Search Results

< Back < Previous | Next > Geopolitics Beyond the West: Rethinking Europe’s Role in the Global Order Alex Krijger 30 Jun 2025 Alex Krijger, a historian and geopolitical advisor, says the 2025 NATO Summit was a turning point, with Europe finally stepping up to take more responsibility for its own security. He believes the world is shifting toward a new global balance of power, and Europe needs to build fairer relationships with the Global South, rethink old institutions, and broaden its view beyond just Western perspectives. Alex Krijger Alex Krijger is a historian, geopolitical advisor, and founder of Krijger & Partners, a consultancy firm specialising in government relations and geopolitical risk. With a career spanning the military, politics, and global energy, he has served as a Dutch army officer, senior figure in the Christian Democratic Party, and a lecturer of geoeconomics at Leiden University. In this interview, he shares insights from the 2025 NATO Summit, discusses Europe’s place in a shifting global order, and warns: “We are not the centre of the universe anymore.” Let’s start off with current events. You attended the recent NATO Summit in The Hague. What are your main takeaways? It was a historic summit with a historic result. In the future, we will talk about the 2025 NATO Summit the same way we talk about the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement and the Maastricht Treaty of 1992. While in 2019 Emmanuel Macron said that NATO was becoming ‘brain dead’, this Summit shows that the Transatlantic Alliance – and Article 5 – is still alive. Europeans will take more ownership of their own defence and security (5% GDP at the latest in 2035), with the need to act quickly because of the Russian threat. That’s the priority. Now that the NATO Summit is over, what’s next? Over the last few days, European leaders have promised a lot of things. However, it’s always easier to promise things than do them because it’s the doing that requires the money. There is hundreds of billions of investment required and European taxpayers have to pay for that. That will hurt. On the other hand – looking at the bigger picture – it is crystal clear that, for the first time since World War Two, Europeans now have to stand on their own feet in terms of energy, raw materials, economy, security and defence. Do you agree that this a fundamental – almost seismic – shift in global relationships? The reality of the world today is that the world order is shifting. Yes, the United States remains by far the biggest power politically, militarily, economically; there’s no doubt about it. We have a strong number two, which is China. And then we have the Global South with ‘middle’ powers like Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Brazil, Indonesia and, in particular, India. In the coming decades, we are heading towards a world with three major powers: the U.S., China and India. Where does Europe fit in to this new world order? It is important to realise that, as Europeans, we are not the centre of the universe anymore. The population of the European Union is 450 million: that’s 5.5% of the world population. That means that 94 out of 100 people in the world don’t live here in Europe. But what do we know about people in the Global South? About people in Latin America, Africa and Asia – regions where there is enormous growth? Can we talk more about Europe’s relationship with the Global South. What are the main issues? When it comes to building a stronger, more autonomous Europe, Europe needs to look more to the south. That’s because the rare materials for the digital transformation and for the sustainable energy, the population growth, market growth, economic growth: it’s all in the Global South. Another point is that, on the last day at the NATO Summit, many Western leaders talked about the need to maintain the international rules-based order. However, many leaders in the Global South don’t consider Europeans to be honest when it comes to maintaining and implementing the rules-based order because they see a difference in values in how Europe deals with Ukraine, the Middle East, and, the biggest war of all of them, Sudan. As long as we still look at the world through our Eurocentric lens, then we don’t see what’s really going on around the world. And if we – and organisations like the ICC in particular – don’t open up towards countries, decision makers and businesses in the Global South, then we are missing out. What are the key factors that European companies should take into account when looking at the Global South? Now we’re coming to something fundamental: in the new world order, the Global South will no longer accept an unequal balance of trade. Therefore, it’s crucial that we stimulate situations where trade relationships are fair, equal and sustainable. Otherwise countries like Brazil, India and Indonesia will say ‘we won’t do business with Europeans: we’ll do it with the Chinese’. The upcoming BRICS Summit in Brazil is a good example. If we ignore that, then we are doing something wrong because this is not just an annual meeting of few countries. No, it’s a growing, important international network and many countries want to be a member. Let’s not underestimate the BRICS – they are doing a lot of work on international trade. What is the impact of the changing world order on international institutions like the United Nations and the World Trade Organisation? It’s crucial to understand that the shift in world order means that international organisations and institutions have to be reformed. Think about the global conflicts at the moment. The 12-day war between Iran and Israel; the UN did not play a role. Ukraine; the role of UN is very limited. Even the war between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo; a peace deal was signed just a few days ago with American intervention. On the subject of international trade, all the issues and the tariffs between the U.S. and China, the U.S. and Europe, are all being managed within their own regions; without the influence of the WTO. In the United Nations today, India has the same power as a country as small as Malta. That’s crazy because India is the world’s biggest democracy, has the largest population, and has the fourth largest economy. The UN, WTO, IMF, the World Bank, and the ICC need to realise that the world order is shifting. If we don’t reform these institutions to reflect the current world order, then the rest of the world will create their own new international institutions like BRICS. Do you have any advice for companies on how to manage geopolitical risk? If you want to manage geopolitical risk, it’s important to understand the global geopolitical trends. For this, you need to not only use Western European sources for your risk assessments. Let’s use an example of a company with 40%+ business interests in China and Taiwan. We don’t know what will happen in the future regarding Taiwan, but we can always make scenarios: one worst-case scenario, one best-case scenario, and one in the middle. This requires a lot of homework; talking with many people, local, provincial, national politicians, journalists, academics, businesspeople etc to get an understanding of the political risks. Based on those scenarios, you can make your geopolitical risk assessment: identifying, analysing and mitigating the risks. You also need to use strategic and analytic sources from that region; if you only use reports from Europe and the U.S., then you are doing something wrong. It’s about trying to see the bigger picture of the geopolitical trends – also from the perspective of the country you are doing business with. For example, what happens in India; try to understand it from the Indian perspective. What happens in the U.S.; try to understand it from the American perspective. That’s the work I do with my global partners: prepare geopolitical risk scenarios and strategies for small, medium and large international operating companies Where can we obtain this local perspective? Our view of the world is strongly determined by the media sources we use. I often ask people what sources they use for their news. And more often than not, they mention sources that are Dutch, European or American. This means that they are missing out on the perspective of the rest of the world. So, to the people who are reading this interview, I want to ask them: How often do you use a non-Western source to gain a different perspective on geopolitical trends and developments? This allows you to inform yourself as diversely as possible, with new and different insights. I recently published quite an extensive list of global news sources. This is a great place to start. You can find Alex Krijger’s suggested list of global news sources here .

< Back < Previous | Next > Integrity & Culture Building Integrity Through Trust and Psychological Safety Camila Fossati, People and Organizations Director, Braskem 16 Jun 2025 A culture of integrity doesn’t come solely through regulations; it thrives on trust, transparency, and psychological safety. Psychological safety—where individuals can speak up and raise concerns without fear—is the foundation of a strong compliance culture. Camila Fossati Camila Fossati is a strategic and inclusive HR leader with over 18 years of international experience across Europe, Asia, and Latin America. With deep expertise in organizational culture, leadership development, and strategic talent management, she has held senior roles at companies such as Braskem, Makro, Suzano, and Gerdau. Throughout her career, Camila has led transformative initiatives that drove cultural change, enhanced organizational effectiveness, and fostered inclusive, high-performing work environments. She is known for aligning HR strategy with institutional values, navigating complex governance, and translating compliance into practical, people-centered solutions. Her leadership is grounded in empathy, data-driven decision-making, and a strong commitment to integrity and diversity. Passionate about creating meaningful change, she continues to inspire teams and organizations to thrive through trust, transparency, and continuous learning. In today’s fast-paced and competitive business landscape, my experience continues to reinforce a critical truth: a culture of integrity doesn’t come solely through regulations; it thrives on trust, transparency, and psychological safety. As organizations face increasing regulatory demands and ethical pressure, the role of leadership in cultivating a compliant, values-driven culture has never been more vital. Psychological safety (which is the belief that individuals can speak up, admit mistakes, and raise concerns without fear of retaliation) is the foundation of a strong compliance culture. When employees feel safe to voice ethical concerns or report misconduct, organizations are better equipped to prevent, detect, and respond to compliance risks. Integrity Starts at the Top: A Strategic Leadership Imperative Leaders set the tone. A culture of integrity starts when leaders model ethical behaviour, communicate expectations clearly, and create an environment where compliance is not just a checkbox, but a shared value. However, when communication is inconsistent or fear of judgment prevails, silence becomes the norm; and silence is the enemy of compliance. Despite this, some HR leaders remain cautious about engaging deeply with compliance, concerned about being perceived as monitors or “corporate police.” There’s an opportunity to rethink this mindset. Human Resources and Compliance are not gatekeepers; they are strategic enablers of a culture where integrity is lived, not legislated. These professionals play a crucial role in guiding leaders to foster environments where ethical behaviour is encouraged and rewarded. Together they help embed integrity into daily operations, not as an obligation, but as a mindset and a conviction. By partnering with leadership, these functions can: Foster open dialogue that encourages ethical decision-making at all levels. Translate values into behaviours through targeted training and coaching. Build systems of accountability that reward transparency and responsible action. When integrity is embraced as a shared mindset rather than imposed as a mandate, it becomes the foundation for trust, resilience, and long-term value. Empowering Employees to Speak Up In a culture of integrity, employees are not passive observers: they are active participants in maintaining ethical behaviour. But this only happens when they feel empowered to raise concerns without fear. Consider a scenario where an employee notices a potential compliance issue but hesitates to report it, fearing retaliation or being labelled a troublemaker. This hesitation can lead to serious consequences. Psychological safety has the potential to transform this dynamic by ensuring that employees feel respected, heard, and protected when they speak up, whether they’re reporting a policy violation or suggesting a more ethical way of doing business. Learning from Mistakes, Not Punishing Them A culture of integrity isn’t about expecting perfection, it’s about fostering a mindset of growth and accountability. Mistakes are part of being human; what truly matters is how organizations respond. This willingness to learn, adapt, and stay true to their values in the face of setbacks is what defines their ethical maturity. When errors are met with blame, employees hide them. When they’re met with curiosity and accountability, employees grow. This mindset shift from punishment to learning is essential for compliance programs to be effective and sustainable. Organizations that embed integrity into their culture don’t just avoid risk: they build trust and strengthen their long-term success. Employees in these environments are more engaged, more loyal, and more likely to act in the company’s best interest. They understand that compliance is not a barrier to performance, but a pathway to trust, reputation, and long-term success. In Summary, fostering a culture of integrity relies on creating an environment grounded in psychological safety, ethical leadership, and continuous learning. When people feel safe to speak up and take responsibility, integrity becomes part of everyday behaviour, not just a matter of compliance. Supporting this kind of culture isn’t only the right thing to do, it’s also a thoughtful and strategic investment in long-term success.

< Back < Previous | Next > Customs Code The new EU Customs Code 14 Apr 2026 What business needs to know — a practical guide to the most ambitious EU customs reform since 1968 The new EU Customs Code What business needs to know — a practical guide to the most ambitious EU customs reform since 1968 https://video.wixstatic.com/video/bd3753_c95a2909e63249fa9674a797a5c27d3d/480p/mp4/file.mp4 In late March 2026, the European Council and Parliament reached political agreement on a new Union Customs Code (UCC) — the most ambitious reform of EU customs since the Customs Union was established in 1968. The reform replaces a fragmented, paper-and-declaration-based system with a fully digital, data-driven one, centred on a single EU Customs Data Hub and a new EU Customs Authority based in Lille. This guide pulls together what is changing, when, and what it means in practice for any company that imports, exports, or moves goods across EU borders. It is based on the agreed legislative text and on public information from the Commission, Council and Parliament. Latest procedural update: the IMCO Committee of the European Parliament endorsed the provisional agreement on 16 April 2026 (38 in favour, 2 against, 3 abstentions). A plenary vote is expected by September 2026, with publication in the Official Journal targeted for October–November 2026. The Regulation will then enter into force approximately 12 months after publication. Changes at a glance Why this matters for business Customs is no longer only about collecting duties. It increasingly polices product compliance — safety, sustainability, sanctions, forced labour, deforestation, CBAM, digital product passports. At the same time, e-commerce volumes exploded from a few hundred million items a few years ago to 4.6 billion items in 2024 and around 5.8 billion in 2025 (DG TAXUD figures), making the current model unsustainable. This reform is the EU's response. Two consequences for any company that imports, exports, or moves goods across EU borders: Your customs data will be used far more intensively — for risk analysis, for non-customs regulatory compliance, and across the whole supply chain, not just at the border. How you organise customs operations will change. IT systems, contracts with carriers/brokers, internal data governance, and the choice of trusted-trader status all need to be revisited. Timeline — what to put in the diary Date Milestone What it means for business 1 July 2026 Interim €3 flat customs duty on low-value parcels; customs handling fee introduced for e-commerce Council agreed (12 Dec 2025) to levy a €3 duty on small parcels as a transitional measure pending the full UCC reform. A per-parcel handling fee applies to e-commerce consignments. Oct–Nov 2026 (expected) Formal adoption of the new UCC Regulation; publication in the Official Journal; EU Customs Authority (EUCA) legally established (based in Lille) Political agreement reached 26 March 2026; IMCO Committee endorsement 16 April 2026; plenary vote expected by September 2026. Once published in the OJ, EUCA starts setting up — it can hire, procure, and begin building the Data Hub. November 2026 Commission adopts delegated act on the handling fee amount Final clarity on the e-commerce handling fee amount. ~2027 New UCC enters into force (~12 months after OJ publication); delegated & implementing acts for the e-commerce Data Hub adopted (target March/July 2027) The detailed rules (data elements, processes) for e-commerce become final — companies can start IT build and testing. 2027 Old UCC progressively repealed; EUCA operational Transition period begins. E-commerce operators must start preparing for new obligations. 1 July 2028 EU Data Hub goes live for e-commerce; full €150 de minimis abolition; Trust & Check trader applications open E-commerce data flows centrally. The €150 duty-free threshold is fully abolished under the UCC. Platforms and importers can apply for Trust & Check status. 2031 Data Hub opens on a voluntary basis to all operators Companies may start using the Data Hub for any customs procedure. Delegated acts must be ready ~2 years before (around 2029). 1 March 2034 Data Hub mandatory; national customs IT systems switched off End-state: a single EU-wide customs data environment. All companies must be connected to the Data Hub by then. Note: Delegated and implementing acts (the detailed rules) are still being drafted. Business needs to engage now — once adopted they define what systems and data companies must build. The four pillars of the reform Pillar What changes Business impact 1. EU Customs Data Hub A single EU-wide digital platform replacing 111 national/EU systems. 'Submit data once' — same data reused across entry, import, transit, export. Consignment-centric (not declaration-centric). Potentially huge simplification: one interface instead of 27 national systems. But requires new IT investment, new data formats, and close attention to the delegated acts that define the data model. 2. EU Customs Authority (EUCA) New EU agency based in Lille (confirmed 25 March 2026). Starts with ~250 staff, scaling to ~500 long-term. Owns the Data Hub, runs centralised risk analysis, monitors AEO/Trust & Check. A single point of escalation for cross-border interpretation issues. Business can engage via the Advisory Board. Does NOT replace national customs — first contact remains local authorities. 3. Trust & Check trader (new) Goes beyond AEO. Requires giving customs real-time access to company data. In return: self-assessment, self-release, fewer controls. Highest simplification tier, but very high bar. AEO is retained for companies that can't/won't go that far. Concern: requirements may be too heavy for SMEs. 4. Liability & responsibility There is always an EU-established 'importer' (non-EU sellers must use an EU-established indirect representative). Each party is responsible for the data they own. More clarity on who is liable for what. Carriers become 'gatekeepers' — they must verify the importer has filed data before loading. Platforms get 'deemed importer' responsibility for e-commerce. E-commerce: the urgent file E-commerce gets its own regime and it starts first. Key changes: €150 de minimis abolished. A transitional €3 flat customs duty applies from 1 July 2026 (Council decision of 12 Dec 2025). The €150 duty-free threshold is fully abolished under the UCC reform when the e-commerce Data Hub goes live on 1 July 2028. Normal duties apply thereafter. Customs handling fee. A per-parcel fee is introduced (amount set by November 2026 delegated act). Platforms become importers. Marketplaces that sell to EU consumers become responsible for customs compliance of the goods they sell — including data, duty and VAT. No simplified treatment for the platforms themselves. The co-legislators explicitly refused to grant extra facilitation to e-commerce flows. T rust & Check available for e-commerce operators. Major e-commerce players can apply from July 2028 and benefit from a reduced handling fee. Strategic implication: the reform is expected to level the playing field between traditional retail and cross-border e-commerce platforms. Some Chinese platforms have already anticipated — Shein alone has 740,000 m² of warehousing in Poland. Expect internal EU competition for e-commerce distribution hubs (Poland, Netherlands, Belgium). Operational impact — what changes day-to-day Data: from declarations to continuous data sharing Today, you file a set of declarations (entry, import, transit, export). Tomorrow, you push data about the consignment into a shared hub and customs "consume" the events in the goods' life cycle. The same data should only be submitted once. Data quality becomes critical — poor data means controls and delays. The Commission is asking companies to start improving data quality now, in existing systems. 'Submit once' only works if companies adopt unique identifiers that track a consignment across its whole journey. This is one of the biggest practical challenges. Carriers will become 'gatekeepers': they must check the importer has filed the data before loading. Expect new contractual and operational arrangements with carriers and brokers. IT and systems Companies will need to interface with the EU Data Hub (directly or via brokers/software). Member State national systems will coexist until 2034 but progressively disappear. Short timelines are a real risk. Industry has flagged that testing phases must be foreseen — ICS2 has had documented service interruptions and readiness concerns. A dedicated test environment is expected. Data sovereignty is a priority: the Commission is assessing sovereign EU cloud vendors for hosting. Customs representatives / brokers Role shifts from filing declarations to data management and compliance advisory. An EU-established customs representative is required when the importer is non-EU. Brokers with strong data capability can consolidate operations — no need for a legal presence in each Member State. VAT, excise and other legislation Centralised clearance for imports is introduced — but NOT for VAT. Industry has flagged this as a missed opportunity; misalignment with VAT remains a source of fragmentation. Penalties are only partially harmonised (minimum common core of infringements and non-criminal sanctions); Member State national sanctions are retained. Trust & Check vs. AEO — what to choose Good news: AEO is retained. It was a real concern that AEO would disappear; business pushed back and won. But Trust & Check is the new top tier: Entry requirements: Full AEO-equivalent plus real-time access to your customs-relevant data by authorities. Practically a major IT and governance project. Benefits: Self-assessment (file periodically, not per transaction), self-release (release goods without prior customs intervention), reduced handling fee in e-commerce, priority treatment. Open question: Will the benefits justify the investment? Industry worries the balance between simplification and controls still isn't right — and that SMEs will struggle to qualify. SME angle: Brokers are expected to step in, providing Trust & Check status to their SME clients as a service. Recommendation: If your company already holds AEO-F, start mapping the Trust & Check delta now and decide whether to aim for it. Applications open July 2028. Risks for business Short and unclear timelines. Delegated and implementing acts are still in drafting; businesses are being asked to build IT for rules that aren't final. Data explosion. Despite the 'submit once' promise, each new EU regulation adds data requirements. Without active pushback, the Data Hub could become another reporting burden on top of CBAM, CSRD, deforestation etc. Integration with national systems. During the 2026–2034 transition, companies will deal with the Data Hub AND national systems in parallel. Risk of double-filing if not well designed. Uneven enforcement. The final text introduces a minimum common core of sanctions, but Member States can still add national sanctions. Interpretation differences will persist. EU competition. More uniform rules could accelerate a shift of distribution flows towards lower-cost Member States. System resilience. ICS2 has had documented service interruptions at today's volumes. With ~18 million daily e-commerce declarations projected, business continuity is a real concern. Opportunities for business Single EU interface. A real chance to cut IT and compliance cost if delivered well — one connection instead of 27. Self-assessment. For compliant traders, the end of transaction-by-transaction filing can free significant resources. Predictability through data. Real-time visibility of consignment status, earlier notification of controls — fewer delays at the border. Level playing field on e-commerce. Traditional retailers and EU manufacturers benefit from tighter controls on cross-border platforms. Sustainability link. The Data Hub can connect to the Digital Product Passport, opening room for differentiated tariffs (e.g., refurbished vs new) and simpler compliance for green products. Shape the rules. The Commission is actively calling for business input on delegated acts, data elements and the Data Hub design. Early movers influence the detail. What business should do in the next 12 months Map exposure: which flows, which Member States, which product categories are most affected (especially e-commerce, low-value consignments, non-EU sellers). Start cleaning customs data quality in existing systems — the Commission has explicitly asked for this, and it will ease the Data Hub transition. Assess Trust & Check readiness vs. AEO: what would real-time data access require on your side? Run a gap analysis. Review contracts with carriers, customs representatives and platforms in light of the new 'gatekeeper' and importer-responsibility concepts. Engage: through industry chambers, federations, national trade facilitation committees, or directly with your national customs authority. The delegated acts for e-commerce will be published in draft in the coming weeks. Budget: plan IT investment for 2026–2028 covering data model changes, interfaces with the Data Hub, and potentially a Trust & Check programme. Bottom line The reform is ambitious and broadly supported: Council and Parliament reached political agreement on 26 March 2026 on what both institutions are calling the most significant customs reform in decades. But success depends on the detail — delegated acts, Data Hub design, EUCA governance. For business, now is the moment to build internal awareness, engage with the Commission on the secondary rules, and start the IT/data homework. 1 July 2028 is closer than it looks. Sources & further reading European Commission DG TAXUD — EU Customs Reform European Commission press release IP/26/735 on the political agreement (26 March 2026) Council of the EU press release — "EU customs: Council and Parliament agree on landmark reform" (26 March 2026) Council press release on interim €3 duty on small parcels from 1 July 2026 (12 December 2025) Council press release on selection of Lille to host the EU Customs Authority (25 March 2026) DG TAXUD — "Goods bought online" statistics (for e-commerce volumes) Note: the legislative text was politically agreed on 26 March 2026 and endorsed by the IMCO Committee on 16 April 2026, but had not yet been formally adopted in plenary or published in the Official Journal at the time of writing (May 2026). Some details may evolve during legal-linguistic finalisation and in the delegated and implementing acts.

< Back < Previous | Next > Anti-corruption / Corporate governance ICC and WCO release trade facilitation recommendations for enhanced integrity at borders 10 Jul 2025 Integrity at borders is fundamental to sustainable trade and economic growth. A new joint International Chamber of Commerce-World Customs Organization paper highlights how trade facilitation – by digitalising processes, reducing complexities and increasing transparency – can be a powerful tool for fighting corruption. Download US$1.2 to US$1.5 trillion. That’s the staggering annual cost of bribery alone – equal to roughly 2% of annual global GDP. But bribery represents just one facet of corruption’s devastating impact. The true cost runs far deeper, undermining the very foundations of fair trade and economic growth by eroding institutional trust, distorting competition, and creating artificial barriers that stifle opportunity for businesses worldwide. Corruption thrives precisely where trade facilitation is most needed: in complex, opaque environments where procedures span multiple government agencies and discretionary decision-making creates opportunities for abuse. Micro-, small- and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs) and women-owned businesses are particularly vulnerable in these settings, as they often lack the resources to navigate burdensome procedures or absorb the added costs of informal payments. However, trade facilitation – the simplification and harmonisation of international trade procedures – can be a powerful lever for combatting corruption, according to a new joint paper from the World Customs Organization (WCO) and International Chamber of Commerce (ICC). How does trade facilitation limit corrupt practices? By reducing complexity and increasing transparency, trade facilitation limits opportunities for illicit practices. When properly implemented, these measures create an environment where corruption becomes both harder to carry out and easier to detect. Digitalising border processes to reduce human intervention and establishing clear and transparent regulatory frameworks that limit discretionary decision-making are concrete trade facilitation measures that strengthen integrity. Public-private partnerships play an essential role by promoting collective action and reinforcing the implementation of integrity-focused reforms. These efforts must be grounded in the World Trade Organiztion (WTO) Trade Facilitation Agreement and the WCO Revised Kyoto Convention, which provide a critical foundation for strengthening integrity, promoting transparency, limiting discretion, and supporting more predictable and rules-based border procedures. However, border practices in many countries remain in urgent need of trade facilitation reforms . Take export licensing, for example: in some cases, companies must visit multiple government offices to have paper documents stamped – a time-consuming and costly process. When officials arbitrarily demand additional documentation, it creates fertile ground for corruption, where officials can demand facilitation payments while businesses feel pressured to comply simply to expedite processes. While trade facilitation serves as a powerful anti-corruption tool, it is not without risks and limitations. These measures can face challenges including data manipulation in digitalised systems, cybersecurity threats, internal corruption risks, and resistance to technological adoption. To address these vulnerabilities, both Customs authorities and businesses must implement comprehensive approaches that include robust governance structures, regular audits, cybersecurity protections, and training programs. Public-private partnerships through National Trade Facilitation Committees and chambers of commerce are essential for building trust and creating effective enforcement strategies that address both the supply and demand sides of corruption. Trade facilitation in action Forward-thinking companies are adopting practices aligned with tra principles as anti-corruption tools. Some firms require their business units to take practical steps to reduce the risk of solicitation, including through digitalising sensitive transactions and engaging legal support when attending meetings with parties that present a higher risk of solicitation. Other businesses mandate the use of electronic communications or e-government solutions in areas such as licensing, procurement and taxes to reduce face-to-face interactions with public officials and minimise connected risks of bribe solicitation. Similarly, some countries that embrace digitalisation have seen remarkable outcomes. For example, in Guatemala a project supported by the Global Alliance for Trade Facilitation digitalised ship arrival and departures procedures through the National Single Window (VUMAR), reducing processing times by 85% and eliminating the need for multiple in-person visits. This reform made all these transactions traceable and verifiable, demonstrating how digital trade facilitation can reduce opportunities for corruption by replacing paper-based processes with more transparent and accountable procedures. Actionable recommendations for Customs and business Customs Digitalise Enhance legal safeguards Raise awareness Address small facilitation payments Publish on a publicly available website Foster a transparent zero-tolerance culture Establish robust feedback mechanisms Increase cross-border collaboration Monitor and evaluate Business Advocate Participate in integrity awareness Apply a risk-based approach Automate processes Develop compliance programmes and controls Prohibit and discourage the use of small facilitation payments Monitor and evaluate Foster a transparent zero tolerance for corruption culture

< Back < Previous | Next > Taxes Developments on the UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation 27 May 2025 The ICC convened a timely briefing to update business stakeholders on the UN-led process to negotiate a new Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation. This follows the landmark UN General Assembly resolution adopted in late 2023, which launched the first steps toward a globally negotiated, binding agreement on international tax governance. While this move signals a more inclusive and multilateral approach, especially in giving developing countries equal footing , it also introduces new uncertainties for businesses already adjusting to recent OECD tax reforms. The ICC emphasised that structured private sector engagement will be essential to ensure that the future convention remains coherent, predictable, and administrable. Key Developments The Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Committee has been established and will begin formal negotiations in the coming months. Business stakeholders are now able to register as observers of the sessions and are encouraged to submit technical input through ICC or national associations. The convention’s scope is broad, aiming to set global norms and principles rather than detailed rules - but its legal status could be binding. Many businesses expressed concern about potential regulatory fragmentation , especially if the new framework does not align with OECD's Pillar One and Pillar Two standards. The need for capacity building in developing countries was widely recognized, as inclusive participation requires not just access but also resources. The ICC reiterated that this new track does not render existing OECD efforts obsolete but rather opens a parallel process , one that risks adding complexity unless clear coordination mechanisms are established. Business leaders were urged to engage early and constructively to safeguard key principles like simplicity, neutrality, and predictability in global tax standards. Recommendations for Business Register to observe the UN tax negotiations and follow developments closely through the channels outlined by the UN. Coordinate input through ICC channels to avoid fragmented responses. Evaluate compliance exposure in anticipation of potentially overlapping global standards. Support efforts to promote coherence between UN and OECD frameworks. The ICC will continue to provide analysis, updates, and advocacy to ensure that the private sector's voice is heard throughout this evolving process. A formal position paper will follow once the first draft of the convention is released.

< Back < Previous | Next > ICC Netherlands calls on Dutch Parliament to accelerate adoption of MLETR 1 Sept 2025 ICC Netherlands, together with a broad coalition of companies, banks and business associations, has presented a whitepaper to the Dutch Parliament calling for swift adoption of the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Transferable Records (MLETR) – a move that will cut costs, reduce delays and strengthen the Netherlands’ competitive position. On 1 September, ICC Netherlands, together with a broad coalition of companies, banks and business associations, presented a whitepaper to the Dutch Parliament urging swift adoption of the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Transferable Records (MLETR) . What may appear to be a technical legal change has enormous practical impact. Adoption of MLETR could: Save Dutch businesses hundreds of millions of euros in unnecessary costs Shorten trade document processing from 6–10 days to less than 24 hours Reduce bureaucracy and cut administrative burdens for SMEs by up to 35% Strengthen the Netherlands’ competitiveness as a global trading nation Why it matters International trade is the lifeblood of the Dutch economy: imports and exports together represent more than €1.6 trillion annually – nearly four times GDP . Yet many critical trade documents are still only legally valid on paper. This causes delays, higher costs, and a loss of efficiency. Other countries are moving faster. The UK, France, Germany and Singapore have already updated their legislation. The UK is even ready to advance digital cooperation with the Netherlands, but progress is stalled because eight key documents cannot yet be issued electronically under Dutch law . Clear call to action ICC Netherlands and its partners urge Parliament to: Quickly approve legislation for the electronic bill of lading Launch the legislative process for the remaining seven MLETR documents The digital future of trade starts now. With one simple legislative step, the Netherlands can unlock major efficiency gains and safeguard its position as Europe’s digital gateway and trade hub. The business community is ready to help make this a reality. 👉 Read the executive summary here: EN- Executive summary - Electronic transferable records (1) .pdf Download PDF • 1.84MB 👉 The whitepaper is available in Dutch, here De adoptie van de UNCITRAL‘Model Law on Electronic Transferable Records’ in NL (6) .pdf Download PDF • 3.28MB About this initiative The whitepaper was prepared by representatives of ICC Netherlands, ICISA, ING Bank, Port of Rotterdam and other experts, supported by a broad coalition of companies, banks and business associations.

< Back < Previous | Next > Arbitration from the Corporate Perspective Tom Scott 31 Mar 2026 A conversation with Huie (Sandy) Huang Arbitration from the Corporate Perspective We cover the subject of arbitration every month in the ICC Netherlands newsletter. Until now, we have never interviewed an in-house lawyer with experience of arbitration from the corporate standpoint. Aiming to broaden our knowledge, we spoke to Huie Huang, who has worked on several arbitration cases in recent years and is now Compliance Data Counsel at TIP Group. Having studied law in the Netherlands and China and worked in Dubai, Shenzhen, Rome and now Amsterdam as an in-house lawyer dealing with international contracts and disputes, Huie brings a global perspective to dispute resolution. In this interview, she shares what arbitration looks like from the corporate side and offers practical advice for in-house counsel navigating international disputes. What does arbitration look like from your position of in-house counsel? Arbitration serves as a strategy to manage disputes while protecting the commercial interests of the company. Arbitration offers practical advantages: neutrality, procedural flexibility, enforceability and confidentiality are all reasons why a company would choose arbitration. The frequency of arbitration cases depends on the company’s industry and risk preference, but also the geography and the nature of the contract. So this is the connection with the geographical location of the parties? Indeed. In my experience working with large transaction cross-border contracts – in the Middle East or Africa, for example – where the counterparty is located in a different jurisdiction, we would prefer to use arbitration rather than litigation to resolve a dispute. Do all contracts have a dispute resolution clause? A standard contract template should normally include a dispute resolution clause; this could be litigation or arbitration. The company may have a different preference, but all this is included in the dispute resolution clause. And what makes a good dispute resolution clause? It’s really important to draft it in a very effective and clear way. That’s because the dispute might not happen until years later; maybe 10 years later for contracts in, for example, the telecom or construction industry. If the clause is poorly drafted, the potential consequences can be costly. Consent is the cornerstone of arbitration; the parties’ intention to resolve disputes through arbitration must be clearly expressed in the contract. You also need to identify the arbitration institution and the seat of arbitration. You can, of course, use a template provided by the arbitration institution. The ICC has this. You can customise the template for your own purposes. Is the ICC the most commonly used arbitration institution? I would say it’s one of the most commonly used institutions. Because of its well-developed arbitration rules and clear procedure structure, the ICC is a very good choice for an arbitration institution. In terms of the scrutiny of the decision, the ICC definitely has advantages compared to some other institutions. The first arbitration case I handled was an ICC arbitration. Can a company take on an arbitration case without an arbitration institution? It is an option, but in practice, I see that companies prefer to use an arbitration institution because it provides the structured framework and administrative support that makes the process more efficient. What factors come into play when a company has to select an arbitrator? Selecting the arbitrator is one of the most challenging and painful points for in-house counsel when dealing with an arbitration case. It’s not like reaching out to a law firm; arbitrators are normally independent. When we select arbitrators, we first consider neutrality and expertise. And because arbitration cases often involve technical issues, it is important that arbitrators have not only strong legal experience but also knowledge of the relevant industry. From a corporate perspective, an arbitrator must be able to understand the technical aspects of the dispute, identify liability and assess damages. An arbitrator who combines strong legal expertise with a clear understanding of commercial reality is therefore highly valued. Why can choosing an arbitrator be painful? Because the arbitrator is really the key factor in the arbitration procedure – they will give the final word. So if you choose the wrong person, it can ruin the case and affect the final result. What role does the seat of arbitration play, and what do companies look for when choosing one? It much depends on a company’s internal policy and its risk considerations. In some cases, companies choose a seat that is geographically close. If the arbitration takes place far away, travel and accommodation costs can become significant. Another key factor is neutrality. When parties come from different jurisdictions, they often prefer an arbitration-friendly country. What about the Netherlands as a seat of arbitration? The Netherlands is a strong option. Many international companies have their European or global headquarters here, which creates a large number of commercial relationships. The country also benefits from experienced arbitration practitioners, particularly in The Hague. More broadly, companies consider whether the seat offers a reliable legal framework, accessible facilities, and a well-known legal system where qualified lawyers and arbitration professionals are readily available. What advice would you give to in-house counsel handling their first arbitration case? My first message is simple: don’t panic. Arbitration is different from court litigation, and it takes time to become familiar with the process. One of the most important steps is to assemble the right team early. This includes not only external counsel but sometimes technical experts as well. At the same time, strong internal coordination is essential. In-house lawyers need support from management, colleagues who know the project well, and sometimes employees who may act as witnesses or experts during the proceedings. Another point that is often underestimated is the workload; arbitration requires significant internal coordination, and gathering the necessary materials can be a major task for in-house counsel. Managing expectations is also crucial; it is important to explain the process clearly to management and ensure they understand the time and resources required. At the same time, arbitration offers some flexibility. There is always the possibility of settlement during the proceedings, which can help reduce time and costs. Arbitration is demanding but very interesting, combining legal reasoning with commercial insight – I feel very privileged to be working as in-house counsel.

< Back < Previous | Next > The Eight Key Benefits of ICC Arbitration for Business Disputes Tom Scott 2 Jan 2026 The Eight Key Benefits of ICC Arbitration for Business Disputes When settling business disputes, choosing ICC arbitration over regular court systems offers businesses a wealth of advantages. We spoke to ICC Netherlands’ Secretary General Laure Jacquier to find out more. Here’s what we discovered: the eight key benefits of ICC arbitration. It’s hard to rank the advantages of ICC arbitration in order of importance. That’s because every dispute is different. That said, the key advantages below help explain why so many businesses turn to arbitration as a dispute resolution method. 1. Confidentiality: the foundation of trust Confidentiality is often the first benefit businesses mention when discussing arbitration. Unlike court proceedings, which are usually public, arbitration takes place behind closed doors. For companies dealing with sensitive commercial data, trade secrets or reputational risks, privacy is crucial. By keeping disputes out of the public eye, ICC arbitration allows parties to focus on finding solutions rather than managing unwanted exposure. “This level of privacy can be critical for maintaining a competitive edge and protecting a company’s reputation,” Laure explains. “ICC arbitration gives businesses peace of mind, knowing their interests are safeguarded.” 2. Efficiency instead of prolonged litigation Another major advantage is efficiency. Court cases can drag on for years, often involving appeals that add more time, cost and uncertainty (the very three things that are not included in a company’s strategic plan). In fast-moving industries, in particular, any time that can be saved makes a real difference. “In contrast, ICC arbitration is designed to move cases forward efficiently,” says Laure. “The ICC applies strict timelines, offers discounted fees if arbitrators are late in issuing awards, and provides expedited procedures where appropriate. This allows companies to resolve disputes faster and return their focus to running the business.” 3. Flexibility built around business needs Companies like to set their own agendas. As such, ICC arbitration offers a level of flexibility that court systems rarely match. Instead of rigid procedural rules, parties can tailor the process to fit the unique needs of their own dispute. This includes choosing arbitrators with relevant expertise and shaping how and where proceedings are held. “Parties can agree on the language, location, and procedural timetable,” Laure notes. “The process is designed with business realities in mind.” 4. Global enforceability under the New York Convention For companies operating across borders, enforceability is a massive concern. However, thanks to the New York Convention, ICC arbitration awards are recognized and enforceable in more than 170 countries. This means national courts in contracting states are generally required to enforce arbitral awards, subject to limited exceptions. “International enforceability is a major advantage,” says Laure. “It offers a level of certainty that court judgments don’t always provide, particularly when recognition across jurisdictions is uncertain.” What does this means in practical terms? “It ensures that an award carries real weight; it’s not just symbolic.” 5. A cost-effective option in the long run Although arbitration is sometimes seen as expensive, ICC arbitration often proves more cost-effective than lengthy court litigation. Prolonged lawsuits can generate high legal fees, court costs, and indirect business disruption. With its streamlined procedures, ICC arbitration “often results in lower overall costs,” Laure explains. “That allows businesses to focus on growth instead of mounting legal expenses.” 6. Impartiality and strong institutional oversight Neutrality is essential in international disputes. ICC arbitration addresses this through strict standards governing arbitrator independence and expertise. “Arbitrators are selected based on their independence and qualifications, ensuring decisions are made solely on the merits of the case,” Laure says. “Combined with oversight by the ICC International Court of Arbitration, this provides businesses with confidence in a fair and objective process.” 7. Predictability and procedural control Unlike congested court systems, ICC arbitration gives parties greater control over timelines and procedures. “Parties can agree on deadlines and structure the process to suit their needs,” Laure explains. “That predictability helps businesses manage disputes without unnecessary disruption. For ongoing operations, that level of control can be invaluable.” 8. Expert-driven decision-making Finally, ICC arbitration allows disputes to be decided by arbitrators with industry-specific expertise. The flipside to this is that court judges may not always have specialized knowledge of complex commercial or technical issues. “This expertise leads to more informed and commercially sensible decisions,” Laure concludes. “Businesses benefit from the insight of professionals who truly understand their industry.”

< Back < Previous | Next > DRS ICC Dispute Resolution Statistics: 2024 24 Jun 2025 The annual ICC Dispute Resolution Statistics offer a comprehensive overview of disputes submitted to the ICC International Court of Arbitration and the ICC International Centre for ADR. They provide an in-depth breakdown of the numbers and global reach of ICC Arbitration and other ICC Dispute Resolution Services worldwide. 2024 key statistics The full 2024 statistical report reflects ICC’s standing as the preferred institution for international commercial and investment dispute resolution. The amount in dispute in cases registered in 2024 varied from just below US$10,000 to US$53 billion, with over a third of the cases not exceeding US$3 million. Alexander G. Fessas, Secretary General of the ICC International Court of Arbitration and Director of ICC Dispute Resolution services said: “ICC Arbitration remains a preferred dispute resolution method globally, attracting high-value, high-impact disputes as well as lower-value disputes. The 2024 statistical report reflects the trust placed in our services, from businesses and states in need of fair, efficient and forward-looking dispute resolution.” Distribution of parties by region Place of arbitration ICC arbitrations were seated in 107 cities across 62 countries or independent territories. Representation of arbitrators In addition to a wide geographic reach, diversity and inclusion are at the core of our service. In 2024, 577 draft awards were approved in Spanish, French, Portuguese, German, Arabic, Italian, Romanian, Bulgarian, Turkish. and bilingually in Chinese/English, demonstrating the adaptability of ICC Dispute Resolution Services in tailoring arbitration services to assist businesses and state entities worldwide. Sectors and industries Cases filed in 2024 covered a wide range of sectors. Top 10 sectors included construction/ engineering; energy; transportation; financing and insurance; telecoms and specialised technologies; health, pharmaceuticals and cosmetics; business services; general trade and distribution; leisure and entertainment and industrial equipment and services. Mediation and other forms of amicable dispute settlement The ICC International Centre for ADR administered 61 new cases in 2024 across its range of services which include mediation, expert proceedings, dispute boards and DOCDEX cases relating to trade finance instruments. Expert proceedings accounted for 20 new filings , with the majority of proceedings from the construction and energy sectors. Parties and neutrals represented a broad geographic span including Africa, the Middle East, the Americas, and Asia-Pacific, reflecting the continuing adoption globally of ICC’s ADR services. For an ICC DRS data overview, download our one-pager in English , Arabic , Chinese , French , Portuguese and Spanish . Access statistical reports from previous years via the ICC Dispute Resolution Library . Download

< Back < Previous | Next > Model Contracts and Clauses ICC Anti-corruption Clause 4 Jul 2025 The ICC Anti-corruption Clause is a voluntary contractual provision that companies can include in their commercial agreements, whereby they undertake to comply with the 2023 ICC Rules on Combating Corruption or commit to put in place and maintain an anti-corruption compliance programme. Download The ICC Anti-corruption Clause is a voluntary contractual provision that companies can include in their commercial agreements, whereby they undertake to comply with the 2023 ICC Rules on Combatting Corruption or commit to put in place and maintain an anti-corruption compliance programme. The purpose is to provide an underlying legal foundation to mitigate corruption risks during the negotiation and contractual period. The inclusion of the Clause thereby reassures both parties about the integrity of their counterpart, and includes clear and actionable avenues for redress where there are allegations of breach. By establishing clearly defined anti-corruption obligations, the Clause creates a transparent framework for ethical business conduct. This reduces compliance uncertainty, enhances mutual accountability, builds trust on a foundation of shared ethical standards, and ultimately strengthens commercial partnerships. Widely used by businesses and even by some governments, the 2025 Clause has been updated to align with current business practices and the 2023 ICC Anti-corruption Rules. ICC Anti-Corruption Clause – 2025 edition: What’s new? The 2025 Anti-corruption Clause ensures alignment with the 2023 ICC Rules on Combating Corruption, which serve as both a self-regulation tool for business and a roadmap for governments in their efforts to fight corruption. The new edition includes a recognition that parties may opt to use this ICC Anti-corruption Clause, or the spirit of this ICC Clause, as part of a broader compliance or business integrity clause, and a reaffirmed commitment on the prevention of conflicts of interest. The Clause is an essential component of ICC’s renown lead in setting standards of business integrity worldwide, and forms part of ICC’s larger body of work on Model Contracts and Clauses – a suite of practical legal tools drafted by legal experts. These contracts and clauses enable business to avoid the significant time and expense of drafting bespoke contracts, offering instead proven, reliable templates that ensure equitable terms for all parties. How to include the ICC Anti-corruption Clause in a contract The ICC Anti-corruption Clause can be included via one of three options: Option 1 : Incorporation by reference of the ICC Rules on Combating Corruption 2023 Option 2 : Incorporation of the full text of the ICC Rules on Combating Corruption 2023, or Option 3 : An undertaking to implement a corporate compliance programme, as described in Article 11 of the 2023 ICC Rules on Combating Corruption. A party who fails to comply with the incorporated anti-corruption provisions will be given a chance to remedy the non-compliance and to raise the fact that it has put in place adequate anti-corruption preventive measures as a defense.   If the non-complying party doesn’t or can’t take remedial action and doesn’t raise a defence, the other party can choose to suspend or terminate the contract.  

< Back < Previous | Next > From Ambition to Economic Delivery: ICC’s Call to Action Ahead of COP30 2 Nov 2025 As world leaders prepare to meet in Belém for COP30, ICC calls on governments to turn climate ambition into economic delivery. Representing over 45 million companies, ICC urges concrete action on finance, adaptation and market integrity to unlock private investment and make the transition to net zero a driver of growth and resilience. From Ambition to Economic Delivery: ICC’s Call to Action Ahead of COP30 As world leaders prepare to gather in Belém for COP30 , the message from business is clear: climate ambition must now translate into economic delivery . In an open letter to Climate Ministers, ICC Secretary General John W.H. Denton AO conveyed the views of more than 45 million companies across 170 countries , calling on governments to make COP30 the turning point where commitment becomes implementation . Business urges governments to make COP30 about delivery The global business community sees the transition to a net-zero, climate-resilient world not only as a moral imperative, but as an economic necessity . Businesses are already investing, innovating, and adapting to growing physical and transition risks. Yet progress is being held back by fragmented regulations and uncertainty around the enabling conditions needed to unlock private capital at scale. To deliver on the Paris Agreement, ICC calls on governments to anchor COP30 outcomes around three priority pillars: Investment-ready national climate action plans. Governments must co-design updated and ambitious NDCs with business, aligning climate goals with growth, energy security and industrial competitiveness. Predictable frameworks and clear market signals are essential to drive long-term investment. A Global Goal on Adaptation that mobilises private finance. Adaptation receives less than 10% of total climate finance today. ICC calls for robust metrics, risk-reporting standards, and smart incentives to make resilience investable, turning adaptation into a scalable economic opportunity. A finance implementation plan that operationalises the new collective quantified goal. The next step in the Baku-to-Belém process must be a concrete roadmap to channel funding into emerging and developing economies. That means addressing structural barriers, including reforms to prudential rules such as Basel III and more effective use of development bank balance sheets, to unlock private capital at scale. Scaling finance and integrity at the heart of ICC’s agenda ICC’s COP30 strategy sets out practical policy actions to turbocharge climate finance, strengthen carbon markets and embed adaptation into business models .Key ICC proposals include: Reforms to global financial regulations to enable greater green investment; New frameworks for Article 6 implementation and voluntary carbon markets; Development of investable adaptation pipelines supported by clear data, incentives and risk-transfer mechanisms such as resilience bonds; Recognition of trade finance as a key enabler of climate-aligned growth. At COP30, ICC will also highlight the role of small and medium-sized enterprises , presenting new data and insights on how SMEs can be empowered to take climate action. A partnership for delivery The private sector has proven its capacity to innovate, from clean energy systems to new low-carbon technologies, but cannot act alone. ICC is urging governments to work hand-in-hand with business to turn high-level ambition into real-world impact through policy coherence, transparent carbon markets and credible financing mechanisms. “COP30 can and should mark the point where climate ambition becomes economic strategy — anchored in growth, resilience and opportunity,” said ICC Secretary General John W.H. Denton AO. How businesses can engage ICC Netherlands invites all members and partners to join this call to action: Use ICC’s key messages in your own communications and bilateral engagements with government representatives in the run-up to and during COP30; Share ICC’s Open Letter and Strategy across your business networks to amplify the voice of the real economy; Highlight concrete business actions that show how Dutch companies are driving sustainable growth and climate innovation. Join the ICC Netherlands Sustainability Commission meeting – 11 December : we will discuss how Dutch businesses can engage with the COP30 outcomes and shape our ICC Netherlands sustainability agenda for 2026 and beyond. The decisions made in Belém will shape global competitiveness, capital flows and resilience for years to come. Business is ready, and willing, to partner with governments to deliver the opportunity of a lifetime . Read further ICC and UNFCCC Business Group call on climate ministers ahead of COP30 (15 October 2025) Ahead of COP30 in Belém, ICC and the UNFCCC Business Group urge governments to make climate ambition a driver of economic transformation, calling for coherent policies that unlock private investment at scale. COP30 Open Letter to Climate Ministers (29 October 2025, ICC) ICC Secretary General John W.H. Denton AO outlines the business priorities for COP30: investment-ready climate plans, a global goal on adaptation, and a finance implementation plan to deliver growth and resilience. COP30 Key ICC Messages and Strategy (October 2025, ICC) ICC’s roadmap for Belém sets out how to scale climate finance, drive private investment in adaptation, and strengthen carbon market integrity — turning the “opportunity of a lifetime” into tangible action. The opportunity to align Basel’s global banking rules with climate needs Basel III made the financial system sturdier after the 2008 crisis. But rules built to prevent a repeat of the last financial crisis now risk slowing the climate transition. Emerging markets need hundreds of billions annually for the world to meet climate targets and stay on a net-zero path. With rule clarifications, targeted adjustments and smart reforms, a unique opportunity presents itself to align financial stability with climate needs and unlock vital private capital.

< Back < Previous | Next > Geopolitics Dissecting the trade war: The response, new data and cautious optimism Chris Southworth 1 May 2025 President Trump’s trade war has disrupted global trade, but according to Chris Southworth (ICC UK), it also presents an opportunity for other countries—who make up the bulk of global trade—to strengthen cooperation, accelerate digitalisation, and build a more resilient system. Chris Southworth The current uncertainties facing global trade are well known. We wanted to look further, to find out how global business should respond to President Trump’s trade war. So we contacted Chris Southworth, Secretary General of ICC United Kingdom . Here below are our main takeaways from this conversation. The current situation “At the macro level, this is an acceleration of a change in the world order on an epic scale. Looking at the US from a business point of view, it’s completely chaotic. You don’t know what’s happening from one day to the next. It’s almost an impossible business environment.” It’s bad, but not that bad.... “Don’t forget that the US only represents 13% of global trade. We need to focus on the remaining 87% of the global trade system, which does not want a trade war. We want to continue and support the multilateral system and support the flow of trade. And then if you look at shipping, it’s even more stark. The US only has 0.6% of flagged global ships: they’re a tiny fraction of the global system. While the US does have the ability to disrupt everybody, they do not have the ability to dismantle trade. The most important thing right now is how the rest of the world reacts.” The required response “We need to pull together as a global community. All the regional blocks – the B-20, the EU, Africa, the CPTPP, the Commonwealth. Shifting from a reactive to a proactive response, I think we are going to see quite a dramatic change in the way we trade. While Europe and China can stand on their own two feet, this will be about the role of the ‘mid-powers’ – countries like Japan, Singapore, UK, Australia and Canada – to work with emerging markets to minimise the damage as much as possible. This is when multilateral dialogue is so important in trade reform.” And the response is already happening “The latest data from CIPS [the global procurement managers organisation] shows what we’re already seeing on a company level. 35% of procurement managers are already sourcing products outside of the US. This is a huge number of companies that are rerouting their trade. The big loser is the US, not everybody else.” Brexit déjà vu “Here in the UK, we have déjà vu. For us, it was Brexit; what you’re seeing in the market is exactly the same. Procurement managers excluded mainland UK and went straight to Europe directly – it’s just how business adapts. The difference is that the current situation is on steroids: it’s on a whole different scale.” The importance of agility (something that digitalisation provides) “In this hugely unpredictable trade environment in which tariffs are coming and going, companies need to be agile. And those companies that are transacting digitally are more agile. They can respond to changes, move goods and cash faster, with the transparency they need in the supply chain. From our perspective, the current situation is the catalyst for the digitalisation of trade. Companies need to reduce costs and risks while boosting agility and resilience. Digitalisation is the toolbox that companies need in order to do those things.” Ending on a (cautiously) optimistic note “This is obviously a very challenging situation. However, it’s just another aspect of shifting global politics and world order. It’s sad to see the US doing what they’re doing, but the world moves on, business will adapt. But it is also a massive opportunity for the rest of us to really get our act together and rethink the way we are trading. We need to step up and strengthen our international relations, broadening our export markets, and start digitalising trade at real speed. Let’s take the opportunities that are in front of us and capitalise on them. In the long run, we’ll be stronger.”