Search Results

< Back < Previous | Next > Dispute Resolution New 2024 Preliminary Figures on Dispute Resolution Released 21 Feb 2025 The role of mediation in dispute resolution Wanting to learn more about the role of mediation in dispute resolution, we spoke to dispute resolution expert Jeremy Lack. We quickly discovered that this was a subject that was as complex as it was interesting. That’s why we decided to divide our interview over two editions of the newsletter. You can read part one here . And below is part two, which looks closer at how the three main aspects of mediation – “there’s a social component, an emotional, and a rational component,” says Jeremy – relate to issues such as confidentiality, trust building, and the psychological tools and barriers to mediation. Let’s continue by talking about confidentiality in mediation; how should that be handled? It is important to understand the level of confidentiality required by the parties in each case, as this can vary depending on the nature of the dispute and the individuals involved. In general, there are two levels of confidentiality in mediation to consider. There’s confidentiality vis-à-vis the outside world, which relates to the existence of the dispute, the existence of the process itself and what was said during the process. The principle is that whatever happens in mediation should not be admissible in any other proceedings. And then there’s the confidentiality of what happens within the mediation itself to ensure what is disclosed by one participant in a private session is not repeated to another participant without prior consent. This can include questions relating to the need for confidentiality as between those who attend the mediation and those who do not, even if they are involved. As for mediators themselves, depending on which organisation they are affiliated to or the country they may be regulated by, confidentiality may vary, it being a professional obligation in most countries, but not everywhere. There can also be confusion in some high-profile cases between the desire for transparency regarding the final outcome, and the need for the confidentiality of the negotiations that led to that outcome. By belonging to the International Mediation Institute, for example, a mediator is automatically bound by a code of conduct that automatically entails strict confidentiality worldwide. Besides professional affiliations, in your opinion, what character traits does a good mediator possess? Inquisitiveness, curiosity and the ability to ask open-ended questions are important attributes for a good mediator, along with the ability to leave your ego at the door and truly listen with an open mind. There is also a social component: one of the most difficult things can be getting meaningful conversations going between people who haven’t spoken much or who greatly distrust or are angry with one-another, to help them get through the process together. This is particularly important if the disputants may need to continue working together in the future, or if they work in a close-knit ecosystem where they are likely to meet again. A mediator must also know when to follow and when to lead. A good mediator is analogous to a good bus driver: they need to make sure they know where the travellers are headed, that all the passengers are on board, and that everyone reaches their intended destination. And what methods do you use to create an environment of trust and collaboration? In a mediation, you want to come with open questions and have all of the participants feel equally seen and heard. You want to find out as much as you can about the needs, interests, concerns, and motivations of everybody involved. This is because, the more you understand their underlying goals, beyond the positions they may have taken, the more room there is for a solution. Exchanging information on such subjective factors often helps promote a sense of trust and collaboration. There’s an arsenal of tools you can use; the more you know when and how to use all the tools, the better off you are, adjusting to whatever is needed, which calls for flexibility. Is mediation almost a psychological exercise? Yes. I am not a psychologist, but for me, there are three different aspects to mediation that could be described as psychological. There’s a social component, an emotional component, and a rational component. The mediator has to build on all three of these aspects, which can require different psychological approaches. Mediation is not a form of therapy, however. We don’t try to change people or their behaviour. We try and help focus their attentions in situations of conflict on what truly matters now, what their alternatives are, and what options are available and most likely to better resolve the conflict more holistically, keeping an eye on the future. Is mediation suited to everyone? Are there any psychological barriers to overcome? It is rare that mediation is ill-suited to a dispute. It is an excellent complement to litigation and arbitration in almost all cases. There are all sorts of psychological barriers to mediation, however. First, people tend to think they are good negotiators, and if they could not reach a settlement, a mediator is unlikely to add any value. The statistics, however, are that over 70% of mediations (which almost always involve failed past negotiations) settle. Another of these is the fear of looking weak, the concern that: “If I say I want to mediate, it looks like I want to settle”. There can also be the belief that the other party will act in bad faith; or that mediation simply entails replacing one already-breached agreement with another. Mediated settlement agreements are rarely not complied with, however, and there is growing interest in being able to have them recognised and enforced internationally under the Singapore Convention or under the New York Convention. There may also be a general feeling of distrust of the mediation process from lawyers and judges who are not used to it, and a preference for more traditional procedures, but the reality is that most lawyers and judges agree that traditional access to justice on its own tends to take too long, be too expensive or destructive. Where does conciliation fit into the dispute resolution mix? How does it differ from mediation? Conciliation and mediation both involve negotiation facilitated by a neutral third party, yet they differ significantly in role, structure, impact, and focus. They are ‘first cousins’ rather than ‘siblings’,each suited to distinct contexts and objectives. Conciliation is typically a structured, evaluative process, often mandated by courts, particularly in civil-law jurisdictions, aimed primarily at financial settlements without ongoing relationships. The conciliator assesses legal merits, reality-tests positions, and frequently proposes settlements. This formal structure tends to activate competitive dynamics (‘out-of-group’ heuristics), prompting parties to position themselves strategically, anticipating and trying to influence the conciliator's recommendations. Conciliation usually yields lower settlement rates (50–60% in court-mandated settings). In contrast, mediation is facilitative, flexible, and less formal, emphasising dialogue and self-determination. Mediators typically refrain from proposing settlements, instead activating ‘in-group’ heuristics that encourage empathy, collaborative behaviour, and greater mutual understanding. Mediation effectively addresses emotional and relational elements, making it ideal for commercial, family, or complex cross-border disputes where ongoing relationships matter, often achieving higher settlement rates (70–90%). In summary, conciliation assesses positions and is mainly appropriate for resolving purely financial disputes without future relationship considerations, while mediation fosters collaboration, empathy, and durable agreements, particularly when relationships and subjective interests are important. When combined using two separate ADR neutrals, they provide almost 100% settlement rates. We understand that you have participated in research into the neuroscience of mediation. Can you tell us more about that? I am fortunate to have collaborated with a group of neuroscientists at the University of Geneva's Centre for Interdisciplinary Affective Sciences (CISA) to help them design and implement experiments related to neuroscience and mediation. Although the neuroscience of mediation is very much in its early days, the more we look at the human brain, we are discovering a whole new understanding of human behaviour, in particular social, emotional and rational heuristics, particularly in the context of conflict, negotiation and mediation. As an example: the results of experiments where couples with recurring conflicts were asked to negotiate with each other or with a mediator present showed measurable differences in social and brain behaviour. This demonstrated that mediation, compared to negotiation, leads to higher satisfaction rates, settlement rates, and a greater sense of inclusion. How can findings from neuroscience help mediators and the mediation process? This increased understanding definitely has the potential to change the dynamics of mediation. I believe that as we learn more from neuroscience, mediators should be made aware of the concepts of social, emotional and cognitive plasticity, to better understand and help parties to understand and manage their emotions, social behaviour and cognitive biases in situations of conflict. For mediators working today, understanding these systems and techniques may facilitate more skilful interventions, allowing what seemed impossible before to become possible now.

< Back Stan Putter HBN Law Arbitrator Biography Stan Putter has over 15 years of experience in international arbitration. He primarily acts as counsel in international arbitration proceedings and ancillary litigation proceedings, including setting aside and enforcement actions, (ex parte) attachment proceedings, injunctions and evidence taking proceedings. He also sits as (chairman, co- and sole) arbitrator. He has been involved in around 100 arbitrations with seats and applicable laws across the globe. Stan Putter is the chairman of the Dutch Arbitration Association. Contact Details Netherlands +31 70 218 9400 Stan.Putter@hbnlawtax.com Additional Links Link About ICC Netherlands We ensure that Dutch business interests are heard and represented in international policymaking. We deliver tools and standards that simplify cross-border business like model contracts or Incoterms®. We support fair and efficient dispute resolution . Become a member Upcoming events Learn more Check our latest news! News Languages Spoken Dutch, English Specialisation Construction, Engineering, Energy, Finance, Corporate Law / M&A, Petrochemical, Technology Bar Admission(s) Credentials CV

< Back < Previous | Next > How to scale private finance for adaptation and unlock new business opportunities 28 Jul 2025 As the frequency and severity of climate-related events escalate, there is a growing consensus that mitigation alone is insufficient. Adaptation must play a central role in securing resilience. To support this shift, the new ICC-commissioned Oxera report assesses how the private sector’s role in climate adaptation can be strengthened and scaled. The report is intended to inform ICC’s advocacy as the official UNFCCC Focal Point for Business and Industry in the lead-up to COP30 in Belém. Adaptation cannot wait: why the private sector matters Climate change is already causing severe economic damage globally. A 2024 Oxera study for the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), the world’s business organisation, found that extreme weather events resulted in US$2 trillion in economic losses between 2014-2023 , directly affecting 1.6 billion people . Annual damages are rising rapidly, reaching US$451 billion in 2022-2023 alone. Adaptation must match mitigation in urgency – and investing today is critical to reducing escalating future losses. While global mitigation finance hit US$1.3 trillion in 2022 , adaptation finance totalled just US$76 billion – only 8% of which came from the private sector, compared to 54% for mitigation. While no country is spared from climate-related disasters, developing countries are hardest hit – and least equipped to respond. In 2022, small island and least developed states paid over twice as much in debt service (US$59 billion) as they received in climate finance (US$28 billion). Public finance remains far below what is needed. The Glasgow Climate Pact urged developed countries to double adaptation finance to developing countries from 2019 levels by 2025 – but even if met, this would cover only a small amount of the estimated US$203-388 billion required annually in those countries. Public resources alone cannot meet the scale of the challenge – and this opens an opportunity for the private sector to step up and work with governments to drive the innovation and investment needed to build resilience at speed and scale. The private sector has both the determination and capacity to deliver scalable, locally rooted adaptation – particularly where it owns or depends on vulnerable assets and infrastructure. Key barriers blocking private sector investment Information barriers: Uncertainty about where, when and how climate risks will materialise hampers investment planning and risk pricing. Limited disclosure of climate risk exposure – only 35% of companies globally have disclosed an adaptation plan – restricts information sharing across markets. Lack of shared metrics and taxonomies for adaptation makes it difficult to compare costs and benefits, assess returns or standardise financial instruments. Institutional and regulatory barriers: Unclear policy signals – including National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) that often lack clarity on private sector roles and incentives – deter long-term investment. Limited public-private collaboration and rigid regulations delay project design, approval and implementation. Constrained access to capital and lack of technical capacity block investment, especially in developing economies. Financial barriers: Low or indirect return and unpredictable cash flows limit investment appetite. High political and regulatory risks, long time horizons and limited exit options, deter financing – especially under current prudential frameworks that do not adequately reflect the benefits of climate resilience. Fragmented and highly-localised projects limit scalability and complicate collaboration across actors. What is working: turning opportunity into scalable solutions Insurance innovations: concessional insurance premia and public-private collaboration – such as the Climate Insurance Linked Resilient Infrastructure Financing (CILRIF) initiative or Flood Re in the UK – create incentives for resilient investments while pooling risk to attract private capital. Parametric insurance offers fast payouts and crucial post-disaster liquidity, reducing financing costs and unlocking investment. Blended finance: structures combining concessional finance, risk sharing and technical assistance can unlock private investment, like the Africa Rural Climate Adaptation Finance Mechanism (ARCAFIM) – a Green Climate Fund (GCF) backed mechanism in East Africa that blends public and private capital to scale smallholder adaptation finance. Adaptation and resilience bonds: aggregated bond structures – such as European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) Resilience Bonds – pool multiple adaptation projects into a single investment vehicle to attract institutional investors. By increasing scale and improving risk-return profiles, they can help overcome common financing barriers for smaller, localised adaptation initiatives. Digital platforms and open data : tools like Oasis Hub and geospatial risk models help reduce uncertainty and guide investment. In addition to supporting these efforts, ICC will collect and share success stories and business experiences in scaling adaptation and mobilising finance for it through its Global Climate Opportunity Campaign , helping to amplify what works and inspire broader replication. Policy recommendations for governments and regulators At COP30 in Belém, ICC calls on governments to forge a robust and coordinated policy agenda that brings together all relevant stakeholders – including multilateral development banks, financial regulators, business, financial and insurance actors – to scale private finance for adaptation and support the implementation of the Global Goal on Adaptation. This agenda should prioritise the following three key action areas: Strengthen climate risk information and transparency Build access to high-quality, open, climate risk data. Mandate disclosure of physical climate risk exposures proportionate to firm size and risk in both operations and supply chains. Providing sector-specific templates to guide reporting will be key in this regard. Support convergence and standardisation of adaptation metrics and taxonomies (building on UNFCCC and standard bodies’ work). Establish enabling institutions and regulatory incentives Include businesses explicitly in National Adaptation Plan (NAP) design and implementation – including through procurement frameworks, public-private partnerships and regulatory sandboxes. Clarify antitrust exemptions to enable pre-competitive collaboration on adaptation solutions. Adjust capital requirements and credit ratings to reward climate-resilient investments and reflect physical risk reductions. Scale adaptation finance with innovative instruments Support multilateral development banks and development finance institutions, working hand in hand with financial and insurance actors to expand the use of blended finance, resilience bonds and insurance-linked instruments to de-risk private investment in adaptation. Promote the design and deployment of structured financial vehicles, such as adaptation bonds, underpinned by robust metrics and repayment models linked to avoided losses or service delivery outcomes. Recognise the critical role of insurers and financial actors in climate adaptation by leveraging their unique data, expertise and risk-modelling capabilities. Establishing formal frameworks for public–private partnerships with insurers to prevent coverage retreat in high-risk areas and ensure continued financial protection for vulnerable communities is also important. This report and summary are part of ICC’s Opportunity of a Lifetime climate campaign, in the lead up to COP30 in Belém, Brazil. Learn more about our call for policy change and how to get involved.

< Back < Previous | Next > Global trade – an urgent need for reform Tom Scott 1 Sept 2025 Global trade is at a crossroads. Rising protectionism, geopolitical tensions and stalled reforms threaten the stability of the rules-based system that underpins Dutch and international business. In this interview, Valerie Picard, ICC’s Head of Trade, explains why urgent WTO reform is needed, what “revitalising the global trading system” means in practice, and how Dutch companies can play a leadership role in shaping the future of trade. Valerie Picard is the Head of Trade at the global offices of the International Chamber of Commerce. We caught up with her to get some answers to some of our pressing questions about the current state of global trade. The international trade environment is always changing. However, 2025 has been especially turbulent and unpredictable. How is the International Chamber of Commerce responding to this? The events of earlier this year certainly represent in many ways a shock: a seismic moment in the global trading system. But they also cannot be viewed in isolation. They are part of a longer trend of rising protectionism, mounting geopolitical tensions and other structural shifts that have been building for more than a decade. The steady increase of trade barriers since the 2007-2008 financial crisis is a clear illustration of this pattern. At ICC, we see this as a pivotal moment. It’s an opportunity to finally address the long-standing challenges that have been holding the global trading system back. As the voice of global business community, ICC has long been calling for reform of the multilateral trading system, echoing the call from businesses of every size and sector across the world that predictable, rules-based trade is the foundation of growth, innovation, and resilient supply chains. For years, we have stressed the need for new rules that incorporate the real‑world perspective of businesses, a fully functioning dispute settlement system, and transparency among other things: At the WTO’s last Ministerial Conference, we made the case for holistic reform of the WTO in order to put the global trading system back on solid footing. Looking ahead to the next Ministerial Conference, we are calling for a serious commitment from members to revitalize the global trading system – this time with the utmost urgency. There needs to be a structured and coherent process, even if it begins with a representative subset of members. And it can’t wait. At the same time, renewing the WTO Moratorium on Customs Duties on Electronic Transmissions is critical. It keeps digital trade predictable and free from tariffs, enabling businesses, particularly SMEs, to participate in the global digital economy without added costs or complexity. It also provides the stability and certainty that investors look for, helping economies attract and retain foreign direct investment. Letting the Moratorium lapse would inject damaging uncertainty and unpredictability into the trading system, create new tariff and non-tariff barriers, and risk further fragmenting the digital economy at a time when stability is needed most. What do you mean by “revitalizing the global trading system”? It means bringing the global trading system into the 21st century so it delivers for the businesses that use it every day. That’s about restoring trust, predictability, and stability, but also updating the rules so they reflect today’s modern business realities and making sure the system works for businesses of all sizes, everywhere. You mention the WTO. How do the challenges that this organisation faces fit in with the current state of affairs? There’s a serious challenge not just to the WTO but to the rules-based system as a whole. That’s a problem, because this framework underpins how global trade actually works. And the reality is, there’s no plan B. Nothing else exists that can provide the stability, predictability, and common rules that businesses rely on every day. While it’s easy to focus on what isn’t working, let’s not forget that the current system provides incredible value to traders across the world, particularly in developing economies. Research commissioned by the ICC and conducted by Oxford Economics shows that the collapse of the WTO-based system could lead to a 33% decline in non‑fuel goods trade across developing countries, with low-income nations seeing up to 43% losses, and an overall GDP drop exceeding 5%. That is a powerful reminder that today’s multilateral framework, with all its imperfections, continues to be vital. The reality is that, in today’s geopolitical environment, it would be impossible to recreate the WTO or build anything close to what exists today. From the business perspective, the reason the system was created, which is the certainty and predictability that it offers, is still as relevant and critical today as ever. Its foundational principles – equal treatment for all trading partners, non-discrimination, and the predictability that comes with clear, enforceable rules-based commitments – remain essential for businesses operating across borders. Can we talk about sustainability. What are the major issues and are sustainable directives even possible? First of all, we believe that sustainable directives are achievable but they need political will, real coordination, and meaningful input from business during their design and roll-out. What we don’t need is a patchwork of competing regulations that create uncertainty, complexity and added costs. That’s why we’ve put forward principles for how to design an effective Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), which have been recognised by governments and international organisations as a practical reference point. Another area where we have been very active is on the circular economy. We think there is a tremendous opportunity for new business models in the circular economy , but trade barriers are blocking the way. Making the circular economy work requires closer cooperation to align standards and regulations, harmonized laws to enable the smoother flow of secondary materials, technical expertise in policymaking to ensure solutions are practical, and updates to international frameworks such as the Basel Convention to better support circular material flows. A third priority is removing barriers to environmental goods and services. Ensuring businesses can access the technologies, services, and expertise needed for the green transition is essential to driving sustainable growth and innovation at scale. You talk about the need for multilateral agreements. But in a previous answer, you described the erosion of the current rules-based system. Those two don’t go hand in hand. That’s exactly why we’re talking about revitalizing the system – to make it fit for purpose again. The system isn’t delivering the way it should, and that has to change. There’s a long list of issues that need to be addressed and a serious negotiating agenda to be worked through, but the starting point has to be a shared commitment to rebuild trust and modernize the framework so it can actually deliver for business and the global economy. Let’s turn our attention to the Netherlands. What role do you see for Dutch companies in revitalizing the system? The Netherlands has a tremendous amount of trade knowledge and customs expertise. Dutch businesses on the front lines of global trade. As operators in one of the world’s busiest trading hubs, with deep expertise in logistics, customs, and compliance, you see firsthand how rules, disruptions, and uncertainty play out in global supply chains. That gives you a unique perspective – from the realities facing SMEs integrated into global value chains to the opportunities and challenges of digitalization and the green transition. In today’s environment, governments and businesses need to work together more closely than ever. At ICC, we’re making the case globally for a strong and open multilateral trading system, but that voice is strongest when our members actively engage, bringing their real-world experience to shape practical, credible solutions. Dutch businesses, in particular, are well placed to take a leadership role – not just at home but internationally – by sharing what they see on the front lines, offering practical solutions, and standing up for the system that underpins their ability to trade and invest across borders with confidence.

< Back < Previous | Next > ICC Netherlands welcomes adoption of eBL legislation 1 Apr 2026 Electronic bills of lading now legally recognised under Dutch law, supporting faster and safer trade flows ICC Netherlands welcomes adoption of eBL legislation Electronic bills of lading now legally recognised under Dutch law, supporting faster and safer trade flows ICC Netherlands welcomes yesterday’s adoption of legislation recognizing the legal validity of electronic bills of lading (eBLs), marking a milestone toward the digitalization of international trade. The reform ensures that eBLs attain functional equivalence with conventional paper bills of lading under Dutch law, providing businesses with legal certainty in domestic and international freight transport. A bill of lading plays a central role in global trade, serving as a document of title, a contract of carriage, and a receipt for the goods. Historically, the physical transfer of paper bills among multiple parties has slowed transactions and increased exposure to errors, loss and fraud. The shift to eBLs has the potential to transform trade operations by overcoming the limitations of paper-based documentation. “With eBLs, documents can be transferred instantly, accelerating trade flows and reducing transaction times from days to hours,” says ICC Netherlands Director General Laure Jacquier. “At the same time, eBLs improve security by minimising the risks of fraud, duplication and loss. They also support sustainability by cutting paper use and energy consumption.” Until now, Dutch trade had largely centred on paper-based documentation, while several leading economies have already incorporated electronic transferable records into domestic law. By formally recognizing eBLs, the reform brings Dutch trade law closer to international digital trade standards, aligning with the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Transferable Records (MLETR). ICC Netherlands has long advocated for the digitalization of trade and views today’s reform as a critical first step. While the legislation is limited in scope, addressing bills of lading only, further legal recognition will be needed to cover other transferable trade documents. Achieving this will also require interoperability across digital platforms and jurisdictions, alignment of standards, and active adoption among key stakeholders. Jacquier concludes: “ICC Netherlands will continue to work closely with government and industry to accelerate this transition toward secure, interoperable and fully digital trade that will strengthen the Netherlands’ position in the global economy.” About MLETR The UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Transferable Records (MLETR), adopted in 2017, is the leading international framework for enabling the legal use of electronic transferable documents in trade, such as electronic bills of lading. It establishes that electronic records can have the same legal effect as paper-based documents, based on the principles of functional equivalence, technology neutrality, and the use of exclusive control over a digital record as a substitute for physical possession. MLETR supports the development of secure, interoperable digital trade systems across jurisdictions. De adoptie van de UNCITRAL‘Model Law on Electronic Transferable Records’ in NL (6) .pdf Download PDF • 3.28MB EN- Executive summary - Electronic transferable records (1) .pdf Download PDF • 1.84MB

404 Looks like this page no longer exists. Back to Homepage

We can’t find the page you’re looking for This page doesn’t exist. Go to Home and keep exploring. Go to Home

< Back DSI Legal Reform Advisory Board announces new Chair ICC DSI Feb 2, 2024 The International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) Digital Standards Initiative (DSI) has announced the appointment of Oliver Wieck, Secretary General of ICC Germany, as the new Chair of the DSI Legal Reform Advisory Board. Mr Wieck is joined by three Vice-Chairs: Luca Castellani, legal officer of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) and one of the drafters of the Model Law on Electronic Transferrable Records; Vashti Maharaj, Head of Digital Trade Policy with the Commonwealth; and Chantal Ononaiwu, Trade Policy and Legal Specialist Office of Trade Negotiations from the Caribbean Community (CARICOM). ICC Executive Board member Valentina Mintah steps down from her role as Co-Chair having served on the Legal Reform Advisory Board since 2022. Since its inception in January 2022, the Legal Reform Advisory Board has played a pivotal role in the global campaign to remove legal barriers to seamless digital trade, and engage countries and policymakers in creating an enabling policy environment for digital trade to take root. John Denton, ICC Secretary General said: “The DSI Legal Reform Advisory Board leadership has a huge amount of expertise, and truly global reach, on the issue of legal reform. We look forward to supporting them in their advocacy work towards sustainable, inclusive, digital trade. The momentum is real, and 2024 will be pivotal.” The Legal Reform Advisory Board, which brings together a wide range of policy, legal, and financial expertise on trade digitalization, was instrumental in creating a monitoring framework to track global alignment to Model Law on Electronic Transferrable Records (MLETR). Mr Wieck, who has been serving as Interim Chair since September 2023, said: “As a representative of ICC’s national committees in the Legal Reform Advisory Board, I am very excited to contribute to shaping and promoting a globally comparable legal framework for the digitisation of global trade transactions.” Mr Castellani said: “I look forward to contributing to the work of ICC DSI on promoting the broader adoption of the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Transferable Records, and, more generally, the digital transformation of trade. It is particularly important to include developing countries in those efforts in order to mitigate the digital divides.” Ms Maharaj said: “Within the Commonwealth legal reform to digitalize trade can be a true catalyst and game changer, particularly for developing states and it is my sincere honour to contribute to the dynamic work of the Legal Reform Advisory Board in creating a globally interoperable, integrated and enabling legal environment for trade facilitation.” Ms Ononaiwu said: “Trade Policy and Legal Specialist Office of Trade Negotiations from CARICOM, “I look forward to supporting the efforts of the Legal Reform Advisory Board to promote an enabling legal environment for paperless trade, which can greatly benefit small economies, like those in CARICOM, that are highly dependent on trade.” For more information about the ICC DSI, including tools and reports, please visit https://www.dsi.iccwbo.org/ . For business. For you. Previous Next

< Back G20 engagement ICC WBO Feb 2, 2024 News from the G20 Engagement in Brazil. John Denton was in Brazil this week for the opening ceremony of the B20, the business engagement group of the G20. Appointed Co-Chair of the B20 task force on Finance and Infrastructure, John was invited to address the role of global policies to enable business in a changing geopolitical and environmental landscape ( see photos ). Among other B20 Task Force or Action Council Co-Chairs announced this week are ICC Chair Maria Fernanda Garza (Integrity and Compliance), ICC Board Member Lama Al-Sulaiman (Employment and Education), and World Chambers Federation Vice-Chair Marie Christine Oghly (Women, Diversity and Inclusion in Business). John underscored the role of the private sector in unlocking diplomatic negotiations within the G20 in this interview with leading Brazilian newspaper O Globo. Previous Next

< Back Clock is ticking for future of e-commerce and digital trade ICC WBO Jan 24, 2024 A World Trade Organization (WTO) moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions is set to expire in February. Without its renewal, the future of e-commerce and digital trade hangs in the balance. The WTO E-Commerce Moratorium will lapse unless WTO members agree to renew it at the WTO’s upcoming 13th Ministerial Conference, which is set to take place next month on 26-29 February in Abu Dhabi. ICC is calling on all WTO members to renew the agreement and has been making the case for its permanent adoption. Without an extension, governments could start to experiment with unilateral tariffs on everything from software, digital payments, and cloud services to the data supporting popular streaming services, disrupting the digital economy and driving up the cost of digital services that businesses across the world depend on to run and grow their operations. ICC Secretary General John W.H. Denton AO said: “ The Moratorium is a critical safeguard and allowing it to lapse would be a historical setback, hurting small businesses and consumers the most, driving up costs and reducing access to knowledge, information, and digital tools. Not only would such a move add to a damaging pattern of escalating tariffs; it would also wreak potential havoc on the online economy. Tariffs really could ‘break the Internet’.” The Moratorium has been in place since the WTO’s Second Ministerial Conference in 1998. Since then, governments have agreed to extend it at the biennial WTO Ministerial Conference. While lacking a specific definition, the term “electronic transmissions” is generally understood to mean anything from software to digital music, movies, and video games. The moratorium has played an important role in the development of the Internet by keeping tariffs off digitally delivered products, services and content. “The agreement has played a hidden – but vital – role in the growth of the Internet economy over the past two decades shielding the Internet from distortions and disruptions induced by levies at national borders. We urge governments to ensure that the moratorium is renewed at MC13 next month,” said Mr Denton. Read more about the WTO E-Commerce Moratorium here . Previous Next

< Back WTO Moratorium on Customs Duties on Electronic Transmissions ICC WBO Feb 2, 2024 The International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) has joined a global coalition of industry associations in a united call to renew the pivotal digital safeguard. ICC and over 170 business associations from across the world are calling on members of the World Trade Organization (WTO) to renew the WTO Moratorium on Customs Duties on Electronic Transmissions at the WTO’s upcoming 13th Ministerial Conference, which will take place in Abu Dhabi, UAE on 26-29 February 2024. Without the renewal, the future of e-commerce and digital trade hangs in the balance. Governments could start to experiment with unilateral tariffs on everything from software, e-books, and cloud services to the data underlying popular streaming services, disrupting the digital economy and creating havoc for businesses across the world who all depend on the Moratorium to grow and operate their businesses. The Global Industry Statement highlights that allowing the Moratorium to expire would be a historic setback for the WTO, representing an unprecedented termination of a multilateral agreement in place since 1998, which is more critical than ever at a time of unprecedented digital transformation. The statement further states that continuation of the Moratorium is critical to ongoing COVID-19 recovery, supply chain resilience and particularly beneficial to micro-, small- and medium-sized enterprises. It refers to recent studies that have demonstrated that any foregone revenue losses from the Moratorium are outweighed by the social, development and fiscal benefits arising from the growth of digital services. For business. For you. Previous Next

< Back Celebrating World Customs Day 2024 ICC WCO Jan 26, 2024 It’s World Customs Day, celebrated in 2024 under the theme ‘Customs Engaging Traditional and New Partners with Purpose.’ Businesses worldwide rely on efficient Customs regimes and smooth logistics when exporting and importing goods. That is why, as a long-time partner of the World Customs Organization, ICC helps drive the harmonisation and facilitation of customs procedures in line with our mission to business work for everyone, every day, everywhere. Here are just some of the ways in which we promote trade facilitation and customs modernisation, and help businesses get goods moving across borders. ATA Carnets – working like a passport for goods ATA Carnets are a trusted standard procedure administered by the ICC World Chambers Federation. They eliminate taxes and duties for the temporary import of almost all kinds of goods. For the 2022 Beijing Winter Olympics and Paralympics in 2022, more than 118,000 pieces of equipment, from 34 countries, valued at US$94 million were temporarily imported into China. Issued worldwide every year for goods valued at US$25 billion, the ATA will be going for gold again in 2024 as the Olympic games and Paralympics head to Paris. What’s more, the world’s first fully digital ATA Carnet was used in 2023 to complete an entire customs journey using the digital ATA Carnet system pioneered by ICC. ICC Genesis Help is at hand for exporters, importers and customs authorities to reduce fraud risks and facilitate smoother customs checks with our groundbreaking Genesis verification tool. Genesis is a digital certifying tool, launched by ICC in 2022, to enable exporters to obtain the certification of their preferential origin statement on invoice declarations from a chamber of commerce. Through the World Chambers Federation, ICC provides an international Certificate of Origin accreditation chain system for chambers of commerce and has established international standards, rules and procedures that reinforce the trust and integrity of the CO Chain, to the benefit of traders and Customs administrations alike. Our Certificate of Origin verification website, allows chambers of commerce and customs authorities to confirm the authenticity and validity of COs issued by accredited chambers. Incoterms® Rules – the daily language of trade Incoterms® rules are ICC’s globally recognised trade terms supporting the efficient clearance of goods through customs by clarifying the tasks, costs and risks involved in the delivery of goods from sellers to buyers. Incorporated in contracts for the sale of goods worldwide, the Incoterm rules provide a common language for trade, providing guidance to importers and exporters and helping trading partners avoid potential misunderstandings. Learn more about ICC’s range of trade tools facilitate cross-border transactions Previous Next