pieces of NLF legislation. NLF legislation should remain focused on safety, remain technology-neutral when possible, and not include cybersecurity or AI requirements. Indeed, the scope of each NLF Directive/Regulation is different and there is a high risk of diverging / conflicting rules for the same products, which further complexifies the inclusion of Cybersecurity or AI requirement in these individual texts. Instead, a horizontal overarching framework such as the Cybersecurity Act will therefore be more efficient than specifying cybersecurity requirements in each Directive/Regulation independently – thus minimising the room for divergence, contradiction and confusion for authorities and stakeholders alike. Scope and definitions JBCE welcomes the flexibility of the Regulation to cover innovations and new technologies, but wants to stress that it is important to keep technology-neutrality at the core of the Regulation. Conformity assessment JBCE is concerned that mandatory third-party conformity assessment will increase costs, create more administrative burden for companies and authorities, and increase the time required to access the market. JBCE would be in favour of retaining the self-assessment option, which indeed has worked well for manufacturers under the previous Machinery Directive. International standardisation The topic of standardisation is key for JBCE members. JBCE supports the preparation of harmonised standards in the Machinery Regulation and calls the Commission to work and align with international ISO/IEC standards when drawing up standardisation requests and recognising harmonised standards. This approach is helpful in ensuring a level-playing field in the EU without putting an excessive burden on some companies present in different markets. JBCE also calls on the Commission to refrain from adopting technical specifications as alternatives to harmonised standards, and to prioritise the adoption of harmonised standards in all situations. Enforcement JBCE welcomes in the new Regulation proposal the reduced paper-based requirements for documentation, and the openness for digital documentation and instructions. This flexibility is very much appreciated, especially in B2B transactions where many clients have varying requests depending on products. JBCE believes that introducing online or electro manuals is a good method to reduce costs in the long term, even though there are variations per products. Please find attached full position of Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE).
Read full response

Response to Requirements for Artificial Intelligence

6 Aug 2021

JBCE welcomes the European Commission’s attempt to set a horizontal Regulation for trustworthy AI with the AI Act. In this context, JBCE asks for a clear definition of AI to ensure an effective and harmonized interpretation and enforcement of the Act. We encourage continued work with International Organisations such as the OECD to provide legal certainty and a shared understanding worldwide on what constitutes an AI system. The same applies to the definition of prohibited and high-risk AI systems. We ask for more clarity on the classification of AI systems and related wording, such as ‘intended to be used’ for a specific purpose. Similarly, while we welcome that the Commission correctly identified much of the legislation in Section B of Annex II that addresses the most common safety concerns, we would like further clarity on the scope for high-risk AI listed in Section A of Annex II and Annex III - notably for “safety components” (beyond the definition in art.3(14)). We strongly encourage the European Commission to consult industry and deliver guidelines to facilitate harmonized interpretation. JBCE appreciates the effort to provide a list of requirements for high-risk AI systems in Chapter 2. However, we believe it is crucial to design tools for companies to provide the proper documentation to meet requirements. We also believe that the definition of responsibilities between provider and user could be improved in art. 29. In fact, it is not always clear who the provider and the user are. We agree that these obligations should be imposed on providers, but we would argue that the user of the high-risk AI system should be responsible if they misuse, negligently or intentionally, the AI system. Further, if AI-origin risks are sufficiently eliminated or reduced with built-in ‘fail safe’ measures in high-risk AI systems, we believe the mandatory requirements on them should be exempted. We all agree that data is key for the correct application of AI systems. Art. 10 should be better designed in order to make it possible for companies to test their AI systems without too many ex-ante obligations and restrictions in terms of “free of error” data. The focus should not be on imposing these principles in the testing or training phases, but rather on the final AI system, in order to support innovation. We are also concerned by the adoption of Sandboxes as defined in the Act. We would rather encourage the adoption of ‘auditable data’ processes. In addition, to get high quality data, it will be essential that the EU sponsors data programs to encourage citizens to share their data altruistically in a secure, effective, and eventually rewarded way. We would like the European Commission to: 1) deliver the necessary standards on time; and 2) work more intensively on standards with International Organisations, to avoid ‘European-only’ standards which could pose severe challenges to innovation and international cooperation. In addition, when defining standards and common specification to ensure the appropriate level of human oversight, we encourage practical consideration of the pros and cons of human oversight and machine control respectively - given that, for example, AI-controlled machines register lower accident rates than human oversight. We believe that the AI Board should also include experts from industry amongst its members. This would be particularly important in terms of ensuring that the Board can effectively help the Commission and national supervisory authorities to provide guidance on emerging technology issues, as provided in art.57. Art.64(2) stipulates that market surveillance authorities can access to the source code of the AI system. However, we suggest that this provision should be deleted, as it would endanger the confidentiality of trade secrets, and contradict existing trade agreements (e.g. the EU-Japan EPA) which ban disclosure requests for source code.
Read full response

Response to Revision of Non-Financial Reporting Directive

14 Jul 2021

The Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE) supports the European Commission’s proposal to enhance companies’ disclosure of corporate sustainability information, encompassing not only the environmental aspect, but also social and governance aspects. JBCE recognises the contribution that this legislation will make in the sustainable growth of companies. However, within JBCE, points of concern remain on the topics listed below: 1) Alignment of EU corporate sustainability reporting standard: internationally and with existing standards 2) Assurance and Audit requirements 3) Requirements on information to be disclosed 4) Reporting format 5) Timeline 6) New provision proposal on effectiveness Each of these points are elaborated upon in the attached position paper, with suggestions for adaptations proposed. Also, in general, in order for companies (especially those falling under the scope for the first time) to comply with the new requirements, sufficient preparation and time will be needed to be suitably equipped and resourced to perform the meaningful disclosures sought by the Commission. Therefore, JBCE believes that it would be pragmatic for the application of such new requirements to be rolled out in a step-by-step approach with the reviewing of the effectiveness of new requirements. A more realistic break-down of the application of new requirements would also have the double advantage of facilitating better alignment of the CSRD with other EU policy developments that have yet to be finalised but will nonetheless need to be in coherence with the CSRD, including the upcoming Sustainable Corporate Governance initiative, Fit For 55 package, and other international movements in this sphere.
Read full response

Response to RoHS exemption for the use of mercury in other discharge lamps for special purposes

12 Jul 2021

JBCE strongly believe that RoHS Directive has been successful in reaching the objective of reducing hazardous substances in EEE in the EU. As a cross-sector association with member companies operating in different industries and stages in the supply chain, JBCE welcomes the opportunity to provide our proposal of alternative wording for exemption 4(f)-IV of the European commission’s draft delegated act. We note that there is a discrepancy between what the draft delegated act proposes as wording for exemption 4(f)-IV (page 4, section 3) and what is stated in the draft delegated act Annex for the same sub-exemption: - Draft delegated act wording: Mercury in lamps emitting light in the ultraviolet spectrum - Draft delegated act Annex wording: Mercury in high pressure sodium vapour lamps emitting light in the ultraviolet spectrum We are concerned with the wording proposed in the Annex, because to the best of our knowledge “high-pressure sodium vapour lamps emitting in the UV spectrum” in fact do not exist. To have this wording in the final RoHS Annex would therefore be technically incorrect and would not reflect the reality of the market. We ask the Commission to change the wording in the Annex by taking on board the wording for 4(f)-IV as written in the delegated act. JBCE and its members support to promote for human health and environment in a realistic manner and on the basis of profound evaluation, and we remain at disposal of European Commission and stakeholders to offer our technical expertise on this exemption.
Read full response

Response to Ecodesign and energy labelling working plan 2020-2024

2 Jun 2021

The Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE) would like to thank this opportunity to provide comments on ecodesign and energy labelling working plan 2020-2024. We would like to repeat our positions, the joint comments with JEMA, which we submitted for the preparatory study of ecodesign and energy labelling working plan 2020-2024 in April.
Read full response

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

2 Jun 2021

The Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE) welcomes this feedback opportunity regarding the disclosure obligations of the Taxonomy Regulation. JBCE particularly appreciates this chance to elaborate on the disclosure obligations, as a means for companies to disclose information on how and to what extent their operations are associated with environmentally sustainable economic activities. As you will already be aware, JBCE is eager to contribute to the EU’s ambition of a green transition, with a view to reaching climate neutrality by 2050, and believes that clear and effective disclosure obligations is paramount to achieving these objectives. For the detail feedback, please find the attachment. Article 9.4: Requirements of reporting Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) JBCE urges the Commission to allow companies the flexibility to choose how to explain their KPI disclosures under the Taxonomy’s Article 8, by adding qualitative explanations about changes to a business’ structure (e.g., via Mergers & Acquisitions – M&A) upon changes made to the technical screening criteria (TSC), rather than obliging companies to recalculate KPIs each time changes to the Taxonomy occur. Article 11: Entry into force and application JBCE would like to request an extension to the anticipated timeline to initiate the disclosure obligation of the Taxonomy Regulation, in the interest of accommodating the companies who will be falling under the scope of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) for the first time. JBCE recommends a phased-in implementation whereby voluntary disclosures would apply for at least the first two years, followed by full-scale implementation from the fiscal year 2025 (i.e., for publication in 2026). Annex I, 2: The Methodology for the reporting of KPIs to be disclosed by non-financial undertakings JBCE would like to request that companies are afforded enough flexibility in reporting on their proportion of turnover, capital expenditure (Capex) and operating expenditure (Opex). While the personnel scope should be the same as the Non-Financial Reporting Directive (NFRD – to become the CSRD) as defined by the Taxonomy Regulation, these companies should be given the flexibility of deciding to disclose the KPIs of the whole group-wide operations, or at entity-level in Europe. Finally, JBCE urges the Commission to provide practical guidance for all stakeholders (not only the providers of disclosed information, but also the end-investors and consumers who will use it) in order to ensure a common understanding on “how to disclose the information” required by Article 8.
Read full response

Response to Revision of EU legislation on registration, evaluation, authorisation and restriction of chemicals

31 May 2021

Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE) welcomes the feedback opportunity regarding Inception Impact Assessment/Revision of REACH. JBCE supports the objectives of the Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability are to better protect citizens and the environment against hazardous chemicals and encourage innovation for the development of safe and sustainable alternatives. As a cross-sector association with member companies operating in different industries and stages in the supply chain, JBCE is eager to contribute to the legislative process of revision of REACH. Please find our comments as attached.
Read full response

Response to Revision of EU legislation on hazard classification, labelling and packaging of chemicals

31 May 2021

Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE) welcomes the feedback opportunity regarding Inception Impact Assessment/Revision of CLP. JBCE supports the EU’s aims at ensuring both a well-functioning single market for chemicals and a high level of protection of human health and of the environment. As a cross-sector association with member companies operating in different industries and stages in the supply chain, JBCE is eager to contribute to the legislative process of revision of CLP. Please find our comments as attached.
Read full response

Response to Revision of the NIS Directive

18 Mar 2021

Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE) welcomes the opportunity to provide our feedback on the proposal for the Revised Directive on Security of Network and Information Systems (NIS2). The proposal is very important and timely as it supports the Commission’s efforts to address new challenges in the cybersecurity threat landscape in Europe. To contribute to a more resilient Europe, JBCE would like the European Commission to consider some recommendations from us. Please find enclosed a position paper detailing JBCE’s view on the NIS2 proposal.
Read full response

Response to Modernising the EU’s batteries legislation

28 Feb 2021

JBCE welcomes the proposal of a new Battery Regulation and is pleased to contribute to this consultation. Please find our feedback in attached.
Read full response

Response to Legislative framework for the governance of common European data spaces

8 Feb 2021

General Comments The Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE) supports the European Commission's efforts to create a trusted and interoperable data sharing environment in the EU and welcomes the general idea of Data Governance Act (DGA) which sets ambitious goals for creating trust in data intermediaries and strengthens data-sharing mechanisms across the EU. JBCE would like to highlight the following points for the European Commission’s consideration. Chapter I: General Provisions [Art. 1,2,9(1) & recital (22)(23)] First, although Recital 22 explains which services are not included in the scope, a clear definition including its exceptions should be defined in the body of the text so that we can understand which data sharing services exactly fall under DGA. Also, it is not clear which existing businesses are in the scope. Since sharing of data is still at an early stage, the definition of the actual scope of DGA shouldn’t go too far and mutual/existing arrangements between companies should potentially therefore stay out of the scope. We request to provide more detailed definitions and explanations, such as how to assess a service to see if it is covered by this article. This definition will lead to discussions on how to divide the areas of competition (data sharing based on contractual arrangement)/cooperation (data sharing via ‘data sharing services’) in the "data-sharing market". Therefore, we believe that careful consideration should be given to the definition. Second, a “highly sensitive data” definition should be introduced to set preconditions for the delegated acts on such data transfers to third countries. Chapter II: Re-use of certain categories of protected data held by public sector bodies [Art.5(3)] We understand that an obligation imposed to companies who re-use data is left to the Member States. It would help to identify a set of rules in the Act to prevent the European Single market from being fragmented and forcing companies to respond differently in each member country which will add additional costs and certain risks. [Art.5(9)(10)] JBCE supports the need to protect commercially sensitive data of non-personal nature and data representing content protected by intellectual property rights from unlawful access. JBCE would welcome clarification on what constitutes equivalent protection measures, so that data sharing service providers could quickly assess and understand if data flows to third countries are lawful under DGA. We strongly request the EU to hold concrete dialogues on this issue in fora such as EPA regulatory cooperation framework as soon as possible, without waiting for the adoption of the law. [Art.5(11)] If "highly sensitive" data are defined separately in the relevant laws, it may cause risks of inconsistency and confusion in the market. In order to avoid such market risks and operating costs associated with them, "highly sensitive" data should be defined in the Act. Chapter III: Requirements applicable to data sharing services The purpose of the Chapter III (Notification of Data Sharing Service Providers) should be explained. Then, the scope should be clarified and be limited to the minimum necessary in light of the purpose of Chapter III. [Art. 11] Data sharing should rely on interoperability and international standards to scale-up to the international data sharing with likeminded countries including Japan. Chapter IV: Data altruism We support the direction that the Commission has set. Chapter VI: European Data Innovation Board It is important that industry stakeholders from diverse data economy ecosystems would have permanent seats in European Data Innovation Board and regularly participate in a formal setting of its activities. Details of our feedback can be found in the attached position paper.
Read full response

Response to Climate change mitigation and adaptation taxonomy

18 Dec 2020

The Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE) welcomes this feedback opportunity regarding the ‘Horizontal issues’ of the delegated act on the Taxonomy Regulation. JBCE particularly appreciates this effort to elaborate on the Taxonomy classification system, as a means of adding concrete weight behind the initiatives of the Sustainable Finance Agenda. As you know, JBCE is eager to contribute to the EU’s ambition of a green transition, with a view to achieving climate neutrality by 2050, and believes that a clear, effective classification of sustainable economic activities is paramount to achieve these objectives. Nevertheless, for the Commission to achieve a fully successful taxonomy regulation, JBCE argues several provisions could be improved: 1.Provide additional clarity and guidance 2.Provide clarity on ‘Best Performing Alternative Technology’ 3.Complete the coverage of manufacturing technologies 4.Recognise the importance of Transitional Technologies JBCE also provides the comments on specific taxonomy sections for climate change mitigation especially; 3.3 Manufacture of low carbon technologies for transport 3.5 Manufacture of other low carbon technologies 4.16 Installation and operation of Electric Heat Pumps 6.3. Urban, suburban and road passenger transport 6.5. Transport by motorbikes, passenger cars and light commercial vehicles 6.6. Freight transport services by road 7.1. Construction of new buildings 8.1. Data processing, hosting and related activities 8.2 Data-driven solutions for GHG emissions reductions Our detail comments can be found in the attachment.
Read full response

Meeting with Axel Voss (Member of the European Parliament)

8 Dec 2020 · Artificial Intelligence

Response to Evaluation of the 'New Legislative Framework' for EU legislation on industrial products

2 Dec 2020

Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE) thanks the European Commission for the opportunity to provide feedback on the Roadmap for the evaluation of the New Legislative Framework (NLF). Indeed, legal, technical and commercial developments are changing the way a product is assessed, placed on the market, updated, as well as the way information is shared, including with the end user of the product and market surveillance authorities. Therefore, an assessment of the NLF is welcome. The NLF, based on the “New Approach” principle, allows a balance between the objectives of safety and other public interests forming the essential requirements of the directives and regulations with the flexibility offered to the manufacturers for the conformity assessment of the products, based on voluntary standards, harmonized at European level which are for the most part aligned at global level. However, we note that the referencing of harmonized standards has become very problematic, affecting the effectiveness of the NLF, and that this point appears to be missing in the program of the evaluation. We encourage to link to this evaluation, an assessment of European regulation 1025/2012 on standardization, particularly on the importance of a clear communication of normative references in line with the state of the art as provided by the standardisation offices, onto which technical compliance may be assumed by all the players. Also, NLF directives are affected by the Regulation (EU) 2019/1020, and more particularly by its article 4. Nevertheless, the NLF decision and consequent directives and regulations haven’t been properly amended by that regulation. This fact shall be also part of the program of the evaluation as a way for improving the clarity of the regulation to the players, and more particularly economic operators, including Japanese Manufacturers. Our detailed views on the six identified assessment focus points are in summary: i) For products whose characteristics may be changed through their lifetime, any new roles and obligations shall be attached to the operator who brings those changes to the product, and shall apply only where new or extended risk is introduced or the intended use of the product is changed. The existing NLF provisions are sufficient for remanufactured product outside the above category. ii) The toolbox of conformity assessment procedures is adequate for addressing the categories of products presenting various levels of risk. The harmonisation legislator does have the choice of which should be available and the circumstances under which these are applicable. The NLF should not be adjusted to solve problems not directly attributable to it. iii) JBCE doesn’t represent any Notified body. Nevertheless, we noted that Notified body’s opinions are usually based on available harmonised standards (cited in the official journal or not), in such situation the added value of the Notified body is limited to the identification of the proper standard. Where harmonised standard is not available, alignment of opinions based on common approach from different Notified bodies might be a subject of interest. Also, the information from Notified body to the manufacturer about the evaluation of the state of the art applicable to the approved product is rarely practiced despite the requirement according to the NLF. These 3 points shall be subject to the evaluation. iv) Same as iii) v) Thanks to the generalisation of communicating technologies and digitalization over the last decade, affixing by hardware markings and contact details on product, and providing systematically paper instruction manual, can be avoided and replaced by e-labelling solution. JBCE believes this would seriously contribute to the reduction of the environmental footprint in line with the Circular Economy principles. This proposal shall be part of the evaluation. vi) The NLF together with Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 address such crises situations.
Read full response

Response to Sustainable Products Initiative

16 Nov 2020

Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE) welcomes the feedback opportunity regarding the Commission’s Sustainable Products Initiative. JBCE supports the EU’s target to achieve climate neutrality by 2050 and JBCE has committed to the European Commission’s objective to ensure that products placed on the market contribute to the circular economy transition. In this regard, JBCE is eager to contribute to the legislative process of the Sustainable Products Initiative. Please find our comments as attached.
Read full response

Response to Ecodesign omnibus amendment of 2019 regulations

3 Nov 2020

The Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE) appreciates the Commission’s work to make necessary amendments to the 2019 energy labelling and eco-design Regulations.Taking this opportunity, JBCE would like to propose following comments, especially for Eco-design requirements for electronic displays (Regulation (EU) 2019/2021). Please find the attached for our comments. We appreciate that the Commission would take into account these comments. Thank you very much.
Read full response

Response to Sustainable corporate governance

8 Oct 2020

The Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE) welcomes the feedback opportunity regarding the Commission’s initiative on Sustainable Corporate Governance, with the proposal expected in Q1 2021. JBCE appreciates this timely proposal as responsible corporate behaviour throughout the supply chain is becoming an increasingly salient topic. In this regard, JBCE is eager to contribute to a due diligence duty that improves the current framework and provides legal clarity to all stakeholders. However, the Commission’s upcoming proposal should also make sure that due diligence remains a risk management and not a ‘tick-box’ compliance tool. JBCE further recommends the following three approaches: 1. Promote a harmonised and global approach JBCE holds a unique position – representing the interests of multinational companies active in Europe with Japanese heritage – and can therefore play an essential role in driving international cooperation on human rights and environment policy for responsible business. In that respect, JBCE believes an internationally recognised due diligence framework is necessary to ensure a global level playing field, and that companies operating within Europe remain competitive. Moreover, JBCE calls upon the Commission to support internationally recognised due diligence frameworks that follow a risk-based approach, such as the UNGP and OECD guidelines for multinational enterprises. In addition, a global approach is essential to achieve meaningful improvements in the current environment of complex and global supply chains. As such, companies’ production sites and markets are spread across the world. Without a harmonised framework, companies would face a patchwork of requirements specific to each region and country, which would make the implementation of the rules difficult and unpractical for all companies along the supply chain. Finally, it is essential that the Commission and Member States play a role to tackle the root causes of human rights abuses, such as poverty and corruption. Companies alone cannot change all partners in the supply chain: collaboration between industry and governments is therefore primordial to achieve positive and durable transformation in all tiers. 2. Build on existing initiatives and platforms JBCE enjoins the Commission to recognise and build-on existing company initiatives and platforms. Indeed, since the structure, issues and the nature of supply chains are all different, supporting already established collective approaches that enable the industry to develop and transform – especially complex sector-specific industry initiatives – should be encouraged and supported by the Commission. 3. Provide assistance and guidance JBCE believes that companies alone will struggle to take all the responsibilities in the supply chain vis-à-vis new due diligence responsibilities. Indeed, the Commission should push for stronger collaboration between public authorities and private stakeholders, and between industries, to tackle issues within supply chains. For example, the Commission should provide adequate tools and guidance to companies of all size to enable them to conduct an effective due diligence exercise. The tools could include: -An indicative list or information to facilitate due diligence. For example, JBCE welcomes the publication of the 4th critical raw materials list and the following CAHRA list to be published for this purpose. -A network of experts who are aware of the local risks. In practice, certain companies do not have the means to reach to all partners throughout the supply chain. The Commission could provide a platform to connect companies with local experts in order for the company to swiftly undertake the necessary changes.
Read full response

Response to Requirements for Artificial Intelligence

10 Sept 2020

JBCE welcomes the European Commission’s efforts to establish a common European approach to AI. This will help the EU’s AI market reach scale and avoid legal uncertainty or fragmentation of multiple policies among EU Member States, through protecting our safety, consumer rights and fundamental rights when we use AI applications. 1.Our recommendation Considering the different levels of risk that could be generated by AI applications, we support the Commission’s proposal of a risk-based approach and would recommend Option 4. This means that the EU’s consideration on regulation should be limited to high-risk AI only, with detailed requirements being determined by industry via a soft law approach. The EU must also help avoid duplications between future regulations and current laws and ensure harmonization with international rules and existing regulatory schemes, minimizing the burden on businesses. 2.Scope of high-risk AI 2.1.We welcome the preliminary ideas proposed by the Commission in the White Paper (p. 17 – sector and specific use), but it is essential to develop clear criteria and definitions through dialogues with industry to ensure legal certainty and to distinguish between high-risk and low-risk AI. In our view, some examples of non-high-risk AI include, but are not limited to, the following types of applications: Mobility Driver assistant safety and monitoring systems, biometric ID to unlock and start automobiles, vehicles navigation systems with voice recognition and telematic services. Manufacturing Fiber laser processing machines, intellectualization of industrial robots, real-time data analyzers. Home, offices & shops Air conditioning systems, digital still cameras/camcorders (automatic focus, smile detection), emotion visualization, ID card. 3.Requirements on high-risk AI 3.1.We welcome the scenario outlined in the IIA p.5 in which the principles and basic regulatory framework are legislated by the EU institutions, but the details of each requirement should be determined by industry (soft law approach). AI is constantly evolving, and it is difficult to pre-determine detailed regulations or to amend them in a timely manner. Therefore a future-proof regulatory framework, rather than specific and sectorial regulations that could stifle the EU’s competitiveness in this field, has to be preferred. 3.2.New ex-ante conformity assessments such as testing and algorithms verifications or data sets, inspections and certifications could be disproportionate for certain applications, but we would support further discussion on how to build a credible assessment mechanism that is capable of checking the trustworthiness of AI applications throughout their life time. 3.3.It is important to ensure that there is no duplication between the future regulatory framework for high-risk AI and existing EU legislation. We also believe that the establishment of a new independent AI authority could bring low added value: some of the potentially high-risk sectors or AI applications are already subject to strict ex-ante rules, which should continue to be covered under existing law and amended if necessary. 4.Facial recognition and biometric data 4.1.There is a broad range of facial recognition technologies and applications that process biometric data. As such, we would warn against adopting a one-size-fits-all approach when considering regulation for these applications. A general ban would compromise innovation and competitiveness for the development of new technologies, products and services. 4.2.For AI solutions based on biometric parameters, we encourage the development of a framework that excludes non high-risk applications. 4.3.Some remote biometric identification solutions used in public spaces could be identified as high-risk applications. They should be regulated under the EU’s future framework on AI, but as long as such solutions are complying with future requirements, they should be allowed in publicly accessible spaces.
Read full response

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

8 Sept 2020

JBCE providing joint comments with DIGITALEUROPE as follows. DIGITALEUROPE and JBCE welcome the feedback opportunity regarding the delegated act on taxonomy-related disclosures by companies subject to the Non-financial reporting directive. In this context, we also wish to reiterate its long-lasting support for the objectives of the Sustainable Finance Agenda and the Taxonomy. The delegated act hence represents a key opportunity to streamline and facilitate the usage of the taxonomy regulation, and to consequently ensure the uptake of sustainable finance. In that context, DIGITALEUROPE and JBCE enjoin the European Commission to undertake comprehensive and appropriate impact assessments and then to establish clear, workable guidelines. DIGITALEUROPE and JBCE recommend the following three actions for the European Commission: 1. Undertake appropriate and comprehensive impact assessments DIGITALEUROPE and JBCE firmly welcome the Commission’s aim to create “consistency” regarding company reporting and to clarify the coherence and relationship between the three corporate disclosure regulations (Taxonomy, NFRD, Disclosure regulation). Nevertheless, for this endeavour the Commission should carry out an in-depth impact assessment focusing on companies not yet covered by the current NFRD who will face a dual challenge to align with the NFRD and the taxonomy, once the NFRD’s scope is extended. Indeed, newly covered companies will need to develop the ability to disclose non-financial information, as well as identify, collect, and calculate the proportion of taxonomy-aligned economic activities, which can be excessively burdensome. In the same vein, the Commission should gather relevant feedback as well as impact assessments if it wishes to add new indicators – in addition to CAPEX/ OPEX and turnover – for companies. Although, in principle, the Commission’s initiative is laudable, there is a risk that supplementary methodologies and indicators cause confusion and excessive burden. 2. Develop clear, workable guidelines for disclosure requirements The upcoming guidelines on using the Taxonomy regulation will be paramount to help companies report their proportion of sustainable economic activities, and hence jump-start the usage of the Taxonomy regulation. For this reason, the Commission must provide clear guidance to all stakeholders (not only the provider of information but also investors and consumers who are using the information) in order to ensure that companies are fairly assessed and compared, and focus only on their specific sectors and activities that are covered by the taxonomy. Moreover, the Commission must ensure that metrics and thresholds for all economic activities are workable, balanced, and defined precisely. This will avoid companies’ discretionary interpreting of their activities’ alignment to the taxonomy, which could cause fragmentation, bias, and mistrust. Lastly, the Commission could offer operational support by providing additional instructions (beyond the March 2020 TEG report) on how companies disclose the turnover, CAPEX and OPEX of eligible economic activities. This is particularly essential for multi-sectorial companies that have several options for how to disclose their economic activities. 3. Promote a global approach In the context of a geo-political European Union and the ambition behind the Taxonomy regulation to boost sustainable economic growth, the Commission must strive to develop disclosure rules adapted to a global perspective and aligned with other forward thinking countries. The delegated act remains an important opportunity for European companies to streamline taxonomy disclosures across their own global supply chain, and for other international companies to follow through as well. This will firstly provide a more comprehensive and accurate report of companies’ proportion of sustainable activities to investors and other stakeholders, and secondly help to boost sustainable finance globally.
Read full response

Response to Report on the application of the General Data Protection Regulation

29 Apr 2020

Dear Sir or Madam, Please find attached our feedback on the two-year review of the GDPR. We would appreciate it if you could consider our views. Kind regards, Takenobu Kurihara, Policy Manager, Digital Innovation JBCE (Japan Business Council in Europe)
Read full response

Response to Climate change mitigation and adaptation taxonomy

20 Apr 2020

The Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE) and its members want to reiterate their continuous support for the vision and overarching objectives of the Sustainable Finance Agenda and the Taxonomy. Indeed, shifting investments towards sustainable activities and transitioning towards a carbon-neutral economy are key targets for both JBCE members and the EU. JBCE has structured its response detailing fundamental issues pertaining to the framework of the climate change taxonomy and attached a document detailing the specific contributions to the technical screening criteria (TSC). 1. Growth and Innovation In the wake of the COVID-19 crisis, the EU will need to create the conditions for a sustainable and dynamic economic recovery and embrace international cooperation. The JBCE therefore calls upon the Commission to promote a taxonomy-inducing green growth and entrench a technological-neutral approach, which will boost investments and support innovative sustainable technologies. For the JBCE, this includes safeguarding transitional and enabling technologies within the Taxonomy Regulation and recognising them as key facilitators of Europe’s rapid sustainable transition and economic dynamism. Additionally, the JBCE stresses that future taxonomy criteria developed by the Commission should be transparent and adaptable to innovation speed. As suggested in the final TEG report, it is essential that future “criteria review and design is a dynamic and inclusive process” (page 55), which will avoid sectors or technologies being excluded or filtered out. 2. Reliable Disclosures We invite the Commission to undergo an in-depth impact assessment focusing on companies not yet covered by the current NFRD who will face a dual challenge to align with the NFRD and the taxonomy once the NFRD’s scope is extended. In this spirit, we invite the Commission to clarify the future relationship between the NFRD and the taxonomy regulation without any overlap. The Commission should ensure that metrics and thresholds for all economic activities are workable, balanced and defined precisely. This will avoid companies’ discretionary interpreting of their activities’ alignment to the taxonomy, which could cause fragmentation, bias and mistrust. Lastly, the JBCE urges the Commission to:  provide clear guidance to all stakeholders in order to ensure that companies are fairly assessed and compared by focusing only on their specific sectors and activities which are covered by the taxonomy;  provide additional instructions on how companies disclose the turnover, CAPEX and OPEX of eligible economic activities. 3. Transparency and Governance JBCE highlights that a transparent and open approach to the governance of the Taxonomy will determine the relevance and long-term usability of the classification. In these terms, the JBCE recommends selecting committed and representative non-financial industries to join the Platform on Sustainable Finance to create objective and substantive market-accepted thresholds. JBCE supports the recent position of the Council (published on 1 April 2020), which argued that the membership of the Platform should ensure “a high level of expertise, geographical balance” (p.36) and include private sector “representatives of financial and non-financial market participants” (p.35). Moreover, the JBCE recommends that the Commission promotes an international perspective within the Platform to facilitate the exchange of diverse best practices and ensure that the classification does not undermine European competitiveness. This international outlook will also lead to a taxonomy increasingly usable across borders, throughout the value chain and, importantly, strengthen the coordination of international standards on the Taxonomy. For these reasons, the JBCE would cherish the opportunity to contribute to the Platform.
Read full response

Response to Revision of Non-Financial Reporting Directive

26 Feb 2020

Japan Business Council in Europe (JBCE) appreciates this opportunity to give a feedback on the inception impact assessment on the revision of the Non-Financial Reporting Directive. We would like to make comments on the following 7 points; 1. Non-financial reports (NFR) are tools, through which companies and stakeholders including investors can exchange on value-creating processes. However experience shows that such communication should be complementend by a real dialogue to generate trust among stakeholders. NFR should not be an administrative tool cultivating a compliance mindset–NFR has a greater power if companies retain discretion on what material is disclosed, and to whom disclosures are made. 2. This is because (a) NFR is best when focused on impacts and improvements that are important to the given company; and (b) materiality differs for each company, depending on the nature of its business, the perspective of top management, corporate culture and “to whom” as described as ‘double materiality’. Thus, a principle-based approach is the only viable way for companies to meaningfully explain their business in a dynamic and changing environment. 3. Not all non-financial information is quantitative and not all quantitative data are self-explanatory. Data becomes meaningful when companies demonstrate the story behind the data. Moreover, information related to social aspects often needs narrative information. Focusing too much on comparability undermines the real value of the non-financial information, which derives from a company’s capacity to voluntarily install integrated reporting approaches aimed at improving decision-making and risk management. 4. The inception impact assessment clarifies three different objectives. Experience tells that meeting objective (1) ad (2) does not automatically lead to meeting objective (3). In the forthcoming discussions it is important to clarify 1) the purpose of non-financial reporting (whether it is a vital tool for management change towards s sustainable global economy (Recital (3) of NFRD) or comparison tool on pre-defined data such as Co2 emissions), 2) what is referred to by sustainability-related risks (are they only environment risks or both environment and social risks), and 3) the nature of risks (risk to business or risk to people). 5. The introduction of EU-only monitoring/reporting mechanisms should be avoided, as it risks failing to capture the impacts and improvements that are relevant to individual companies. This is a significant risk in the case of the EU Taxonomy on sustainable investments–here, relying too heavily on a framework that remains in development, and will retain a dynamic nature, runs risks failing to capture sustainability gains made by companies whose activities are either not covered by the Taxonomy, or are defined prima facie as not sustainable. Overall, a collaborative approach should be taken globally, involving like-minded partners such as Japan. 6. Companies are making efforts to respond to many questionnaires from different ESG rating agencies or ESG data providers often without being fully informed about the internal mechanism of such ratings. We strongly recommend that ESG ratings agencies or ESG data providers provide more clarity on their methodological approaches, as these ratings would be likely to increase in importance as a mechanism for international comparability. 7. The most challenging part of NFR is collecting reliable data within the company and having meaningful assurance. However, unlike the data within a company–which is burdensome but manageable–collecting information from business partners in supply chains involves even higher costs and reliability concerns, and may often be simply unfeasible. Companies ought to be incentivised to integrate NFR into their daily business, and any expansion of NFR should bear in mind the reality where companies are envisaged.
Read full response

Response to Revision of the Machinery Directive

11 Feb 2019

We welcome the continuous work and intention of EU Commission to improve the Machinery Directive. JBCE would like to thank the European Commission for the opportunity to provide input to the consultation on the inception Impact Assessment in relation to the revision of the Machinery Directive. We support that this evaluation will assess effectiveness, efficiency, relevance and coherence, however, there are a few areas which we would like the evaluation to incorporate. Alignment with NLF will be essential to enable the objectives to continue to ensure high level of safety and free movement of machinery in the single internal market. This will need to be implemented with the consideration of flexibility where practical approaches such as language of instructions and methods of providing information in some cases. We appreciate consideration to secure new industry trends to continue to evolve in the market and industry while the clarification and harmonisation of essential safety requirements will be key.
Read full response

Response to Restriction of hazardous substances - evaluation

11 Oct 2018

JBCE would like to thank the European Commission for the opportunity to provide input to the consultation on the roadmap for the review of the RoHS Directive. We support that this evaluation will assess effectiveness, efficiency, relevance and coherence, however, there are a few areas which we would like the evaluation to incorporate: • Providing sufficient consultation period A sufficient consultation period should be foreseen, taking account of stakeholders' time needed to gather intelligence in order to provide appropriate feedback. Consultation should be conducted considering coordination with other studies or consultations on RoHS running in parallel. • Exemption wordings to be simplified The wording of exemptions should be kept simple. Even for knowledgeable EEE manufacturers it is difficult to determine the actual scope of exemption on the basis of current wording of exemptions. The physical property of substances is not likely to change over a limited period of time. Therefore, the periodic review of some exemptions only causes additional burden for the European Commission and industry. • Category 8&9 products JBCE appreciates that currently a longer timeline is provided for the restriction of new substances for category 8&9 products (Medical devices & Monitoring and control instruments) than for the other product categories under Annex I of the EU RoHS Directive (2011/65/EU). The development of the category 8&9 products normally requires a longer time – it can often take up to10 years – and thus it is quite difficult to provide alternative products within a few years. Taking this fact into account, while also regarding the effectiveness and efficiency of the process, JBCE would like the European Commission to continue to provide the manufactures of category 8&9 products more time to prepare for the application if (a) new substance(s) would be restricted. Particular applications of category 8&9 products make use of physical phenomena which would in fact require the exemption to be renewed eternally unless there are fundamental changes to the measurement principle. For such applications it will only be an unnecessary burden for the European Commission and industry to consolidate and assess an exemption renewal dossier every time again. An exclusion should be examined for such particular application. • Conducting reasonable examination of substance restrictions We consider that the EU RoHS Directive Article 6 is appropriate to determine the conditions for substance restriction. At the actual examination of substance restriction, sufficient period for information gathering and assessment should be given, and prioritization should be appropriately done based on evidence. • Considering the global dimension Each time the EU updates the legislation, for example, withdrawing, renewing or granting an exemption, this will have a domino effect on the rest of the world. JBCE would like the European Commission to take possible world-wide influences of EU RoHS into consideration more, if possible. Since its publication in 2003, the EU RoHS Directive has become a global de-facto standard for legislations on restricting hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment (EEE). The worldwide impact of RoHS is significant and becomes bigger and bigger as time goes by. RoHS-type laws have been introduced or are currently being considered in many jurisdictions outside the European Economic Area (EEA), for example, in China, India, the Eurasian Customs Union or the Gulf States. Sometimes RoHS is copied exactly. However, often it is not. Especially, countries might introduce a completely different approach on the scope, exemptions and declaration of conformity. During the review, the above fact should be taken into consideration. JBCE considers that Better Regulation, that is, simpler and understandable law and its implementation would be beneficial not only for the European Union but for all over the world.
Read full response

Meeting with Alessandro Carano (Cabinet of Commissioner Violeta Bulc)

15 Feb 2018 · Introduce new Executive Director

Meeting with Eric Peters (Cabinet of Commissioner Mariya Gabriel)

15 Jan 2018 · EU Digital Policies and Priorities; EU-Japan cooperation

Response to Amendments of the Annexes to REACH for registration of nanomaterials

6 Nov 2017

1. General Our understanding is that the public consultation on the definition of ‘nanomaterials’ has not yet been launched - only the 'road map' was consulted from 15 September to 13 October 2017. At the same time the Commission wants to make amendment to the REACH annexes concerning the contents of the dossier and CSR and hopes that the amended regulation will enter into force in 1 January 2020. While there is neither fixed mandatory definition of 'nanomaterials' nor approved or recommended measurement method, this REACH annex amendment (with the application date 1 January 2020) looks very ambitious or perhaps too optimistic. There should be good flow of implementation of the regulations - the regulation on the nano definition (with guidance of the analytical/measurement method) and the regulation on the REACH annexes must become effective at the same time, so that the registrants will not be confused. 2. Aquatic toxicity study For all studies for the aquatic toxicity it is mentioned that they do not need to be performed if the substance is highly insoluble in water. Thus, the study can be waived. For nano, however, it is said that: "For nanoforms high insolubility in water alone cannot serve as a justification for waiving." Which other arguments should the registrants of nanoforms need to present in addition to the high insolubility? - and is that justified?
Read full response

Meeting with Maximilian Strotmann (Cabinet of Vice-President Andrus Ansip)

16 Jun 2017 · Digitisation of industry

Meeting with Jon Nyman (Cabinet of Vice-President Cecilia Malmström)

12 Dec 2016 · Possible participation at a future event