Search Results

< Back < Previous | Next > Highlights from the Week of Integrity 2025 1 Nov 2025 The Week of Integrity 2025 brought together organizations across sectors to explore how integrity strengthens culture, trust, and sustainable growth. From the launch of the new Book of Integrity to inspiring partner initiatives and thought-provoking dialogues, the week proved that integrity is a year-round capability, not just a one-week commitment. Integrity & Culture: Highlights from the Week of Integrity 2025 From 27 to 31 October, organizations across the Netherlands and beyond came together for the Week of Integrity 2025 , a week dedicated to reflection, dialogue, and action on how integrity strengthens culture, trust, and long-term business resilience. Opening: Integrity as a cultural foundation The week opened with a clear message: integrity is the cultural foundation for resilient institutions. Speakers Mirjam Bakker-Vergouw and Lousewies van der Laan highlighted the urgency of restoring trust in a polarized world. Prof. Dr. Muel Kaptein delivered an interactive keynote introducing a practical framework for measuring and managing ethical culture, setting the tone for a week focused on how integrity sustains open, just, and sustainable societies. The week also marked the launch of the seventh edition of the Book of Integrity , “Culture of Integrity” , featuring essays from business leaders and experts on how ethical culture underpins sustainable growth. The book set the tone for the discussions that followed: integrity is not just a principle, but a practice that defines how organizations lead, decide, and grow responsibly. Partner Spotlight The Week of Integrity thrives thanks to its many partners, whose creativity and engagement brought the theme to life across sectors and industries: KPMG published a five-part blog series inspired by Prof. Kaptein’s keynote, each day exploring a dimension of ethical culture—from the value of integrity and the balance between hard and soft controls, to preventing ethical complacency. Forvis Mazars launched a daily blog series analyzing corruption risks through 99 FCPA cases , covering topics like kickbacks, nepotism, shell companies, and self-reporting—concluding with a practical self-scan for organizations. Kickbacks en fictieve facturatie: zo herkent u het in de praktijk - Forvis Mazars - Nederland NIBC Bank released its updated Code of Conduct , hosted an engaging internal event with CEO Nick Jue and guest speaker Prof. Marjan Olfers , and reinforced its Speak Up culture with interactive role-plays and manager-led initiatives. Damen , in collaboration with Van Oord and SBM Offshore , organized a Compliance Champion spotlight, an open Compliance Café , and an Industry Roundtable on Culture , encouraging open dialogue and peer learning. On October 27, Geert Vermeulen from De Integriteitscoördinator and Lucianne Verweij , Business Integrity Specialist, hosted a session inviting experts to discuss Whistleblowing Management Systems and related topics such as the benefits of a speak-up culture, the value of effective speak-up mechanisms, and the associated challenges. Marijntje Zweegers , Research and Prevention Coordinator at the Dutch Whistleblowers Authority , provided insights into the role of the Huis voor Klokkenluiders, while Wim Vandekerckhove guided participants through the Speak-Up Self-Assessment (SUSA) online tool. Triple Jump encouraged employees to engage in informal lunch discussions about integrity and sustainability, helping colleagues reflect on how everyday choices shape ethical behavior. They complemented this with an Integrity Quiz and an invitation to read the Book of Integrity , featuring a contribution from their Compliance Manager, Margherita Noto . These initiatives demonstrated how integrity can be embedded across sectors, from finance and infrastructure to professional services and compliance. Seminar: Culture and Integrity in a Shifting World At the seminar “Culture and Integrity in a Shifting World” , participants explored how organizations can uphold integrity amid growing geopolitical and regulatory uncertainty. The session opened with Casper Roerade (Evofenedex) , who outlined how global trade fragmentation and political pressures are reshaping corporate governance and ethical expectations. A panel featuring Christiene Everaars , Tekla Surguladze (Magnum) , Alessandro Fontana (Saipem do Brasil) , and Angeliki Mitropoulou (SBM Offshore) — moderated by Suzanne Kröner-Rosmalen (NautaDutilh) — examined integrity challenges across global supply chains and ESG compliance. Sonia Garcia delivered a compelling keynote on the role of organizational culture and psychological safety, while Mariet de Boer and Twan Hol from the Dutch Whistleblower Authority shared practical tools to foster open, speak-up environments. Closing: Integrity as a capability The week concluded with an inspiring message from global thought leader Brett Hudson : integrity must be more than a value — it must be a capability. Hudson emphasized that ethical failures often result from structural weaknesses rather than individual flaws. He called on leaders to intentionally design systems that enable integrity under pressure and to use technology, including AI, responsibly, as a support for human judgment and values. The Week of Integrity 2025 once again proved that integrity is not only about compliance but about culture, leadership, and courage. Across industries, partners showed how principles can be turned into practice, strengthening trust, resilience, and purpose in an increasingly complex world. Keep the conversation going Integrity is not a one-week theme — it’s a year-round commitment. There are 52 weeks of integrity , and organizations are encouraged to keep the momentum going. If you’re inspired to take action, explore the Week of Integrity Toolbox — a collection of free resources, case studies, and interactive tools that can be used any time of the year to strengthen integrity, spark dialogue, and build ethical cultures within your organization.

Team Members Brian Chung VP Product This is placeholder text. To change this content, double-click on the element and click Change Content. Read More Kelly Parker HR Representative This is placeholder text. To change this content, double-click on the element and click Change Content. Read More Ashley Amerson Product Manager This is placeholder text. To change this content, double-click on the element and click Change Content. Read More Marcus Harris Account Director This is placeholder text. To change this content, double-click on the element and click Change Content. Read More Brad Grecco Marketing Associate This is placeholder text. To change this content, double-click on the element and click Change Content. Read More Camilla Jones Content Manager This is placeholder text. To change this content, double-click on the element and click Change Content. Read More

< Back < Previous | Next > Geopolitics How businesses can tackle isolationism and protectionism Tom Scott 3 Feb 2025 Andrew Wilson As Deputy Secretary General for Policy at ICC Global, Andrew Wilson ’s job focuses on any public policy relevant to business. That’s everything from trade to tax, from climate to financial regulation. He carries out this work at a range of different levels: national, EU, but mainly various United Nations bodies such as the WTO. He describes ICC’s role as being “the voice of business in international policymaking, ensuring that what is agreed at the UN or WTO really meets the needs of local private sectors across the world”. We caught up with Andrew to talk to him about the challenges of geopolitics today: how it affects international trade, the global shift towards isolationism, the impact (if any) of Trump’s second term in the White House. In addition to ICC’s response to these issues, we also discussed the various options open to businesses to tackle the trend of increasing unilateralism and protectionism. What is ICC’s view of the current state of geopolitics? We are living in an increasingly fragmented and uncertain world. We’ve got hot conflict in Ukraine and, until recently, the Middle East. And we have severe tension between the largest two economies in the world: the USA and China. In addition to this, there is also a steadily growing mindset of unilateralism and protectionism within many economies. Looking closer at unilateralism and protectionism, how does this affect international trade? The trade environment is far more complex and certainly less stable than it was, say, before the pandemic. In 2023, for example, there were 3,000 new trade barriers erected by governments across the world. This represents a five-fold increase over the previous five years. This steady drift, almost unnoticed by much of the media, towards greater isolationism is certainly not conducive to high levels of trade growth, which powers long-term job creation and GDP growth. Indeed, the USA is currently getting a lot of media attention about tariffs. Surely this huge increase in trade barriers is not originating only from the White House? This is an important point of clarification that we want to bring to the debate. The USA is certainly not alone in its protectionist policies. This is part of a much broader trend towards unilateralism in trade: the steady erosion of the multilateral trading system. There are governments in other regions – Southeast Asia and, to a lesser extent, Latin America – that are introducing some forms of restrictions to trade. These aren’t necessarily tariffs; it could be distortionary subsidies or export restrictions. Just how much influence does the USA have? Another point of nuance that is sometimes missing is that the USA accounts for only ten per cent of global trade flows. Compared to the 1930s, for example, the USA just simply doesn’t have the same market power today. However, we are very conscious of how countries may respond to the ‘America First’ policy. What possible options do countries have? They could choose to negotiate. Or accept the imposition of tariffs. Or to retaliate. Our big concern from a systemic perspective is if other major economies start to retaliate – the European Union, China, Canada, for instance – then we could end up with tariff escalations within the G20 or even the G7. That would obviously be extraordinarily concerning. Our message is to see the bigger perspective and avoid retaliation: keep calm and negotiate. And what advice can ICC give businesses to deal with the trend of unilateralism and protectionism? Coming from discussions we’ve run together with the International Monetary Fund with a whole range of corporates, we have identified six best practises for how businesses can navigate this very uncertain environment. Maybe it sounds facile, but there’s no need to overreact or to essentially follow the media cycle. We think it’s important that businesses stay sanguine. We strongly recommend internal education by ensuring that relevant teams are properly educated about tariffs, currency fluctuations and other trade barriers. In some cases, companies will need to extend this education down their supply chains. Companies should have a contingency plan. So as soon as there is any indication of possible trade policy changes, companies know how they may be impacted by tariffs or any other import or export restriction. Then they can respond accordingly, for the short-term but also potentially for the mid-term and long-term. Invest in intelligence. We know that not every company can do this, so wherever possible, use advanced tech such as AI to develop intelligence on supply chain shifts, possible policy changes and uncertainties. Use this intelligence to manage supply chains and volumes. Clear communication with suppliers is vital. If you’re at the top of the supply chain, or near the top, make sure to maintain solid relationships with suppliers, particularly if those are of a strategic or long-standing nature. Create a joint plan of action throughout the supply chain. We recommend effective advocacy. Companies can use associations like ICC as a way to influence government policy in a constructive way. Considering ICC’s history, established in 1919 to promote open global trade and investment after Word War One – and consequently promoting peace – what is ICC’s position in today’s world? We see this as a key moment for ICC to step up. We are very well aware of the responsibility we have at this moment to respond to the needs of business in an effective way. This is using our position in the WTO system, in the UN, and with our global network of chambers. I think of ICC being a space where business can convene to openly and honestly discuss how they are approaching some of the challenges they’re facing. In practical terms, how will ICC achieve this? In terms of external focus, we have three main aims. Our objective number one is the preservation of the existing multilateral trading system which is absolutely vital for the global economy and for society as a whole. This includes maintaining the WTO. Although the WTO is not the ‘new thing in town’, it underpins a huge percentage of international trade and it is absolutely critical for developing and emerging economies. We published research last year that showed that if the WTO was to disappear overnight, the impact on trade would be enormously severe. Here’s just one example: trade flows in sub-Saharan Africa would decline within a five-year period by 40 per cent. The second point is how do we effectively remake the case for international trade? Twenty years ago, the mainstream consensus was that multilateral trade was a good thing. I fear that this opinion has been lost in many ways. Therefore, we want to look at how we can tangibly, realistically and creatively start to rebalance the discussion on trade. The third and final point is, as the world appears to be going in a protectionist direction, what practical solutions can business bring to government discussions to strengthen the system? Here’s one example. The WTO dispute settlement mechanism no longer functions because under the Obama administration, the USA refused to appoint new judges. That is hugely problematic for the WTO to provide discipline and order within the multilateral system. We accept that there is very little prospect of this being resolved in the new Trump administration. As an alternative to the classic model of WTO dispute resolution, one idea we’re working on is state-to-state arbitration to enable the resolution of trade disputes and thus avoid escalation. It’s this kind of practical, but potentially very valuable intervention that we need to pursue with greater vigour. These solutions would be informed very much by the needs of the business community – in our case, ICC members – to identify the problems, work together on practical solutions, and then use our position to advocate for those solutions.

< Back < Previous | Next > ICC Netherlands at the WTO Public Forum 2025 in Geneva Jasper van Schaik 6 Oct 2025 At the WTO Public Forum 2025, ICC Netherlands joined global leaders to address one key question: how can we rebuild trust in global trade? From digitalization to AI and sustainability, the call for WTO reform has never been more pressing. By Jasper van Schaik, Board Member, ICC Netherlands From 16 to 18 September, I had the privilege of representing ICC Netherlands at the World Trade Organization Public Forum in Geneva. This is the world’s largest trade gathering, bringing together over 4,500 participants at a moment when global trade is undergoing profound change. The multilateral trading system established by the WTO has delivered enormous benefits in terms of predictability and trust. Yet it is now under serious threat and urgently needs to adapt. This has been evident for some time, but in 2025 the urgency is clearer than ever. While 72% of global trade is still conducted under WTO terms, this figure has dropped from 80% just a year ago — a sharp signal of erosion. From shifting geopolitical dynamics to rapid digital transformation, it is obvious that a modernized and digitized trading system is no longer optional, but essential. We need a coherent framework for digital trade rules that reflect today’s realities, and anticipate tomorrow’s. At ICC, we believe the multilateral trading system remains an essential engine of shared prosperity. Legitimate concerns about the WTO’s adaptability must be addressed, but tactical unilateral trade deals are no substitute. Fragmentation and “quick fixes” risk raising costs and uncertainty, especially for SMEs, threatening their participation in global value chains. That is why WTO members must credibly commit to reform, and to modern rules on issues such as digital trade, AI, and sustainability. ICC is there to ensure the business voice, the voice of those who make trade happen, is heard. ICC Chair Philippe Varin underlined this point in the Forum’s main panel discussion, delivering a compelling message: trust, the very foundation of global trade, is eroding. Without urgent reform, risks will rise further, and SMEs will pay the highest price. WTO has to become more agile, and his call to action was clear: Revitalize the multilateral system and modernize WTO governance, including reform of consensus rules that allow a single member to block progress. Develop a new playbook fit for today’s world. Fix the dispute settlement mechanism, which has been not fully functional for too long. Here, our ICC Arbitration system may offer inspiration. Ensure business plays a key role, and is at the table from the start, not on the sidelines. Varin also emphasized that the future of trade will increasingly depend on tools. AI, for example, could boost global trade by up to 40% by 2040 beyond current forecasts, mainly by reducing trade costs, enhancing productivity, and opening new export pathways. AI also has enormous potential in trade operations, including predictive risk management, supply-and-demand assessments, tariff and duty calculations, and customs documentation. Another crucial tool is the digitization of documents for cross-border trade, which needs urgent acceleration. ICC Netherlands is working on this front together with the Global Alliance for Trade Facilitation, already delivering impact through the digitalization of phytosanitary certificates — a critical step toward faster, more secure border processes. Our next step will be to digitize more trade documents in more countries, creating tangible benefits for business. Looking ahead, the next WTO Ministerial Conference , the WTO’s highest decision-making body, will be pivotal. The WTO Ministerial Conference, scheduled for 26-29 March 2026 in Cameroon, can take binding decisions on all matters under the multilateral trade agreements. Every member country, including the Netherlands, will be represented at ministerial level, usually the Minister of Foreign Trade. It is vital that the voice of business is heard. ICC Netherlands, together with VNO-NCW, will work in the coming months to gather inputs from Dutch business and ensure they are reflected in the discussions leading to this crucial Ministerial Conference. Please don’t hesitate to directly reach out to me or to Laure Jacquier, Director General of ICC Netherlands, already.

< 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 > Trade & Investment Incoterms® 2020: Navigating Risk, Responsibility & Reality in Global Trade 3 May 2025 Incoterms® 2020 help businesses manage tariff and compliance risks in global trade by clearly defining who is responsible for transport, insurance, and customs duties. Strategic use can reduce seller exposure to tariffs, making these terms crucial tools in navigating today’s volatile trade environment. New Insight: Managing Tariff Risk with Incoterms® As outlined in our April 2025 guidance note “Using the Incoterms® 2020 Rules to Manage Tariff Risk in International Trade,” businesses can use Incoterms strategically to reduce exposure to unpredictable tariff changes. While Incoterms do not affect tariff schedules directly, they clearly allocate responsibility for customs duties and import formalities. This clarity becomes critical in volatile trade environments. Key Takeaways: • Only DDP (Delivered Duty Paid) places full tariff risk and cost on the seller. • All other rules (EXW, FCA, CPT, CIP, etc) shift import tariffs to the buyer. • Smart selection between DAP and DDP can make a difference when negotiating long-term contracts under changing trade regimes. Use cases: • Avoid seller exposure to future tariffs by shifting from DDP to DAP. • Use FCA or EXW to pass compliance burdens to better-prepared buyers. • Define roles clearly to reduce friction between logistics, legal, and finance. Understanding Incoterms® 2020: More Than Just Shipping Terms Incoterms® 2020 — shorthand for “International Commercial Terms” — are globally recognized rules to standardize obligations in international sales contracts. Incoterms clarify the responsibilities of sellers and buyers regarding transport costs, risk allocation, and logistics obligations at each point in the supply chain. While Incoterms do not govern ownership transfer or payment mechanisms, they serve as a common legal and commercial language that reduces ambiguity and friction in cross-border trade. • Who arranges and pays for transport and insurance? • Who handles customs clearance? • At what point does the risk transfer from seller to buyer? These are not trivial distinctions. Choosing the wrong Incoterm can lead to costly disputes, unpaid claims, or disrupted deliveries. The 2020 revision introduced updated insurance requirements, clearer allocation of security obligations, and a stronger recommendation to match Incoterms with the realities of modern logistics (like containerization). There are 11 terms, grouped as follows: Multimodal terms: EXW, FCA, CPT, CIP, DAP, DPU, DDP Sea/inland waterway-only terms: FAS, FOB, CFR, CIF Understanding the practical application of these rules is where professionals gain the most value — and where costly misconceptions often arise. Incoterms Gone Wrong: 5 Real Mistakes to Learn From Choosing the wrong Incoterm might seem like a small slip — until it leads to costly delays, damaged goods, legal disputes, or unexpected tax bills. Below are five real-world examples, often used in trade compliance training, that show just how easy it is to get it wrong — and how to avoid the same fate. Misapplying Incoterms® can create costly confusion over responsibility, risk, and compliance — even in otherwise well-structured contracts. While the examples above are fictional, they reflect common pitfalls seen in international trade and logistics. Understanding Incoterms® isn’t just a legal formality — it’s a frontline tool for avoiding preventable disputes in global commerce. Incoterms® in Action: Would You Get It Right? Test yourself! Incorrect use of Incoterms isn’t just academic — it leads to costly errors, disputes, and legal risk. Think you’re covered? Take this quick quiz and test your instincts on three real-world scenarios. You’ll find the correct answers and explanations at the end of this newsletter!

< Back < Previous | Next > Competitiveness in times of Geo-economic Fragmentation Casper Roerade 3 Nov 2025 As global power shifts toward fragmented multipolarity, trade is increasingly shaped by geopolitics, security, and strategic autonomy. Businesses must navigate competing rules, supply-chain risks, and political pressures to remain competitive in an era of geo-economic fragmentation. Competitiveness in times of Geo-economic Fragmentation Setting the Scene: A Geopolitical update “Integrity in Transition : Culture, Power & Pressure”. The global power dynamics have shifted and the great powers of the world are reinterpreting their role in the international system. This has profound implications for the global trading system. We have entered a world of ‘ fragmented multipolarity’ . A world in which the US and China are certainly the dominant players, but middle powers play a significant role in the international system. Multipolarity does not imply the equality of all major powers, but rather a fragmented system with large "system influencers." These are states that cannot expect to individually dominate a system, but nevertheless can significantly influence its nature through unilateral and multilateral actions. Think of Brazil, India, Saudi Arabia, but also the European Union (EU). These countries explicitly reject the "Cold War mentality" and consciously opt for strategic autonomy instead of one side. The EU calls it "open strategic autonomy," India calls it "multi-alignment," Brazil's "autonomia pela diversificação," and so on. Furthermore, it is not just a world of several players but a fragmented system. Not ordered around one or two dominant countries, not governed by fixed alliances and institutions but rather characterised by shifting issue-specific coalitions. This will require the EU to adopt a pragmatic approach whilst not relinquishing our values. As Henry Kissinger aptly wrote in his 1957 doctoral dissertation about the multipolar world of the 19 th century: “Whatever else a revolutionary power may achieve, it tends to erode if not the legitimacy of the international order, the restraint with which such order operates. Principles of obligation in a period of legitimacy are taken so much for granted that they are never talked about, and such periods therefore appear to posterity as shallow and self-righteous. Principles in a revolutionary situation are so central that they are constantly talked about. The very sterility of the effort soon drains them of all meaning.” Such is the challenge we face today. We are seeing many countries shirking the rules and norms of our trading system which used to be unchallenged. National security, a legitimate exemption to WTO rules under article XXI of the GATT, is roundly abused nowadays. Between 2010 and 2019, countries invoked this security concern at the WTO only eight times per year on average, but in 2024, the number of notifications reached a record high of 95. Many states, not just the US, are increasingly taking advantage of the absence of a functional Appellate Body to block WTO panel rulings by appealing into the void. Since the Appellate Body collapse, developing countries have accounted for more than half of all appeals into the void. The use of sanctions has exploded and International Investment Agreement (IIAA) terminations have exceeded newly enforced IIAs since 2017. Trade is reconfiguring accordingly. Geopolitical distance of trade (i.e. trade between politically distant countries) has decreased, as the EU and US are de-risking from China. Meanwhile new high growth corridors are emerging: EU-India, China-ASEAN and India-Middle East. As competition heats up, China has demonstrated its resolve to stand firm against economic coercion. Caught flatfooted by Trump 1.0, they have clearly expanded their arsenal for supply chain warfare. With its own export controls, unreliable entities list and antitrust reviews, China is leveraging its manufacturing centrality to choke off supplies of rare earths, batteries and green tech. China feels assured that it has won the first round of the trade war in April/May when it forced the US to back off sky-high tariffs with its rare earths export restrictions. A May 2025 national security whitepaper signaled a confident Beijing less willing to compromise. In this era of ‘ weaponized interdependence’ European businesses face a difficult prospect reconciling corporate and European interests. With China aiming to draw in as much technology, capital, and data as possible, while making it harder for firms to move out. Any rapprochement with China as signaled by the Trump-Xi meeting in South-Korea will be ephemeral as long as Chinese industrial policy enables overcapacity. The outcome of the 4th Plenum (20-23 Oct) and subsequent new Five-Year Plan up to 2030 demonstrates only that China will double down on self-reliance and industrial output. For example, China’s largest single tax, the value-added tax (VAT), is split evenly between the central government and the local government of the place where a good or service is produced , instead of where it is consumed . Since the system allocates tax revenue to regions based on production, it rewards continuous expansion of industrial bases. Local Chinese officials try to retain as much upstream and downstream activity as they can to expand their tax base. Provincial five-year are duplicates, each promising the same clusters in the same industries, offering discounted land and utilities, and guarantee quick regulatory approvals. The resulting overcapacity is the logical outcome of a tax and subsidy system that rewards scale over selectivity. Tensions will persist and business will need to navigate the dilemmas of adhering to third country laws and political alignment with the home market. How to balance compliance, impact, and geopolitical realities. It will be the challenge of our time as businesses seek to be competitive under conditions of geo-economic fragmentation. Casper Roerade is policy advisor for mainports and international supply chains at evofenedex, the leading Dutch association for logistics and international business. He specializes in supply chain resilience, trade policy, and logistics, advising companies on how to anticipate global developments and strengthen their strategic position. With an extensive network across both the Netherlands and international markets, Casper bridges politics and business to help shape future-proof supply chains in a fragmented global economy.

< Back < Previous | Next > Geopolitics Geopolitics insights: “These are just warning shots of the kind of tectonic shift that is happening” Michael Every 1 Apr 2025 Michael Every from Rabobank explains that the current geopolitical situation poses a major systemic shock threatening international trade, comparable but opposite to the end of the Cold War. Companies can either ignore these changes or adapt, but options are limited and often conflicting, as national security interests increasingly outweigh economic ones, with banks and businesses being increasingly directed by government policies focused on national security. Michael Every For our fourth conversation about Geopolitics in 2025, we spoke to Michael Every , Global Strategist in Rabobank’s Global Economics and Markets Division. As you will read, he doesn’t beat around the bush, drawing on his 25+ years of experience working in “cross-asset, cross-geography, cross-disciplinary” matters of strategy and market analysis to give straight answers to our straight questions. How does the current state of global geopolitics affect international trade? To answer most concisely: it threatens to be as large a systemic shock as what we experienced at the end of the Cold War, but in reverse. How can internationally operating companies react to the present situation? There are just a few choices. The first is to ignore it: don’t admit the world is changing. I can assure you that many CEOs fall squarely into the bracket of ‘don’t take any risks, don’t rock any boats, and don’t offend the shareholders’. Maybe they are thinking that everything will be as right as rain in six months. Good luck with that. The second more consequential option is to change: to try and read what’s actually happening and then act on that. However, available actions are largely a binary choice, or involve a very limited set of options which can contradict sharply with each other. To be blunt: for most companies, things are not as good as they were before. Surely it can’t all be bad. Someone must be gaining from this increased fragmentation and protectionism? The most obvious winner of the last two and a half months is European defence stocks which have gone through the roof. However, for various reasons, I don’t know how long that’s actually sustainable. In a de-globalising or re-globalising world most of the winners are now losers. The global economy risks becoming a bifurcated trading system with protectionist blocs with fractured payment systems; the euro used by one group of countries, the dollar by another, and Bitcoin used somewhere else, etc. Just because no-one has lived through this recently doesn’t mean it hasn’t happened before. The 1930s is a past example. And we have seen snippets of this recently. How many people lost money on Russia after they invaded Ukraine? How many people are suddenly freaked out about owning American assets? These are just warning shots of the kind of tectonic shift that is happening. How does the current state of global geopolitics affect international trade? It means something: in the short term, obviously, they’re still powerful. But once you start getting back to the nuts and bolts of geopolitics and geoeconomics – to where we are now – business is told to do what national security wants it to do. And, to be clear, America didn’t start this; this was happening before Trump. America is actually echoing things that happened earlier in other countries. It’s just that we didn’t recognise it. To be blunt, the emerging thinkers who are setting the pace in the White House and many other economies see the concept of the International Chamber of Commerce as anathema. I don’t see any argument that the International or any Chamber of Commerce can bring to the White House to make them pivot. They only want to hear: How can we help you make this transition happen faster? What can we do to make this work better? Can the banking community play a role in bringing stability? No. Because what we’re seeing unfold most graphically in America is a shift from economic policy, where businesses and banks have a say, to economic statecraft, where they largely don’t. Such statecraft concerns itself in the grand strategy of national security rather than rising stocks. In that environment, banks and businesses will be first politely, and then more and more forcibly, be told ‘here’s how you can help. Here’s what we want you to be doing’.

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

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

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

< Back < Previous | Next > Marketing & Advertising European Commission Withdraws Green Claims Directive — ICC Welcomes Opportunity for Constructive Recalibration 30 Jun 2025 The European Commission has withdrawn the Green Claims Directive after concerns over burdens on SMEs, marking a key advocacy win for ICC and its members. ICC now invites businesses to help shape future sustainability marketing policies that are credible, practical, and innovation-friendly. After months of uncertainty, the European Commission has formally withdrawn the Green Claims Directive. ICC invites members to shape the next phase of environmental marketing policy. Brussels, June 2025 – In a significant development for sustainability regulation and business communication, the European Commission has announced the withdrawal of its proposal for a Green Claims Directive. The decision, shared during the Commission’s midday press briefing, comes amid growing concern over the administrative burden the legislation would have imposed—particularly on Europe’s 30 million micro-enterprises. The Directive, originally introduced in 2023, aimed to tackle greenwashing by requiring businesses to substantiate environmental claims—such as “climate neutral” or “100% recycled”—through detailed criteria and mandatory third-party verification. While widely supported in principle, the approach raised major concerns across the business community for its potential to hinder innovation, create disproportionate compliance costs, and undermine existing good practices. A milestone for business engagement ICC has consistently supported the goal of credible, science-based sustainability communication, while also advocating for a more balanced, proportionate approach. As ICC noted in its response to the proposal, mandatory ex-ante verification risked penalising responsible companies and disincentivising voluntary leadership, particularly among SMEs. Thanks to continued feedback and coordinated outreach from ICC members across Europe, these concerns were heard. Today’s withdrawal marks a milestone in collaborative advocacy—and opens the door for a more workable path forward. What comes next? While the Commission has withdrawn the Green Claims Directive, existing EU consumer protection legislation remains in place: · The Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (UCPD) already prohibits misleading environmental claims and will remain a key enforcement tool. · The Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition Directive, adopted earlier this year, will also enter into force in 2026 with new requirements around environmental marketing. These frameworks continue to provide a baseline for action against greenwashing, and ICC will work to support their consistent and practical implementation. More importantly, this moment provides an opportunity to co-design better solutions. As the Commission considers future steps, ICC encourages a renewed focus on: Supporting self-regulatory mechanisms , such as the ICC Marketing Code and Environmental Claims Checklist Promoting clear, scalable guidance that builds trust without excessive red tape Ensuring that frameworks are workable for all business sizes , especially SMEs ICC’s call to members This is not just a regulatory win—it’s a call to action. ICC is inviting members to help shape the next phase of policy by sharing real-world examples, common challenges, and practical alternatives. Constructive engagement now can ensure the next iteration of EU policy supports credible sustainability claims—while enabling business innovation and competitiveness. Once again, ICC thanks its network for the active engagement that helped deliver this outcome. The work ahead is equally important—and we look forward to continuing the conversation with you. 📄 Read ICC’s response to the Green Claims Directive