Search Results

< Back < Previous | Next > ICC Executive Board approves revised Rules of Arbitration 23 Mar 2026 The International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) has approved a revised version of its Rules of Arbitration. The new Rules will enter into force on 1 June 2026. The revisions aim to enhance efficiency, clarity and usability, while ensuring that ICC Arbitration continues to meet the needs of users worldwide. They follow the previous update, which entered into force in January 2021, and reflect the ongoing evolution of arbitration practice. The updated Rules introduce new procedures and improvements to existing provisions, with a focus on streamlining proceedings and supporting effective case management. At the same time, they preserve the flexibility that characterises ICC Arbitration, including the ability of parties to select arbitrators and tailor procedures within the framework of the Rules. Claudia Salomon, President of the ICC International Court of Arbitration, said: “The revised Rules reflect our commitment to ensuring ICC Arbitration meets the needs of businesses, states and state entities worldwide. ICC Arbitration gives parties the confidence to enter into agreements knowing that their disputes can be resolved fairly and effectively if they arise. These revisions make the Rules clearer and arbitration more efficient, while preserving the flexibility and procedural integrity that parties expect. Ultimately, the revised Rules ensure a trusted dispute resolution process that underpins international trade and investment.” To date, over 30,000 cases have been registered with the ICC International Court of Arbitration under the ICC Arbitration Rules. The latest revisions – undertaken by the Bureau of the ICC Court and the ICC Secretariat, with input from the ICC Commission on Arbitration and ADR, ICC Court Members, and the ICC Governing Body for Dispute Resolution Services – are in line with commitments set out in the ICC Centenary Declaration on Dispute Prevention and Resolution, and reaffirm ICC’s leading, role in promoting efficient, neutral and trusted dispute resolution. The approval of the new Rules comes amid continued strong use of ICC Arbitration. In 2025, 881 cases were filed under the Rules, with the total value of pending disputes reaching US$299 billion. Disputes ranged from just under US$2,500 to US$31 billion, reflecting the wide scope of cases administered by ICC. In a 2025 global arbitration survey, the ICC Arbitration Rules were ranked as the most preferred arbitration rules worldwide among more than 60 sets, and across all major regions. The revised Rules will apply to all requests for arbitration filed on or after 1 June 2026. Users are encouraged to familiarise themselves with the updated provisions ahead of their entry into force, in particular where new procedural requirements may affect the filing of cases. ICC will release the 2026 Arbitration Rules and provide further information and practical guidance to support users and practitioners in the lead-up to 1 June 2026. ICC Executive Board approves revised Rules of Arbitration - ICC - International Chamber of Commerce

Defending multilateralism and international trade Our engagement: Working to restore predictability in global trade by leveraging ICC’s unique position in international organisations (UN, OECD, WTO) and ICC Netherlands’ business network. Now more than ever business voice must be heard as rules are increasingly shaped by geopolitical dynamics rather than business reality. Dutch business and policy network: •VNO-NCW/MKB NL CMO/CHP commissions •Dutch banking commission – Chair Jesseke Kollau, Rabobank •Customs & Trade Facilitation - Jochem Sprenger, Fenex Service Name This is a Paragraph. Click on "Edit Text" or double click on the text box to edit the content and make sure to add any relevant information that you want to share with your visitors. Service Name This is a Paragraph. Click on "Edit Text" or double click on the text box to edit the content and make sure to add any relevant information that you want to share with your visitors. Service Name This is a Paragraph. Click on "Edit Text" or double click on the text box to edit the content and make sure to add any relevant information that you want to share with your visitors. Service Name This is a Paragraph. Click on "Edit Text" or double click on the text box to edit the content and make sure to add any relevant information that you want to share with your visitors. Service Name This is a Paragraph. Click on "Edit Text" or double click on the text box to edit the content and make sure to add any relevant information that you want to share with your visitors. Service Name This is a Paragraph. Click on "Edit Text" or double click on the text box to edit the content and make sure to add any relevant information that you want to share with your visitors. Satisfaction Guarantee This is a Paragraph. Click on "Edit Text" or double click on the text box to start editing the content.

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

< Back < Previous | Next > Trade & Investment A call to de-escalate transatlantic trade tensions 23 May 2025 In response to a US proposal to increase tariffs on European Union goods, ICC is calling for redoubled ongoing efforts to renew the US-EU trade relationship. The proposed tariff hike on EU imports introduces major uncertainty into one of the most stable and integrated trade relationships in the world. The immediate effect — for businesses on both sides of the Atlantic — will be to further chill investment decisions, disrupt essential supply chains and undermine market confidence. "The transatlantic relationship is not only of immense economic importance — it is, in many ways, the cornerstone of the rules-based global trading system. For decades, EU-U.S. trade has set an important standard for openness, reliability and shared prosperity. A sharp escalation in tariffs between two central pillars of the global economy risks sending shockwaves through the global business community at a time when stability is at an absolute premium." "We call on the U.S. and EU to redouble ongoing efforts to renew their trade relationship. A swift and coordinated de-escalation is essential to preserve the trust and stability that underpin international commerce, business investment and job creation."

< Back < Previous | Next > Customs at an inflection point 21 Apr 2026 Four trends shaping global trade compliance in 2026 Two back-to-back events in April 2026, a conference in Brussels on the new Union Customs Code hosted by ICC Be, and the latest meeting of the ICC Customs and Trade Facilitation Commission hosted by ICC NL, offered a useful snapshot of where global customs is heading. Different audiences, different levels of detail, but the same underlying currents. Four trends in particular deserve business attention this year. In one minute (for non-specialists) If your business ships goods across borders, or works with companies that do, the systems governing those movements are being rewritten. The EU is building a single digital platform to replace 27 national customs systems, starting with e-commerce in 2028 and extending to all trade by 2034. Worldwide, customs authorities are shifting from checking paperwork to analysing live data, with artificial intelligence doing more of the work every year. Companies that share clean, consistent data with customs get faster clearance; those that don't get more friction at the border. Four trends stand out in 2026: data quality becomes a business priority, AI is changing how controls work, "trusted trader" status is being redefined, and global rules are harmonizing, but unevenly. The rest of this article explains each, with a short glossary of the main terms at the end. 1. Data is becoming the unit of customs compliance For decades, customs has been organised around declarations. A trader submits an entry summary, an import declaration, a transit message, an export declaration, often into separate national systems, often with overlapping content. The EU's new Union Customs Code, politically agreed in late March, is the clearest signal yet that this model is giving way to something else: a data-driven, consignment-centric system in which the same information is submitted once and consumed many times. The EU Customs Data Hub will go live for e-commerce in July 2028 and become mandatory for all operators by 2034. The same shift is visible at global level. The World Customs Organization's 2025 edition of the SAFE Framework of Standards makes data harmonisation one of its headline priorities, explicitly to reduce duplication and streamline cross-border processes. At the operational level, Dutch Customs is piloting what it calls "digital corridors", arrangements with trusted operators who make supply-chain data available via API, in exchange for lighter-touch controls at the border. The conceptual direction of travel is unmistakable. For business, the practical implication is that data quality moves from being a back-office concern to a compliance KPI. Unique identifiers that follow a consignment from origin to destination, consistent product classifications, clean master data on parties in the chain — these stop being "nice to have" and become the basis on which risk, duty and release decisions are made. Several speakers at both events made the same point in different words: the technology is not the problem, the data model is. 2. The AI adoption gap is widening, not narrowing The WCO's 2026 Study Report on Disruptive Technologies, based on a survey of 116 customs administrations, makes for sobering reading. Only around 10 percent of administrations report using artificial intelligence or machine learning in production. Another 37 percent are experimenting or piloting. Roughly 30 percent still describe themselves as "operational", meaning foundational systems are in place but limited advanced analytics. Against this, private-sector adoption of AI has accelerated sharply. UNCTAD projects the technology will be the frontier technology with the largest market size by 2033, at around USD 4.8 trillion. The gap has two consequences. First, administrations will increasingly rely on private-sector data quality and self-assessment because they cannot inspect their way through growing volumes, 5.8 billion e-commerce items entered the EU alone in 2025. Second, where administrations do deploy AI, they deploy it in ways that demand more from industry, not less. Several customs authorities are now using large data models to identify "risk clusters" at a macro level, then asking individual importers to prove their specific shipments are outside those clusters. Rotterdam's AI-driven x-ray image recognition is an encouraging example of how automation can raise coverage without adding headcount. But the gap between administrations with that capability and those still working from paper-based processes is not closing. 3. The trust architecture is being rebuilt A common thread across the EU reform, the WCO SAFE update, and recent bilateral trade agreements is that the relationship between administrations and compliant businesses is being redefined. Three examples make the pattern visible. In the EU, the new Trust & Check trader regime, on top of the existing AEO programme, offers self-assessment, self-release and reduced controls to companies willing to grant customs real-time access to their data. This is a significant step beyond AEO: the balance of effort shifts from periodic audit to continuous visibility. Whether the benefits will justify the investment for most companies is an open question, and one industry is actively shaping through the delegated acts still being drafted. At the same time, the EU's co-legislators wisely chose to retain AEO in parallel, preserving a more accessible tier for companies that cannot or will not go that far. In origin certification, research presented at recent WCO events suggests full self-certification does not produce measurably lower compliance than third-party certification. That evidence is nudging administrations that had resisted the shift. But the picture is not uniform: India's new "authentication" requirement under the EU-India and UK-India agreements introduces a verification layer on top of self-certification, requiring exporters to provide additional identifiers through new IT systems. The UK and the EU have built two different solutions. Expect this pattern, self-certification at the level of principle, authentication in the detail, to spread. On the platform side, e-commerce marketplaces are being drawn into the compliance chain as "deemed importers", liable for customs compliance, duty and VAT on goods sold to EU consumers. The shift in responsibility is less a change of doctrine than a recognition that trust, data and liability must be realigned for the actors who actually hold the commercial information. 4. Harmonisation is uneven and will stay that way Against the direction of travel towards greater integration, real-world harmonisation remains patchy. HS 2028 was finalised in January 2026 and enters into force across the WCO membership in 2028, but a meaningful number of countries are still implementing HS 2017, with all the friction in correlation tables, tariff engineering and origin determinations that implies. In the EU reform, centralised customs clearance for imports is being introduced, but the VAT framework has not been aligned, leaving a gap industry has flagged as a missed opportunity. Penalties are only partially harmonised: the final text sets a minimum common core of infringements and non-criminal sanctions, but Member States retain room to add national sanctions on top. The United States is debating a bill that would replace its first-sale valuation rule with a last-sale rule, converging with other jurisdictions but doing so through a politically charged process with affordability implications for consumers. None of this is an argument against the direction of travel. But it is an argument for realism about timelines and transition costs. Companies operating across multiple jurisdictions will continue to need parallel capability for some years, systems, data, and compliance processes that accommodate different rules, different timings, and different assumptions. So what? The operational substance of customs reform is being written now, in the delegated and implementing acts of the EU Union Customs Code, in the explanatory notes accompanying HS 2028, in the work programmes of the WCO Permanent Technical Committee and its technical sub-committees, and in the bilateral IT systems being built around new trade agreements. These are not abstract debates. They will determine the data companies have to provide, the systems they have to connect to, the trusted-trader status they can realistically target, and the penalties they are exposed to. The practical channels for businesses to engage are well established: national trade facilitation committees, industry federations, chambers of commerce, and global business organisations with formal observer status at the WCO. Where those channels are used well, the detail reflects operational reality. Where they are not, business ends up implementing rules that were designed without it. The next twelve months, between now and the first EU Data Hub go-live in mid-2028, will set the tone. Key terms at a glance Harmonised System (HS) — the global product-classification language used by customs authorities in 200+ countries. Every tradeable good is assigned an HS code, which drives duty rates, origin rules and statistics. The system is updated every 5–6 years by the WCO. HS 2017 / HS 2022 / HS 2028 — successive editions of the Harmonised System. HS 2028 was finalised in January 2026 and takes effect in 2028; many countries are still implementing HS 2017 or HS 2022, which creates classification gaps between trading partners. WCO (World Customs Organization) — the Brussels-based body that develops global customs standards, including the Harmonised System and the SAFE Framework. 185+ member administrations. Union Customs Code (UCC) — the EU's foundational customs law. The "new UCC" is the reform politically agreed in March 2026, introducing the EU Customs Data Hub, the EU Customs Authority and the Trust & Check trader regime. EU Customs Data Hub — a single EU-wide digital platform that will replace the 111 national and EU customs IT systems currently in use. E-commerce goes first in 2028; all trade by 2034. AEO (Authorised Economic Operator) — the existing trusted-trader status in the EU and most major economies. Companies meeting security and compliance criteria get lighter-touch treatment at the border. Trust & Check — a new, higher-tier trusted-trader regime in the EU reform. In exchange for giving customs real-time access to company data, traders get self-assessment and self-release. AEO remains in parallel. Deemed importer — an e-commerce platform or marketplace treated, for customs and VAT purposes, as if it were the importer of the goods it sells — even if it never physically handles them.

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

< Back < Previous | Next > Digitalisation The Netherlands Moves on eBL Legislation — But More is Needed for True Trade Digitalisation 15 May 2025 The Dutch government has taken an important first step in the digitalisation of trade by submitting a bill to Parliament that formally recognises the legal validity of electronic bills of lading (eBLs). The Dutch government has taken an important first step in the digitalisation of trade by submitting the draft law Invoering van het elektronisch cognossement to Parliament. If passed, the law will align the Netherlands with early adopters such as France, Germany, and the UK , who have already advanced legislative work on this topic. It draws inspiration from the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Transferable Records (MLETR), but stops short of full implementation. 📄 Read the draft law here The proposal, submitted on 14 May 2025, amends Book 8 of the Dutch Civil Code to give eBLs legal equivalence with their paper counterparts in maritime shipping. A three-year review clause has been included to assess the possibility of extending the law to other types of electronic transport documents. While this is a welcome development, ICC Netherlands and other stakeholders argue that the bill, though important, is too narrow in scope. A forthcoming white paper developed by ICC Netherlands calls for the full adoption of MLETR, not just for eBLs but for all forms of transferable electronic trade documents, including warehouse receipts, promissory notes, and bills of exchange. The reason is simple: partial reform limits impact. As it stands, the bill’s narrow focus creates a fragmented legal framework that risks undermining the efficiency gains digitalisation promises. Without legal clarity for a broader range of trade documents, businesses and financial institutions may hesitate to embrace digital workflows. Moreover, the Netherlands risks falling behind jurisdictions that have already implemented MLETR in full, including Bahrain, Singapore, the Abu Dhabi Global Market, as well as key trading partners like France, Germany, and the UK, who have each taken significant legislative steps toward full adoption. These jurisdictions are increasingly becoming attractive trade hubs for companies seeking a legally certain digital environment. According to a 2023 DCSA survey, eBL adoption stood at just 5% globally—despite broad consensus on the benefits. Legal uncertainty remains a primary barrier, particularly among banks and insurers who rely on negotiable instruments in trade finance. ICC Netherlands’ position is clear: if the Netherlands is serious about becoming a digital trade leader, it must move beyond this single-document approach. Full MLETR adoption would: • Ensure legal clarity across the full lifecycle of trade finance instruments • Enable interoperability with international platforms and legal regimes • Promote efficiency and resilience in supply chains • Reduce costs and carbon emissions by eliminating paper-based processes We welcome the government’s initiative and recognise it as a foundational step. But foundational steps must lead somewhere. A broader, more ambitious legislative trajectory is not only desirable — it is necessary. ICC Netherlands will continue to advocate for full MLETR implementation and invites companies, policymakers, and trade practitioners to join the conversation. The future of trade is digital — and the legal framework must keep up.

< Back < Previous | Next > Trade & Investment Why services can’t realistically be tariffed and shouldn’t be 4 Jun 2025 New ICC brief outlines why tariffs on cross-border services are unworkable and what policymakers should do instead. In today’s digital economy, cross-border services are essential to how businesses operate, grow and compete. But while goods have long been subject to customs tariffs, applying tariffs to services would be both impractical and create significant legal, operational, and economic risks. This is because services are fundamentally different from goods, making them virtually unworkable to tax at borders. Unlike physical products that customs agents can see and inspect, services are intangible—think of things like consulting, software, or design work—that often cross borders digitally or through the movement of people, rather than in shipping containers. This creates multiple challenges: there is no clear moment when a service ‘enters’ a country, no global classification system comparable to the Harmonized System for goods, and no consistent method to assess what should be taxed. Even when governments try to tax cross-border services – such as digital services taxes (DSTs) or withholding regimes – they face legal challenges, high enforcement costs, and risks of international retaliation, as these approaches often violate established rules or conflict with trade and tax agreements. In contrast, some countries have opted for a more neutral approach by applying VAT to cross-border services —treating domestic and foreign providers equally. Beyond feasibility, there is also a strong economic argument to be made against tariffs on services. Services account for more than half of global trade on a value-added basis and are vital enablers of productivity, innovation, and inclusion. Imposing tariffs would raise costs, fragment global supply chains, and disproportionately harm MSMEs and developing economies that rely on affordable cross-border services to grow and compete, including legal advice, design, IT support and marketing. Tariffs on services would also increase compliance burdens and administrative costs for governments, requiring entirely new systems to monitor digital transactions, register providers, and audit contracts. Exporters would not be spared either: many countries are net exporters of services in areas like finance, education, and media. Tariff measures could trigger retaliation and reduce market access for these firms. In short: services can’t realistically be tariffed – and they shouldn’t be. Instead, policymakers should: Reaffirm multilateral norms by supporting the continuation of the WTO E-Commerce Moratorium and rejecting tariffs on services. Avoid unilateral tariff-like measures — such as DSTs or withholding regimes —that risk legal conflict, trade retaliation, and fragmentation. Pursue multilateral cooperation through appropriate multilateral and regional bodies to develop common rules for the taxation of the digital economy. Download

< 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 < Previous | Next > Join the ICC Global Digital Trade Sandbox Laure Jacquier 3 Feb 2026 Digital trade is moving from ambition to execution. The ICC Global Digital Trade Sandbox offers companies a unique, vendor-neutral environment to test real digital trade processes, contribute to global pilots, and help shape the future of cross-border trade. ICC Global Digital Trade Sandbox From ambition to execution: join the ICC Global Digital Trade Sandbox Digitalisation is transforming international trade, but adoption remains uneven. While international standards, technologies and policy frameworks are advancing rapidly, many companies still struggle to move from awareness to practical implementation. Fragmentation, interoperability challenges and legal uncertainty continue to slow progress. To address this gap, ICC has launched the Global Digital Trade Sandbox , a flagship initiative starting in early 2026 that shifts the focus from advocacy to execution. This challenge is particularly visible in the Dutch context . Despite broad political and business support for digital trade, regulatory reform to fully enable the use of electronic trade documents, such as electronic bills of lading, has been repeatedly delayed . As a result, Dutch companies risk falling behind peers in jurisdictions that have already modernised their legal frameworks. Bridging the gap between policy and practice The Global Digital Trade Sandbox responds to a growing gap between what is technically possible and what is legally and operationally enabled . It provides companies with a structured, vendor-neutral environment to test digital trade processes in real-world conditions, without commercial or regulatory risk. Importantly, the Sandbox does not replace legal reform. Rather, it complements it by generating evidence from practice : what works, what does not, where interoperability breaks down, and which regulatory barriers have the greatest impact on business. For countries like the Netherlands, where legal reform is pending, this evidence is particularly valuable. What is the Digital Trade Sandbox? The Digital Trade Sandbox is not a technical platform and does not promote specific technologies. Instead, it is an ICC-led orchestration environment that brings together companies, banks, logistics providers and technology vendors to test digital trade workflows using existing systems and international standards, including ICC’s Key Trade Data & Documents Elements (KTDDE). Through guided pilots and proofs of concept, participants explore processes such as e-invoicing, electronic transport documents and digital trade documentation. The objective is to demonstrate interoperability, identify operational bottlenecks and support scalable adoption across borders. Why this matters for Dutch companies For Dutch companies engaged in international trade, the Sandbox offers a pragmatic way forward, even while regulatory reform is ongoing: Prepare ahead of regulation by testing digital trade processes before legal change is finalised Reduce uncertainty by identifying legal, operational and contractual barriers early Stay competitive internationally as other jurisdictions move faster on digital trade Contribute to reform by providing concrete business evidence to policymakers Participation allows companies to move from waiting to learning, and from learning to readiness. A global initiative with local anchoring The Sandbox operates through ICC’s global network, with National Committees acting as local convenors . ICC Netherlands supports Dutch companies in exploring participation, connecting them to global pilots and ensuring that Dutch business insights feed into international discussions. This local anchoring is essential. Without practical input from companies, regulatory reform risks remaining abstract, or misaligned with real trade flows. How to get involved Companies interested in participating can: Review the available Sandbox materials (hereunder) Join one of the information sessions on 10 February 7AM CET / 2PM SGT / 1AM NYT register here 2PM CET / 9PM SGT / 8AM NYT register here Contact ICC Netherlands to discuss suitability and next steps Participation in the Sandbox is free of charge for eligible ICC members. Moving forward, despite uncertainty Digital trade is no longer a future ambition. It is a strategic necessity, especially in a volatile geopolitical environment where efficiency, resilience and trust matter more than ever. While regulatory reform remains essential, waiting for it to be completed is not a strategy. The ICC Global Digital Trade Sandbox offers Dutch companies the opportunity to prepare, test and shape the future of digital trade: together, pragmatically and at global scale. Interested in joining or learning more? Please reach out to ICC Netherlands for further information - info@icc.nl 3. ICC DSI Digital Trade Sandbox Brief (1) .pdf Download PDF • 903KB

< Back < Previous | Next > Beyond the Contract: Insights from the ICC NL Dispute Resolution Forum 2025 7 Oct 2025 At the ICC Dispute Resolution Forum on 7 October, experts explored how culture, trust, and human behaviour shape cross-border business disputes. The discussions revealed that resolving conflicts effectively starts long before the contract is signed. Beyond the Contract: Bridging the Human Gap in Cross-Cultural B2B Disputes “The best dispute-resolution clause is the one you never have to invoke, because you’ve established the trust to resolve the issue beforehand.” What happens when contracts clash with culture? During this year’s ICC Dispute Resolution Forum , hosted by A&O Shearman Netherlands , specialists examined how human behaviour and emotional intelligence are transforming the way global businesses approach conflict resolution. Despite the increasingly complex legal frameworks that govern international trade, the speakers agreed on a fundamental reality: conflicts rarely stem from the contract itself, but rather from the relationships that underpin it. Each year, over USD 80 billion in international B2B contracts are subjected to arbitration, with cross-border disputes growing twice as fast as global trade . Beneath these statistics lies a human narrative — how individuals from different cultures build, sustain, and sometimes lose trust. From Legal Clauses to Human Understanding Throughout the forum, three key themes emerged that continue to shape dispute resolution today. 1. Emotions play a decisive role in business decisions. As highlighted by Gideon Wilkins in his keynote address, culture and emotion influence business decisions long before a dispute arises. Although corporate negotiations may appear rational, factors such as fear, trust, and motivation often dictate outcomes before any legal provision comes into play. 2. A shift toward pragmatic, relationship-based solutions. In a panel discussion moderated by Marnix Leijten (De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek) , Ana Morales Ramos (Aramco Europe) , Thijs Geesink (ABN AMRO Bank N.V.) , and Nathalie Laumans (Technip Energies) explored how companies make real-world choices between arbitration, litigation, and mediation. They compared priorities across sectors: banks value enforceability, legal certainty, and precedents; industrial and energy companies emphasise technical expertise, confidentiality, and preserving long-term relationships. The discussion pointed to a gradual movement toward interest-based, collaborative approaches that allow parties to safeguard commercial relationships while resolving disputes efficiently. 3. Drafting clauses with clarity and foresight. In her session on drafting dispute-resolution clauses , Marieke Schaink (A&O Shearman) cautioned that many disputes originate from ambiguity, over-specificity, or copy-paste clauses that fail to reflect the real dynamics of multiparty contracts. She urged practitioners to: Ensure that the scope of arbitration clauses is broad enough to avoid related disputes ending up in different forums; Choose the seat of arbitration carefully, neutrality and a reliable legal framework prevent surprises on public policy grounds; and Exercise caution when pre-agreeing arbitrator qualifications , as overly narrow criteria can limit the pool of candidates and cause delays. Her key message: a well-drafted clause should serve the business, not constrain it. Innovation, AI, and the Future of Arbitration As the day concluded, Alexander Fessas (Secretary General, ICC Court) and Marieke van Hooijdonk (Vice President, ICC Court and independant arbitrator) reflected on how AI, expedited procedures, and revisions to the ICC Arbitration Rules are modernising the process while safeguarding due process. Their dialogue underscored that innovation and fairness must evolve together . A central message throughout the day was unmistakable: business disputes are not merely legal matters; they are deeply human. Understanding culture, communication, and emotion is vital for preventing and resolving them. Spotlight: The Truth About Cross-Cultural B2B Relationships These themes resonated with ICC’s six-part research series, The Truth About Cross-Cultural B2B Relationships , developed by ICC , Jus Connect , and McCann Worldgroup . Based on insights from 1,701 business leaders across nine countries, the series examines how culture, emotion, and behaviour influence every stage of international business. Part 1: The human Connection 2024-05-icc-jc-mccann-truth-report-part1.pdf B2B purchasing decisions often carry greater emotional weight than consumer choices, as they involve higher personal and professional risks. Success depends not only on clear contracts but also on empathy and curiosity, which help navigate cultural nuances and build trust, turning agreements into lasting, human-centered partnerships. Part 2: The Emotional Rollercoaster 2024-10-icc-template-truth-report-part2.pdf The research outlines the emotional trajectory of B2B collaboration, ranging from initial optimism to the pressures of conflict. A mindset referred to as “FOMU” (Fear of Messing Up) causes organizations to excessively complicate contracts while neglecting the importance of relationships. Part 3: Contracts and Culture 2024-10-truth-report-part3.pdf Different markets perceive contracts in varying ways; some see them as strict obligations, while others regard them as frameworks for collaboration. Misunderstanding these perspectives can quietly lead to disputes. Part 4: Trust, Transparency & Technology icc-2024-12-truth-report-part-4.pdf While technology improves efficiency, it cannot substitute for transparency or emotional intelligence. In hybrid environments, subtle misinterpretations of tone or hierarchy can undermine trust. Part 5: The Future of Collaboration icc-2024-12-truthreport-part5.pdf To effectively prevent disputes, it is essential to foster collaboration among legal, compliance, and commercial teams from the beginning, not just when conflicts emerge. Part 6: One Size Doesn’t Fit All 2025-04-truthreport-part6_V3-one-size-doesnt-fit-all.pdf Cultural diversity transcends geographical boundaries. The research identifies four global archetypes: Strategic Balancer, Pragmatic Realist, Decisive Custodian, and Innovative Explorer. The Netherlands stands out as the Strategic Balancer, characterized by pragmatism, transparency, and directness. Connecting Research and Practice Forum speakers echoed the research findings: disputes often arise from emotional disconnect or cultural misalignment rather than from defective clauses. The “ FOMU ” — Fear of Messing Up — mindset, identified in the research, mirrors real-world contract practices where risk aversion hinders flexibility. Dutch in-house counsel stressed the importance of early involvement of legal and compliance teams and of building bridges between technical, commercial, and legal functions. Ultimately, both the forum and the research highlighted adaptive leadership as a success factor: understanding behavioural archetypes helps teams balance Dutch directness with cross-cultural sensitivity. Practical Takeaways for Dutch In-House Teams Dispute prevention starts long before conflict arises. To reduce friction: Re-humanise your dispute strategy, emotions and culture shape every stage of a deal. Craft dispute clauses as tools for clarity and collaboration, involve leadership early and tailor to the project’s real risks. Align legal, compliance, and commercial functions from the outset. Adapt communication styles to partner archetypes, balancing Dutch directness with global nuance. Use technology wisely: AI supports efficiency, but trust still depends on human insight . Read further 🎧 Podcast: Listen to insights from the forum on Spotify, Apple Podcasts and Amazon Music: Spotify: https://bit.ly/4pdCU8Y Apple Podcasts: https://apple.co/4pui6KH Amazon Music: https://amzn.to/4gbWP3X 📄 White paper series: Dive deeper into the research on cross-cultural B2B relationships via the full six-part series: “The Truth about Cross-Cultural B2B Relationships”

< Back < Previous | Next > Joint Statement by ICC and WTO heads