Search Results

< Back Professor Dr Henricus J. Snijders Snijders Law and Leiden University Arbitrator Biography Professor Dr Henricus Joseph (Henk) Snijders is an Emeritus Professor of Civil Law and Civil Procedure, with a distinguished career in academia and legal practice. Prof. Snijders serves as an arbitrator for prestigious institutions including the Netherlands Arbitration Institute (NAI) and the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC). He is also a legal advisor and legal expert, often issuing legal opinions in both state court and arbitral procedures. He represents the Netherlands in the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) and in particular Working Group IDR of this commission. He is deeply involved in legal scholarship as an author and editor of numerous books and articles, and he holds key editorial roles in several legal publications. He is a chairman and board member of various legal and academic organizations, contributing to the development and regulation of civil law and arbitration practices. His previous positions include lawyer and barrister at the Dutch Supreme Court, Professor at Erasmus University Rotterdam and Leiden University, Scientific Director of the Leiden Institute of Private Law, deputy judge at the District Court of The Hague and deputy judge of the Court of Appeal at Arnhem, member of the Working Group for the revision of the Dutch Arbitration Act 1986 and chairman of the Advisory Board of the Netherlands Arbitration Institute. Prof. Snijders' contributions to legal scholarship and practice are complemented by his roles as a patron and board member of multiple legal associations and his continued engagement in teaching and course coordination especially in the field of arbitration. In his spare time, he enjoys playing the violin and traveling. Contact Details Netherlands +31 (0)64 828 0773 law@hjsnijders.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, German, French Specialisation Arbitration Law, Civil Procedures, Contracts, Property Law, Tort Law Bar Admission(s) Credentials CV

< 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 > Taxes Shaping the Future of Global Tax: ICC Commission Charts a Course Amid Rising Fragmentation 1 Apr 2025 UN-led tax reforms, digital economy protocols, and OECD challenges headline a pivotal Commission meeting. The ICC Taxation Commission’s March 2025 meeting convened at a critical moment for global tax policy. Against the backdrop of growing geopolitical instability and fragmentation in international trade, ICC members gathered to address urgent developments in global taxation frameworks, digital economy protocols, and regional policy shifts. Trade Turbulence and Strategic Advocacy Opening the session, Andrew Wilson (ICC Vice-Secretary General) and Valerie Picard (ICC Head of Trade) addressed a key concern: the erosion of multilateralism driven by unilateral trade measures, particularly from the U.S. While the core trade stance hasn’t dramatically changed, the implementation is now more aggressive and less internally contested. This “louder, more coordinated” approach risks hardening global divides and undermining established multilateral institutions. In response, the ICC is stepping up its advocacy efforts, producing foundational papers—such as on VAT—that provide clarity and are being actively used by member states in their policy dialogues. UN Tax Convention: Inclusive, But Complex Michael Braun (Germany UN Mission) shared an update on the UN process to establish a framework convention for international tax cooperation. Spurred by growing calls from developing nations, the convention aims to rebalance rule-making power and build a more inclusive and equitable tax framework. The process now moves into a drafting phase following the adoption of the Terms of Reference in 2024, which laid out three pillars: a framework convention, a protocol on digital services taxation, and another on dispute prevention. The structure includes three workstreams, co-led by representatives from the Global South. While the Terms of Reference do not formally embed stakeholder engagement, ICC is pushing for structured business input, emphasizing that private sector expertise is crucial to ensuring practical, implementable rules. The OECD Debate: Pillar Two and Compliance Burdens In parallel, the OECD’s Pillar Two implementation sparked intense debate. Business representatives flagged compliance costs, especially for low-risk jurisdictions, and questioned the added value of full model rules in such cases. ICC presented a proposal for permanent safe harbors based on country-level data and simplified reporting, aimed at lowering compliance costs while maintaining tax integrity. Although the idea gained some support, concerns about erosion of tax bases persist among certain jurisdictions. ICC called for urgent high-level government engagement to maintain momentum and promote a practical, stable system. Regional Insights and Diverging Trajectories Regional sessions showcased both alignment and divergence. In the Asia-Pacific, the Belt and Road Initiative tax platform highlighted progress in digitalization and capacity building. Meanwhile, the EU is focusing on simplification and competitiveness, with the European Commission reviewing directives for redundancy in light of Pillar Two’s global uptake. Africa, represented by Thulani Shongwe (ATAF), spotlighted VAT collection challenges and a growing push for regional cohesion on core tax policy positions, backed by the African Union. The U.S. position remains a wildcard. With the administration opposing some OECD rules and broader concerns about extraterritoriality, participants expressed concern over the stability of the current multilateral tax order. Beyond Structure: Substance in Focus As the UN tax convention process advances, the spotlight is shifting from structure to substance. Key issues include the scope of Article 12 on digital services, the potential for simplified allocation systems, and whether the dispute protocol will embrace binding arbitration or remain limited to prevention mechanisms. The ICC emphasized the need for clarity to avoid conflicting obligations and ensure smooth integration with existing treaties. Ongoing Projects and What’s Next The Commission’s working groups reported on ongoing initiatives including: Foreign subsidy regulations VAT treatment for cross-border telework Sustainability-linked tax policies The interaction between investment treaties and tax rules All underscored the same themes: simplicity, coherence, and coordination. Fragmented rules risk undermining both taxpayer certainty and government revenue collection. Looking ahead, ICC will play a key role in the UN’s Financing for Development Forum (FfD4) in Seville, where business engagement will address the impact of tax on development, investment, and sustainability. A new economic impact study on digital service taxation is also in the works, and ICC continues to push for inclusive dialogue as UN protocols are developed. “ The global tax landscape is being redefined, ” one participant noted, “ and ICC must be both a stabilizer and a shaper of that future . Conference Room Papers (CRPs) - 30th Session | Financing for Sustainable Development Office

< Back Marieke Witkamp Marieke Witkamp LLC Arbitrator Biography Marieke Witkamp FCIArb is a Houston based international arbitrator with an LLM in Dutch and US Law and a Texas bar license. She also holds the CIArb Diploma in International Maritime Arbitration. Marieke has a unique professional background. She is originally trained as a commercial judge in the Netherlands and became an international commercial and arbitration lawyer after moving abroad to the United States and the Middle East. She dealt with ICC arbitrations as counsel in Qatar and worked as in-house counsel in the Dutch energy industry and the sports & entertainment industry of Qatar. She is therefore familiar with every perspective when it comes to dealing with disputes: as the court, as counsel and as the client. Working on 3 continents has also given her a proper understanding of the different expectations that parties may have in cross-border disputes. Marieke’s areas of expertise are maritime, insurance, construction, energy law and post M&A disputes but she is comfortable with almost any contractual dispute that comes up. As a judge she had to deal with anything that entered her docket - she is trained to familiarize herself with new types of commercial conflicts and legal issues in a short time. Marieke’s significant experience as an arbitrator includes sitting as sole arbitrator, emergency arbitrator, party and chair arbitrator in commercial disputes with seats in the US, UK and the Netherlands. Marieke is a hands-on arbitrator who takes her responsibility to start off a procedure in the best way possible. She will customize a procedure to the parties’ needs and will take the necessary decisions to keep a procedure on track. She is often asked as chair as she is very experienced in managing cases, leading hearings and writing fair and well-reasoned awards. Marieke frequently travels to the Netherlands/Benelux and will not charge for travel expenses. Contact Details Tomball, TX 77375, Verenigde Staten +18324586340 marieke.witkamp@outlook.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 English, Dutch Specialisation Construction, Engineering, Arts,Leisure, Entertainment, Tourism, Sales, Purchases, Transport, Maritime, Pharmaceutical, Joint Ventures, Consortia, Cooperation, Insurance, Energy and Natural Resources, Distribution, Franchising, Corporate Law / M&A, Real Estate Shipbuilding Bar Admission(s) US (US Bar) Credentials CV

< Back < Previous | Next > Business Business responds to US reciprocal tariff plan 2 Apr 2025 Following the announcement of the US reciprocal tariff plan, the International Chamber of Commerce has issued a statement describing the new measures as a shock to the global trading system that need not result in a systemic crisis. Speaking on behalf of more than 45 million companies in over 170 countries, ICC Secretary General John W.H. Denton AO said: “What we’ve seen today represents a watershed moment in American trade policy that poses severe downside risks to the global economy. To put this in historical context, effective US tariff rates now stand at a level not seen since the 1930s — and cover a significantly higher proportion of American GDP than the infamous Smoot-Hawley Act. “This is, without doubt, a shock to the global trading system but it need not result in a systemic crisis. The US is an economic superpower but only accounts for 13% of global imports. How other nations respond to the new duties will ultimately determine the scale and depth of any economic fallout from “Liberation Day”. We continue to encourage governments to place an emphasis on negotiation and de-escalation to the greatest extent possible — tariff retaliation is a lose-lose game. “We are immediately concerned by the potential impact of the severe tariffs imposed on a range of emerging economies — an approach which risks further damaging the development prospects of countries already facing worsening terms of trade. “Businesses across our network will be seeking urgent clarification from the relevant US authorities on how new country-level tariffs will be applied in practice — including on how they interact with sector-specific duties and rules of origin requirements. Given the almost immediate entry into force of the new measures, there is a clear risk of costly supply chain disruptions and customs backlogs absent of express guidance being provided in a timely manner. “From a broader perspective, it’s clear that the measures announced today present a fundamental challenge to the rules-based governance of trade. In addition to responding bilaterally to the US administration, we also need to see governments taking action to safeguard the multilateral system — and set the foundations for its eventual revitalisation. “ Predictability and certainty are fundamental to cross-border commerce . We fully appreciate the US administration’s desire to secure a level playing field for international trade but remain deeply sceptical that a tariff escalation of this scale can deliver on that goal — multilateral solutions will ultimately be needed to resolve longstanding inefficiencies and inequities in the global trading system.”

< Back < Previous | Next > Sustainability Business at the Frontlines of Climate Policy 2 Apr 2025 At the ICC Global Environment & Energy Commission meeting, business leaders emphasized the urgent need for sustainable climate action amid rising geopolitical and economic uncertainties, while reaffirming the private sector’s key role in driving this transition. Looking ahead to COP30 in Brazil, ICC plans to focus on accelerating climate action, promoting sustainable trade, and advancing environmental sustainability through private finance mobilization, adaptation efforts, and coherent trade-climate policies. On 27 March, business leaders and policy experts from around the world gathered in Paris and online for the ICC Global Environment & Energy Commission meeting, navigating the turbulence of a shifting global climate landscape. With geopolitical uncertainty rising and regulatory clarity lagging, ICC reaffirmed its commitment to ensuring the private sector remains an engine for sustainable transformation. The world is entering a new phase of climate and trade uncertainty, ICC is committed to ensuring business can navigate and lead through this transition. A Cooling Political Climate, Rising Economic Risks The meeting opened with a sobering macroeconomic outlook. While global growth is expected to remain stable in 2025, the real concern lies in “pandemic-level uncertainty in trade and investment”. Climate ambition is showing signs of retreat in several jurisdictions, including the US, Canada, and parts of Europe. Subsidies are being scaled back, and net-zero targets delayed. Despite this, optimism remains. China, for instance, continues to lead the global energy transition, with over 50% of global low-carbon investment now originating there. “Clean energy investment has grown by 50% in the past two years. But global efforts still fall short of what’s needed to meet the Paris Agreement.” Setting the Agenda: ICC’s 2025 Priorities Under the banner of “Solutions at Scale”, the Commission laid out a focused work plan across three priority pillars: Setting the Agenda: ICC’s 2025 Priorities Under the banner of “Solutions at Scale”, the Commission laid out a focused work plan across three priority pillars: ICC at COP30: From Dialogue to Delivery As the international community shifts its focus toward COP30 in Belém, Brazil, ICC is positioning itself to play a pivotal role in elevating the voice of business in climate negotiations. Building on the success of its engagement at past COPs, ICC will once again create space for meaningful business dialogue inside the Blue Zone, acting as the formal focal point for business and industry in the UNFCCC process. One of the highlights will be the return of the ICC COP Ship—a floating platform for high-level roundtables, bilateral exchanges, and civil society dialogues. This unique initiative, docked near the COP venue, symbolises ICC’s mission: to bridge public-private divides and unlock bold action through cooperation. “The ship is more than a venue: it’s a signal that business is not just at the table, but committed to steering climate ambition forward.” ICC’s strategic messaging heading into COP30 will centre around three pillars: “We want to help move from high-level pledges to real economy delivery, with a focus on implementation, scalability and inclusiveness.” ICC will also lead several official side events, including on climate-smart trade, SME access to finance, and the operationalisation of Article 6 carbon markets. With Brazil’s presidency emphasising equity and environmental justice, ICC aims to ensure the private sector’s contributions are recognised not only as essential, but as agents of trust, innovation, and global solidarity. “We are entering COP30 with a clear mandate: to be practical, ambitious, and united across business sectors.”

< 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 Trade Register 2025 30 Oct 2025 Built on over USD 25 trillion in transaction data, the ICC Trade Register 2025 offers the most comprehensive insight into global trade and supply chain finance. Its findings confirm trade finance as a low-risk, high-impact asset class—and show how data-driven evidence continues to shape smarter regulation, sustainability, and competitiveness worldwide. ICC Trade Register 2025 The global benchmark for trade and supply chain finance For over a decade, the ICC Trade Register has provided the most authoritative, data-driven picture of global trade and supply chain finance. With aggregated data from leading international banks, now exceeding USD 25.7 trillion in transactions , it has become the industry’s reference point for understanding risk, guiding regulation, and shaping how trade finance supports the real economy. From data to policy impact The ICC Trade Register is more than a database: it is a strategic instrument for the financial system . Its empirical evidence has influenced major prudential reforms, ensuring that trade finance receives the risk-sensitive treatment it deserves under Basel III . Over the years, ICC data has: Demonstrated the short-term, self-liquidating nature of trade finance instruments, leading to the maturity flow waiver ; Supported a reduction in Credit Conversion Factors from 50 % to 20 % for performance guarantees in the EU and UK; Secured lower Required Stable Funding under the Net Stable Funding Ratio (from 10 % to 2.5 %); Helped regulators adopt Exposure at Default (EAD) instead of full nominal values for leverage ratio calculations. These outcomes are not abstract. They translate into 30–60 % capital savings , up to 90 % reductions in expected credit loss provisions , and EUR 1–2 million in annual liquidity savings for mid-size and large banks. A clearer view of trade finance performance The 2025 edition of the Trade Register provides insight into a trade landscape being reshaped by geopolitics, digitalisation and sustainability. Its findings confirm that trade finance remains one of the lowest-risk asset classes in banking, even amid uncertainty. Key trends include: Receivables finance is now the fastest-growing trade product, projected to expand at a 5.4 % CAGR through 2033 ; Sustainable trade finance continues to rise — 3.1 % of global transactions are clearly green, and 74 % show potential sustainability alignment; Digital trade is gaining legal force, with MLETR-based legislation now covering around 10 % of global exports; Artificial intelligence is moving from pilot projects to enterprise-wide tools, improving efficiency and compliance across banking operations. These shifts underscore how technology, regulation and sustainability are converging to redefine trade finance — turning it into both a growth engine and a channel for responsible investment. Membership: data, dialogue, and influence Participating in the ICC Trade Register gives banks access to exclusive benchmarking, early insights, and a direct voice in policy discussions. Members benefit from: Early access to the complete report and datasets; Peer benchmarking of trade finance portfolios; Members-only briefings on regulatory developments; Active participation in steering discussions that guide the industry’s collective advocacy. By contributing data, member institutions help build the evidence base that underpins future engagement with the Basel Committee , the European Central Bank , and other regulators, ensuring that the risk profile of trade finance is recognised fairly and accurately. “The ICC Trade Register has become the global benchmark for our industry, providing clarity, confidence and tangible impact.”Samuel Mathew, Chair of the ICC Trade Register and Managing Director, Head of Documentary Trade at Standard Chartered Accessing the Trade Register 2025 The ICC Trade Register can be downloaded instantly and digitally via 2go.iccwbo.org .Institutions can choose from four levels of access: global overview, regional breakdown, single-region detail, or full report with Loss Given Default (LGD) data. Financial institutions that wish to contribute data or join as members can contact the ICC Trade Register team directly. Learn more ICC Trade Register 2025 Brochure – Full overview of insights, membership and access options. ICC Trade Register Strategic Preview – A closer look at the data’s regulatory influence and the 2025 outlook. ICC Banking Commission – ICC’s global rule-making body for the banking industry.

< 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.”

< 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 Martje de Vries Lentsch De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek Arbitrator Biography Martje is a partner in De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek's International Arbitration & Litigation practice. She is widely known for her expertise in commercial arbitration and complex cross-border litigation, notably in the field of energy, where she advises clients on critical strategic matters and has represented these companies in a range of arbitrations and court cases. She has 15 years of experience in the oil and gas industry. This includes in-house experience gathered during a secondment to Shell's litigation department in Houston and her role as litigator at the Houston office of Haynes & Boone. Clients value Martje as an accomplished practitioner who can advise on both legal and economic issues in highly complex disputes. She also manages highly political and sensitive disputes and negotiations, managing numerous stakeholders and interests. Martje's expertise also includes disputes related to joint ventures and collaboration agreements, and issues related to recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments and annulment of arbitral awards as well as related attachment proceedings. As a member of the ICC International Court of Arbitration (ICC), Martje actively participates in the Court’s judicial supervision of ICC arbitrations, including the appointment of arbitrators, decisions on challenges against arbitrators, and the scrutiny and approval of ICC arbitral awards. In addition, Martje is an executive board member of the Dutch Arbitration Association and included in the Netherlands Arbitration Institute (NAI) and the Shanghai Arbitration Commission’s (SAC) panels of arbitrators. Martje has been included in GAR's latest edition of its '45 under 45' – a guide to the leading younger practitioners in international arbitration. Martje’s recent work includes advising and representing: an international energy company in various gas price review arbitrations under long-term gas sales agreements under the ICC and UNCITRAL rules in English and German; an international energy company in three ICC arbitrations under New York law arising out of long-term LNG purchase contracts; energy companies in a variety of arbitration and litigation matters related to the accelerated shut-in of and damage claims in relation to the Groningen gas field; a commercial airport in legal proceedings on a large construction project; Shell before the Dutch courts in a case under Nigerian law brought by four Nigerian farmers and environmental organisation Milieudefensie related to oil spills in Nigeria, and the successful mediation between the parties Contact Details Netherlands +31 20 577 1384 martje.devrieslentsch@debrauw.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 Joint Ventures, Energy, Commercial, Collaboration Agreements, Enforcement and Annulment of Arbitral Awards Bar Admission(s) Credentials CV

< Back Bartholomeus Leijnse Leijnse Artz Arbitrator Biography Bartholomeus P.H. Leijnse (1962) graduated in Dutch law (1988) and in philosophy (1994); practicing lawyer since 1992, at Nauta Dutilh until 2001; founding partner of the boutique firm Leijnse Artz in Rotterdam (2001), focusing on commercial interests in highly regulated markets (food, consumer goods, health care and pharma). Counsel in numerous domestic and international arbitrations under various rules; chair, co-arbitrator, emergency and sole arbitrator in numerous cases in institutional (NAI, ICC, WIPO) and ad hoc arbitrations. Contact Details Netherlands +31 10 2444344 b.leijnse@leijnseartz.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 Joint Ventures, Corporate Law / M&A, Product Liability, Life Sciences and Healthcare, Shareholder Disputes, International Trade Contracts Bar Admission(s) Credentials CV