Search Results

< Back < Previous | Next > ICC #WeAreICCWeek 30 Jun 2025 From 16–19 June, #WeAreICC Week brought together over 200 ICC representatives and leaders from 85 countries in Paris for a dynamic series of strategy and governance meetings. Highlights included the annual meeting of the ICC World Council, chaired by Philippe Varin, and a gathering of the ICC Executive Board. 🌍 We are ICC Week Global Priorities, Local Impact: What You Need to Know and How to Engage From 16–19 June, #WeAreICC Week brought together over 200 ICC representatives and leaders from 85 countries in Paris for a dynamic series of strategy and governance meetings. Highlights included the annual meeting of the ICC World Council , chaired by Philippe Varin, and a gathering of the ICC Executive Board . The Council approved four new Executive Board appointments , five term renewals , and a second term for World Chambers Federation Chair Rifat Hisarcıklıoğlu . The meeting also welcomed the creation of four new ICC national committees (DR Congo, Mongolia, Venezuela, and North Macedonia), alongside new direct members from El Salvador, Ethiopia, Honduras, Malawi, Senegal, Tanzania, and Yemen . At the heart of the week were presentations from ICC’s global workstreams —from climate, tax, and digital trade to dispute resolution, customs, and food systems—highlighting key policy priorities and opportunities for member engagement in the months ahead. Each commission and initiative outlined practical tools, global milestones, and open invitations for companies, experts, and national committees to get involved. Below, you’ll find short summaries of each workstream, including key takeaways and concrete ways to contribute. Whether your interest lies in sustainable finance, model contracts, or cross-border digitalisation, now is the time to shape the agenda . 🌱 Driving Climate and Environmental Action: ICC’s Energy & Environment Workstream Accelerating the Green Transition with Business at the Table During the #WeAreICC week, the Energy and Environment workstream outlined a bold vision for private sector engagement on climate and sustainability issues ahead of COP30 and beyond. Structured around three pillars— climate action, sustainable trade, and environmental responsibility —the ICC Global Commission is actively aligning business advocacy with the goals of the Paris Agreement, while providing practical tools and platforms for companies worldwide. 🔹 Key Updates: Following COP29, ICC welcomed the Baku Climate Unity Pact and is now leveraging the Baku to Belém Roadmap to scale up private investment toward the new climate finance targets ($1.3 trillion/year by 2035). For COP30, ICC will lead business input into negotiations on finance, adaptation, carbon markets (Article 6), and just transition. ICC’s new global campaign will mark 10 years since the Paris Agreement and highlight business commitments to climate goals. On plastics, ICC remains a strong advocate in the UN Plastics Treaty process (INC-5.2), calling for practical, business-informed approaches and regulatory clarity. 🔹 Cross-Cutting Initiatives: ICC is expanding its Principles for Sustainable Trade Finance , with recent endorsements by major global banks, including the Dutch ING Bank, and continued development of social and green trade finance standards. Efforts continue to shape high-integrity voluntary carbon markets and broaden collaboration on sustainability-linked supply chain finance. 🔹 Opportunities to Engage: Nominate experts to ICC working groups (plastics, climate finance, trade). Encourage banks and members to endorse ICC’s Sustainable Trade Principles. Share national insights on regulatory barriers or incentives to climate investment. Prepare for COP30 participation, especially via ICC’s dedicated Blue Zone space or engagement aboard the ICC-hosted ship in Belém. Together, we can make climate and environmental action everyone’s business. ⚖️ Commercial Law and Practice Commission Keeping International Contracts Fair, Flexible, and Future-Proof This commission ensures business contracts and model clauses evolve alongside trade and legal developments. From model contracts on agency, force majeure, and sustainable transactions to guidance on ESG compliance and corruption risk, ICC continues to provide essential legal tools for international business. 🔹 Key Updates: The revision of the ICC Model Contract for the International Sale of Goods is underway, reflecting modern business realities such as digital contracting, sustainability, and force majeure risks. ICC is finalizing new model clauses for negotiating and drafting sustainable contracts , providing practical tools to integrate ESG criteria into commercial agreements. The CLP Commission is contributing to global discussions on responsible business conduct , engaging with the OECD and other partners on business and human rights. Work has also begun on a project examining the use of model contracts in digital trade , including interoperability and electronic signature standards. 🔹 Supporting Legal Certainty in Turbulent Times: The Commission is monitoring trends in contract performance and dispute escalation resulting from supply chain volatility and climate transition. It continues to provide business input to UNCITRAL and UNIDROIT on commercial law reform and emerging technologies. 🔹 Opportunities to Engage: Join the working group on the revised Model Sale of Goods Contract or sustainable contracting. Contribute use cases on how businesses are integrating ESG into their contractual practices. Stay tuned for upcoming consultations and new publications expected later this year. 🚛 Revitalizing Global Trade: ICC’s Trade and Customs Commission Creating a Trade System That Works for All ICC’s Trade and Customs Commission is pushing for practical reforms to simplify border procedures, promote trusted trader programs, and improve transparency. It remains a key platform to shape WTO modernization efforts and defend multilateral trade. The Commissions outlined a robust agenda aimed at modernizing the multilateral trade system, addressing mounting protectionism, and ensuring that trade remains a tool for resilience, sustainability, and shared prosperity. At the heart of the workstream is ICC’s campaign to revitalize the global trading system , particularly in the lead-up to the 14th WTO Ministerial Conference (MC14) in 2026. Through strategic advocacy, data-driven insights, and global collaboration, ICC is shaping the business voice on key trade debates. 🔹 Key Updates: A new suite of policy briefs addresses urgent topics: the erosion of the WTO, exchange rate misalignments, trade-related subsidies, and the economic impact of WTO dissolution on developing countries (in partnership with Oxford Economics). ICC is actively engaged in shaping outcomes on trade and climate , including the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) , deforestation regulations, and a new set of Ecoterms® defining sustainability in trade. The WTO e-commerce moratorium and digital trade negotiations remain high on the agenda, as ICC works to ensure an open, rules-based digital economy. The Customs Commission is advancing work on rules of origin , Authorized Economic Operator (AEO) programs for SMEs , and an integrity at borders initiative with the WCO. A virtual meeting of the Global Customs Commission will take place on 2–3 July 2025 , open to all nominated experts. 🔹 Opportunities to Engage: Nominate trade and customs experts to ICC’s Global Commissions. Join national-level advocacy to promote ICC policy positions. Participate in upcoming dialogues and provide feedback on draft publications. Share ICC tools and insights with Dutch policymakers to build momentum ahead of MC14. Global trade reform needs business leadership—and ICC members are uniquely positioned to deliver it. 🌐 A Decade of Impact: The Global Alliance for Trade Facilitation Making Trade Simpler, Faster, and More Inclusive The Alliance’s public-private approach is helping countries implement the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement. With 36 projects in 30+ countries, the Alliance is working on reducing clearance times, automating processes, and engaging small businesses—especially in Africa and Latin America. 🔹 What’s New: New and upcoming projects across Africa, Asia, and Eastern Europe , including Bangladesh, Cameroon, Mauritania, Moldova, and potentially Ukraine and Egypt. A growing partnership with UNICEF to streamline medical imports, improving access to vaccines and health products in up to 10 countries. A regional initiative with the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) to scale up digital phytosanitary certificates (ePhyto) across Africa. 🔹 Opportunities for ICC Members: Connect local businesses with GATF projects to share trade bottlenecks and shape reform. Participate to roundtables or workshops on trade facilitation challenges with Alliance support. 🌐 Learn more | @GATFnews 💻 Accelerating Digital Trade: Progress and Priorities from the ICC Digital Standards Initiative Laying the Foundations for Seamless Digital Trade DSI is scaling digital trade adoption by setting standards, building trust, supporting legal reform, and boosting capacity. Recent highlights include the global rollout of the Key Trade Data Glossary (KTDDE), a reliability framework for digital platforms, and support for MLETR adoption in over 20 countries. The DSI’s four-pillar vision—standards, trust, legal reform, and capacity—has gained impressive traction, offering both governments and businesses a structured roadmap to transition from paper to interoperable, secure digital trade. 🔹 Key Highlights: The Key Trade Data Glossary (KTDDE) is emerging as a global baseline for standardised trade data. Implementation guides now support real-time data exchange across over 160 million businesses worldwide. DSI launched a reliability assessment framework for digital trade platforms, a major step toward scalable digital trust. This initiative, developed in collaboration with the Digital Governance Council of Canada, aims to help solution providers, regulators, and businesses benchmark the reliability of digital systems. Significant momentum is building behind the adoption of the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Transferable Records (MLETR) . DSI is currently engaged in 20+ countries including Thailand, Malaysia, the Netherlands, and Nigeria, offering legal reform technical support to governments. In May 2025, the Dutch government submitted a bill to Parliament to formally recognise the legal validity of electronic bills of lading (eBLs) —an important first step toward aligning with MLETR principles . While the proposal stops short of full MLETR adoption, it lays the groundwork for broader digital trade reform. A three-year review clause was included to explore expansion to other types of electronic transferable records. ICC Netherlands and partners continue to advocate for full implementation to unlock the benefits of paperless trade across sectors. Through more than 50 global training sessions in 2024, DSI has strengthened its presence in Latin America, Africa, and Asia. A professional certification— Certificate in Digital Trade Strategy (CDTS) —has also been relaunched via ICC Academy to boost private sector knowledge. 🔹 Opportunities to Engage: Dutch businesses are encouraged to support ICC Netherlands’ advocacy for full MLETR implementation by endorsing the upcoming White Paper on Digital Trade Reform , which outlines the benefits and practical pathways for adoption in the Netherlands. Companies can help raise awareness by sharing practical use cases where paperless trade would reduce costs, improve efficiency, or support sustainability goals. Members are invited to join ICC-hosted events and working groups to engage policymakers, especially in the lead-up to the three-year legislative review. Interested firms can also adopt ICC’s reliability tools to assess their digital trade readiness and gain visibility in the broader European digital trade ecosystem. 💼 Driving Business Voice in the Evolving Global Tax Landscape Global Tax Commission Shaping Fair and Predictable Global Tax Rules The Commission is actively contributing to the new UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation. Its advocacy secured business access to negotiations and is shaping global protocols on service taxation and dispute resolution. 🔹 UN Tax Convention – A New Era The presentation outlined the road to the new UN Tax process—initiated during the 2015 Addis Ababa Financing for Development Conference and formalized through UNGA Resolution 78/230 in 2023. The process now advances under an intergovernmental committee tasked with drafting a binding Framework Convention and two early protocols: Cross-border taxation of services Tax dispute prevention and resolution Through strategic engagement, ICC successfully advocated for business participation to be formally included in the negotiation process—a significant achievement that opens the door for private sector input in shaping international tax norms. 🔹 What’s Next The ad hoc committee will hold three formal sessions annually from 2025–2027, with the first rounds in August 2025 (New York) and November 2025 (Nairobi) . ICC coordinates accreditation for business representatives and supports members with talking points and logistics. Beyond UN engagement, the Global Tax Commission remains active in key regional platforms (EU, LAC, and potentially ATAF and Asia), while also monitoring developments such as the U.S. Section 899 proposal and its implications for foreign direct investment. 🔹 Opportunities to Engage Participate in joint regional webinars to engage with business and government stakeholders. Contribute to public consultations . Respond to the upcoming global survey on tax and sustainable investment (summer 2025). Stay informed through regular briefings , including updates on VAT, digital taxation, and telework. ICC members are strongly encouraged to seize these openings to shape fair, transparent, and growth-friendly global tax frameworks. 🛡️ Upholding Business Integrity in Uncertain Times Business Integrity The Integrity Commission is leading ICC’s work on anti-corruption, whistleblowing, responsible business conduct, and ethical trade. New tools include updated corruption rules, SME guidance, and model clauses for responsible behavior in fragile settings. The #WeAreICC presentation on Business Integrity reaffirmed ICC’s longstanding commitment to advancing responsible business conduct, anti-corruption, and the rule of law. As global uncertainties and geopolitical tensions rise, business integrity is more critical than ever—not only as a matter of ethics but also for risk mitigation, trust-building, and sustainable development. 🔹 What ICC Is Doing At the heart of this work is the ICC Global Commission on Business Integrity , a platform uniting companies and policymakers to drive consistent and effective integrity standards across jurisdictions. ICC acts as a global standard-setter , notably through the 2023 revised ICC Rules on Combating Corruption , which now include clear mandatory provisions, guidance for implementation, and compliance program elements. New and updated tools have also been launched: ICC Anti-Corruption Clause – to be voluntarily included in contracts; ICC Whistleblowing Guidelines – practical guidance for safe speak-up environments; Due Diligence Guidance for SMEs , Gifts and Hospitality Guidelines , and the RESIST Tool for anti-bribery scenarios; ICC Guidance on Responsible Business in Challenging Contexts – offering a strategic and tactical approach to integrity in fragile or conflict-affected settings. 🔹 Opportunities to Engage Participate to the Dutch mirror committee and Week of Integrity events. Businesses can embed ICC tools into compliance programs or legal frameworks. Members are encouraged to join the next Global Commission meeting (October 2025, virtual). 🏦 Scaling Up Trade Finance: ICC’s Banking Commission Sets the Agenda Global Banking Commission Powering Sustainable Trade Finance The Commission continues to set rules and provide data that support trade finance reliability and regulatory fairness. Priorities include sustainability frameworks, eRules, and digital innovation in collaboration with DSI. The ICC Global Banking Commission, the world’s leading standard-setting body for trade finance, used its #WeAreICC Week briefing to reaffirm its commitment to building resilient financial frameworks for global trade. As trade finance demand grows amid shifting supply chains, climate obligations, and digitalisation, the Commission is accelerating work across four priority areas: access, risk, trust, and transformation. 🔹 Key Areas of Focus: Trade Finance Modernization : ICC continues to guide the industry with updated rules, opinions, and technical guidance , while aligning on a clear and consistent definition of trade finance to counter regulatory fragmentation. Sustainability : The ICC Principles for Sustainable Trade Finance (PSTF) —developed with banks and in collaboration with the ICC Environment & Energy Commission—establish a common framework to define and assess sustainable trade across industries and regions. Digitisation & Innovation : In partnership with the Digital Standards Initiative (DSI) , the Commission is advancing API standards and eRules to support paperless trade finance systems. A working group on digital trade finance is actively pursuing global adoption. Risk Data & Advocacy : The ICC Trade Register continues to offer unmatched data on the low-risk nature of trade finance, reinforcing advocacy for proportionate capital treatment under global banking regulations. 🔹 Opportunities to Engage: Nominate experts to join ICC’s technical taskforces. Promote ICC’s banking rules and advocacy papers to regulators . Contribute national data to strengthen the ICC Trade Register . Join capacity-building efforts and promote uptake of sustainable trade finance frameworks. As global trade faces tighter financing conditions and regulatory pressures, the Banking Commission is more relevant than ever in bridging private sector needs and public policy. 🌾 Unlocking Sustainable Growth: ICC’s Agri-Food Initiative Sets a New Course for Food Systems Agri-Food Initiative Enabling Sustainable and Inclusive Food Systems The ICC Agri-Food Initiative is a multistakeholder platform supporting food systems transformation. Work focuses on sustainable trade, finance, climate adaptation, and innovation—with a major milestone coming at the Committee on Food Security in October 2025. The #WeAreICC presentation on the ICC Agri-Food Initiative laid out a clear vision: enable food systems transformation through cross-sectoral cooperation, global standards, and inclusive trade. This unique platform, convened by ICC, connects business leaders, farmers, financiers, and policymakers to drive practical solutions for a resilient and sustainable agri-food economy. 🔹 Key Highlights: The initiative responds to a triple challenge: feeding a growing population , preserving the environment , and ensuring fair market access . It is structured around four thematic tracks : Food Trade, Climate, Finance, and Innovation—supported by a cross-cutting Policy & Advocacy track . Work is underway on practical guidance for trade policy design , sustainable financing models, and tools for agri-business resilience in vulnerable regions. The platform has already mobilized over 150 experts , including partners from WBCSD, WEF, UNDP, IFAD, and major agribusinesses. 🔹 2025 Priorities: A flagship event at the UN Committee on Food Security (October 2025, Rome) will launch a policy paper with concrete business-driven recommendations. Continued input into UNFCCC , COP30 , and WTO dialogues on food systems and climate-smart trade. Expansion of regional dialogues and national committee engagement to localize solutions. 🔹 Opportunities to Engage: Nominate experts to the thematic tracks and contribute case studies or policy inputs. Help identify food system barriers in supply chain—trade, financing, or regulation. Participate to knowledge-sharing sessions with ICC’s Agri-Food team. In a time of escalating food insecurity, ICC’s Agri-Food Initiative offers a rare, solutions-driven forum where business plays a central role in fixing broken food systems—globally and locally. 🌾 [Explore more: iccwbo.org ] | #AgriFoodForChange ⚖️ Dispute Resolution at the Core of Global Business Confidence Dispute Resolution Services (DRS) Dispute Resolution: ICC Charts a Strategic Path Forward for DRS Services During the We are ICC Week, a dedicated strategy session shed light on the latest trends in ICC Dispute Resolution Services (DRS) and outlined upcoming initiatives designed to reinforce ICC’s role as the world’s leading institution for business dispute resolution. In 2024, ICC saw nearly 2,850 new arbitration and ADR cases filed, covering a record $102 billion in new disputes. These figures not only reflect ICC’s global reach—spanning every continent and increasingly involving state-owned entities—but also show growing reliance on ICC rules, particularly the Expedited Procedure Provisions (EPP), now under revision. Looking ahead, ICC’s work will be anchored around several priority actions: A major revision of the ICC Arbitration Rules is underway, incorporating input from over 135 submissions received through national committees. A redline version is now in circulation with working sessions planned in July and a new set of rules expected to enter into force in 2026. Expansion of ICC DRS digital capabilities with the launch of “ICC Case Connect,” a secure digital case management platform powered by Opus2. Development of regional ICC Hearing Centres , enhancing in-person arbitration infrastructure in key locations. Advancing thought leadership on urgent issues including AI in dispute resolution and corruption risks in arbitration, via newly established task forces. Continued commitment to diversity and inclusivity , with increased female representation (46%) and stronger corporate in-house participation among appointed delegates. Opportunities to Engage Members are encouraged to: Participate in the ICC Rules revision process and nominate delegates for July’s working sessions. Share feedback to help shape future dispute resolution tools and guidance. Propose or join (new) task forces and use ICC’s DRS roadmap to align local actions with global goals. Dispute resolution is more than legal certainty—it’s business continuity. ICC ensures companies, big and small, have access to world-class, trusted solutions. 🔗 Explore more

< Back < Previous | Next > The Silent Drain on Enterprise: The Economic Impact of Unresolved Commercial Disputes 4 Nov 2025 A new ICC–Oxera report reveals the staggering global cost of unresolved commercial disputes, which drain liquidity, suppress investment, and weaken trust in markets. The study highlights how affordable, digital dispute resolution can unlock growth, especially for SMEs, and strengthen justice as essential economic infrastructure. The Silent Drain on Enterprise: The Economic Impact of Unresolved Commercial Disputes Every day, countless business-to-business transactions end in disagreement, over payments, delivery, quality, or performance. For large companies, such disputes are often an inconvenience. For small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), they can be existential. A new Oxera study commissioned by the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) exposes the staggering economic toll of low-value commercial disputes that remain unresolved, often because the cost of pursuing justice exceeds the value of the claim itself. The result is a hidden but systemic drag on productivity, investment, and growth: a “missing market” for justice that distorts economies worldwide. Globally, SMEs are estimated to write off more than US$1 trillion every year in bad debts and disputed invoices . In many developing economies, the average cost of court proceedings is higher than the claim value, making enforcement economically irrational. The rational choice, repeated millions of times, is to walk away, eroding trust across markets and suppressing the appetite to invest. From Business Losses to Macro-Economic Harm The ICC–Oxera report, published in October 2025, traces how unresolved disputes ripple outward from individual firms to entire economies. At the firm level , unpaid claims drain liquidity, tie up working capital, and consume valuable management time, time that could fuel innovation or new sales. At the market level , the lack of predictable contract enforcement increases uncertainty, discouraging long-term partnerships and limiting participation in global value chains. At the systemic level , these losses accumulate into a macroeconomic brake on growth: weak enforcement reduces investment, tightens credit, and lowers productivity. The impact is particularly severe for SMEs in emerging markets, which account for 95% of firms and over half of employment but face prohibitively high legal costs and lengthy proceedings. In Cambodia, Papua New Guinea, and Timor-Leste, the average cost of enforcing a contract exceeds 100% of the claim value. Globally, the SME financing gap, already estimated at US$5.2 trillion annually , widens further as lenders hesitate to finance firms that cannot reliably enforce contracts. Justice as Economic Infrastructure The message from ICC and Oxera is clear: efficient, accessible dispute resolution is not only a legal necessity, it is an economic imperative. Just as ports, energy grids, and digital networks enable trade, a functioning justice system allows firms to enforce agreements quickly and fairly. Improving access to justice for SMEs unlocks multiple growth dividends: Frees capital locked in unpaid invoices and reduces costly litigation; Strengthens trust between buyers and suppliers; Deepens credit markets by giving lenders confidence that contracts will be honoured; Encourages innovation by reducing risk and promoting fair competition. Accessible dispute resolution is, in short, a form of economic infrastructure , vital for productivity, inclusion, and sustainable growth. A Digital Pathway Forward Digital innovation now offers a once-in-a-generation opportunity to democratise access to justice. Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) platforms, using digital workflows, secure document exchange, and virtual mediation, can resolve many commercial disputes at a fraction of the time and cost of court proceedings. Building on its century-long leadership in commercial standard-setting and access to justice, ICC is developing a global ODR platform designed for micro-, small-, and medium-sized enterprises. By integrating ODR into national legal systems and trade frameworks, governments can create a low-cost, high-trust layer of justice infrastructure, particularly valuable for cross-border transactions and digital trade. For Europe and the Netherlands, home to strong digital trade ecosystems and forward-looking legal institutions, this presents an opportunity to lead by example, making dispute resolution more efficient, inclusive, and future-proof. Read further Full report: The Economic Impact of Unresolved Low-Value Commercial Disputes (ICC & Oxera, 2025) Read the Summary

< Back < Previous | Next > Orchestrating the back office of the future: why the human factor is becoming the primary vulnerability 25 Mar 2026 As financial institutions digitalise their back offices, fraud is evolving from technical breaches to human manipulation. What does this shift mean for control, governance and risk in increasingly automated environments? Orchestrating the back office of the future: why the human factor is becoming the primary vulnerability As financial institutions continue to digitalise their operations, the back office is undergoing a profound transformation. This was the focus of the “Orchestrating the Back Office of the Future” executive dialogue, which brought together actors from across the banking and trade finance ecosystem to reflect on how automation, data and AI are reshaping back-office functions. Organised in collaboration with Iron Mountain and Conpend, the dialogue explored how institutions can move from fragmented, manual processes towards more integrated and intelligent operations. Within this broader transformation, one question becomes increasingly important: where does risk sit in a digital back office? A paradox: stronger systems, growing losses Financial institutions have invested heavily in securing systems and strengthening controls. Yet global losses from fraud are estimated at around $5 trillion annually , and a significant share of successful attacks involve a human element. This points to a structural paradox. As technical systems become more robust, fraud does not disappear, it adapts . Rather than attempting to break systems, fraudsters increasingly operate within them. From technical “hacks” to social engineering A key shift highlighted in the discussion is the move from technical attacks to social engineering . This does not necessarily involve sophisticated hacking. Instead, it relies on: impersonation, manipulation of trust, and the creation of urgency or pressure to trigger action. In such scenarios, processes are followed correctly. Transactions are approved. Systems function as designed. The difference lies in intent. This makes detection significantly more complex. Controls are typically designed to identify incorrect processes, but are less effective when correct processes are used for the wrong purpose . The human factor as the primary entry point As highlighted during the session, between 70% and 90% of successful attacks involve a human element . This shifts the focus from systems to behaviour. Fraud today often emerges in situations where: decisions are taken under time pressure, authority is not challenged, or a request appears credible enough to bypass verification. These are not technical failures. They are organisational and behavioural vulnerabilities . Importantly, this also means that fraud is not always external. Insider actions, mistakes, or misjudgements can play a role, further blurring the line between error and intent. Technology accelerates both sides The increasing use of AI adds another layer to this dynamic. While it offers significant opportunities to improve efficiency and detection, it also enables fraudsters to operate faster, at lower cost, and at greater scale . This creates what can be described as a defender’s dilemma : institutions must continuously adapt, while attackers can rapidly leverage new tools to refine their approach. Rethinking control in a digital back office These developments suggest that strengthening systems alone will not be sufficient. As back-office functions become more digital, the main vulnerability is no longer the technology itself, but the interaction between people, processes and systems . This requires a shift in perspective. Controls must not only verify whether a process is followed, but also consider: whether the context is consistent, whether the request aligns with expected behaviour, and whether individuals feel able, and responsible, to challenge anomalies. In practice, this means integrating the human dimension more explicitly into process design, governance and risk management. A shift in mindset The evolution of financial crime ultimately challenges a fundamental assumption: that trust can be embedded solely in systems and procedures. In an increasingly digital environment, trust must be actively managed, across technology, processes and people. As back offices become more efficient and interconnected, resilience will depend not only on how systems are designed, but on how they are used in practice.

< 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 > Enhancing Climate Finance in Emerging Markets 26 Jul 2025 Emerging markets and developing economies need US$450–550 billion in additional annual climate finance by 2030, but private flows are declining. ICC’s new policy brief shows how targeted reforms to the Basel III framework could unlock 3–4 times more private investment in climate-aligned projects. Ahead of COP30, ICC is calling for a structured dialogue with regulators to ensure climate finance flows to where it is most urgently needed. Emerging markets and developing economies (EMDEs) are central to achieving the Paris Agreement goals. They represent 25% of global GDP , yet attract just 14% of climate finance flows . Private finance to EMDEs is even more limited — only around US$30 billion annually , while the need is closer to US$450–550 billion each year by 2030 . A new ICC policy brief shows how reforms to the Basel III prudential framework could unlock significantly more private capital for climate-aligned projects in EMDEs. Current rules unintentionally discourage bank lending to these regions, despite strong data showing that project finance in EMDEs often outperforms corporate loans with lower-than-expected default rates and higher recovery rates. Key barriers identified: Limited recognition of risk mitigation tools : Guarantees and blended finance structures used by multilateral development banks (MDBs) and development finance institutions (DFIs) are often excluded from capital relief. Overly conservative treatment of project finance : Risk weights do not reflect proven performance and embedded protections. Country risk ceilings : Sovereign credit ratings inflate perceived risks, even for high-quality, co-financed projects, raising the cost of capital. The way forward ICC proposes a two-step approach : Technical clarifications – small adjustments to Basel rules that could immediately unlock more capital, such as recognising partial guarantees, timely payouts under MDB/DFI instruments, and borrower-level mitigants like FX hedging. Structural reforms – longer-term changes, including treating project finance as a distinct asset class, refining country risk treatment, and introducing a scaling factor for high-quality, climate-related EMDE investments (similar to the SME Supporting Factor in the EU). If implemented, these reforms could increase the bank capital available for climate projects in emerging markets by 3–4 times , without compromising financial stability. As the official voice of business in the UNFCCC process , ICC will take these recommendations into the COP30 negotiations in Belém, Brazil , calling for a structured dialogue with regulators and the Basel Committee to ensure climate finance reaches the regions that need it most. 2025-ICC-Enhancing-climate-finance-in-emerging-market-developing-economies-1 (2) .pdf Download PDF • 625KB

< Back < Previous | Next > Trade & Investment The world order is changing from a ‘rules-based’ to a more ‘power-based’ setup 1 Mar 2025 The previous two issues of our newsletter have looked closer at the current geopolitical situation: the challenges and solutions thereof. These have covered the subject from the perspective of the trans-Atlantic thinktank German Marshall Fund (Dr. Alexandra de Hoop Scheffer) and ICC Global (Deputy Secretary General for Policy Andrew Wilson). Now it’s time to hear from one of the largest business associations in the Netherlands – evofenedex – which represents its 10,000+ members active in supply chain logistics and/or international trade. Evofenedex Managing Director Bart Jan Koopman answers some of our most pressing questions covering risks, opportunities and how to build resilience. What is your take on the increasing international trade tensions that we have seen in the media so much over the previous couple of months? For a long time, international trade has been managed and regulated by international institutions implementing a variety of rules and agreements. However, a large number of countries and groups of countries are stepping out of this way of working. So instead of the world becoming more globalised, we are seeing more and more fragmentation. However, this goes back longer than the recent developments we are seeing in the media at the moment; this has been happening for a number of years. As for the timing of the coverage, it’s important to note that this is not a story that is driven by Trump. For example, the WTO started becoming a lame duck organisation in the Obama years. However, the situation has been worsened by Trump. To understand the underlying mechanisms as to why this is happening, we need to look at the fact that the world order is changing from a ‘rules-based’ to a more ‘power-based’ setup. And how does this affect international businesses? This has a significant impact on the business community with substantial economic and trade consequences. It is very challenging for companies to make decisions in this fragmented world with different rules and standards. Experience has taught us that protectionism comes with more rules and regulations and makes it harder to be compliant. And at the same time another reality is true. If things were complex with regulations, then without them, it is even more complex. You also now have to take all these geopolitical developments into account! Let’s talk about risks and opportunities. How should companies tackle the seemingly constant stream of risks? If you are in business, there have always been risks and there will always be risks: the Suez Canal blockage, the Middle East situation, and the coronavirus pandemic are all relevant examples. When looking at how to deal with such uncertainty – this unpredictability – if you only look at situations from a risk perspective, then you often don’t get a chance to see the opportunities. So rather than only looking at – and reacting to – the risks, companies need to act more strategically. This is the challenge of moving from a risk-based to a more resilient way of working. How can companies build resilience? Reconfiguration of supply chains is a good example. A large company working in the semiconductor sector, for instance, knows that the USA will have big problems with companies delivering certain chips to China but also chips made in China and shipped to the US will be a problem. In this case, reconfiguring the supply chain to relocate this part production outside China – to Malaysia or Vietnam – could be a solution. Another option rethinks the ‘just in time’ supply chain method. Companies can build resilience by increasing the number of their suppliers; having three or four instead of one or two. This would involve different supply chains operating in parallel, possibly at different production sites. Of course, this is more expensive, but it is more resilient. Other examples could be to set up production in the USA, or to focus more on internal European markets. Reconfiguration of supply chains can offer new possibilities for every company in every sector. Last but not least, cooperation in the value chain and supply chain helps to build resilience as well. What is the role of organisations like ICC and evofenedex? Companies need to concentrate on their business rather than sitting around analysing trends. On the other hand, they need to stay up-to-date with both the short and long-term trends so that they don’t make decisions that they could regret later. This is where organisations like ICC and evofenedex can help companies find their way through the complexity. At evofenedex, the trio of actions that we like to offer our members is ‘interpret, learn and influence’. This is not only useful for small and medium-sized companies, but large ones too. Look at the complexity that everyone is operating in: regulations are only increasing, but at the same time we are living in a world where regulations are getting less and less important. This is a challenge but also an opportunity. And how does this translate to practical help to members? Externally, we work with organisations such as the ICC on the ‘big picture’ issues; promoting the push towards increased digitalisation of trade procedures, and during the Week of Integrity, for instance. And then internally, we look at long-term trends and themes affecting our members, and try to give advice and increase members’ knowledge level on those subjects. Significant trends at the moment include compliance, working with trade restrictions, and sustainability. Rather than one-on-one transactions, we bring our members together in what we call communities to share experiences and knowledge with each other. Despite all of this do not forget international business is still very much alive and needed and I am convinced that together we can do business also in these turbulent times!

< Back < Previous | Next > ICC warns of double taxation risks in latest UN tax talks 19 Dec 2025 As United Nations negotiations on a Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation continue, ICC warns that reforms risk creating new layers of double taxation. Following the latest round of talks in Nairobi, ICC states that expanding taxing rights without mandatory safeguards and relief from double taxation could undermine cross-border investment, strain tax administrations and weaken global growth. Government negotiators gathered mid-November for the third session of the United Nations Intergovernmental Negotiations Committee (INC) on the Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation. Ambition is high: to reshape global tax rules under UN auspices, with a particular eye on fairness and development. For business, however, the direction of travel raises familiar, and serious, questions about certainty, coherence and the risk of double taxation. As the institutional representative of over 45 million companies worldwide, ICC used the Nairobi session to drive home its message. In written submissions to the negotiating workstreams, ICC advocated that without clear safeguards, the Convention could unintentionally undermine cross-border trade and investment rather than support sustainable development. A convention with many moving parts The first week in Nairobi focused on the draft commitments in articles to be included in the Convention itself ( Workstream I ). These articles ranged widely – from fair allocation of taxing rights, the treatment of high-net-worth individuals and sustainable development, to illicit financial flows, tax avoidance and evasion, harmful tax practices, and the prevention and resolution of tax disputes. Double taxation: a severe and unacceptable risk for business For the business community, the most sensitive provision is Article 4 on the ‘fair allocation of taxing rights’. As currently worded, Article 4 asserts broad taxing rights for jurisdictions but offers little guidance on how income should be allocated between them. From a business perspective, this creates a severe and unacceptable risk of double and even multiple taxation – an ambiguity could lead to a regulatory ‘free-for-all’ for jurisdictions. ICC advocated that the Convention must explicitly state the prevention and relief of double taxation as a core non-negotiable objective. Any new source-based taxing rights must be paired with mandatory relief by the residence country, whether through exemptions, tax credits or equivalent measures. Put more simply, if the Convention gives multiple countries the right to tax the very same profits, it must also require relief from double taxation, for instance, through recognition of a tax credit. Otherwise, if the same profits are taxed more than once, it will no longer be economically viable for companies to operate in more than one country. This ultimately leads to a decrease in investments and job creation, and distress in local supply chains and the overall local economy. Expanding taxing rights without equally strong relief mechanisms would, ICC says, amplify the problem rather than solve it. Closely linked is the question of definitions . ICC stressed the need to align concepts and definitions with existing international usage standards, such as those of the United Nations (UN) and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Fragmented definitions increase compliance costs, strain tax administrations and raise the likelihood of disputes – outcomes that would disproportionately affect developing countries with more limited administrative capacity. Dispute prevention and resolution must be strengthened to safeguard tax certainty. The second week of negotiations turned to Workstream III , covering the latest concept note released by the UN Protocol II on dispute prevention and resolution. The concept note outlines an optional mechanism for the protocol to work, allowing countries to choose from a range of mechanisms, those suitable to their legal, political and institutional contexts. The concept note also included open questions on scope, mechanisms and capacity building. While details remain uncertain, our response is unambiguous. Without credible dispute resolution, tax certainty, cross-border investment and sustainable economic growth are at risk. To enhance tax certainty and reduce the volume of disputes, ICC proposed incorporating new prevention instruments into the Protocol: ‘MAP-Lite’ Framework: a streamlined process that allows tax authorities to cooperate quickly, review cases early and grant temporary tax relief while disagreements are being resolved – giving companies interim certainty and reducing the impact on business. ‘Synthetic’ APAs: Encouraging the possibility of coordinating two unilateral Advance Pricing Arrangements (APAs) to create the certainty equivalent of a bilateral APA, yet with less complexity and delay. Simple Safe Harbours: Introducing simple ‘safe harbours’ – pre-agreed tax rules – for low-risk services and routine distribution margins. Where disputes cannot be avoided, ICC strongly supports reinforcing the effectiveness of the Mutual Agreement Procedure (MAP) – a formal process that allows governments to resolve cross-border tax disputes between themselves – supported by a binding arbitration backstop. Experience from existing treaties suggests that the mere presence of binding arbitration encourages tax authorities to settle cases within MAP, reducing uncertainty for both governments and taxpayers. One notable absence from Nairobi was progress on Workstream II, covering the taxation of cross-border services. No new document was presented, although a fresh proposal is expected ahead of the next session in New York, starting on 2 February 2026. For now, the UN tax process remains very much a work in progress. Whether it delivers a predictable, rules-based framework or a patchwork of competing claims will depend on choices made by negotiators. ICC remains committed to constructive engagement with the INC and to delivering a predictable, rules-based system that benefits the global economy, while supporting developing countries in achieving needed revenues alongside investment confidence.

< 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 > COP30 Falls Short of What the Global Economy Needs 23 Nov 2025 COP30 reaffirmed global commitment to the Paris Agreement, but its outcomes fall short of what the world economy urgently needs. Without clear pathways on adaptation, mitigation and finance, the private sector’s ability to deliver climate solutions at scale remains constrained. COP30 Falls Short of What the Global Economy Needs As the dust settles on COP30 in Belém, one message from the global business community stands out clearly: the world cannot afford another year of incrementalism . While governments reaffirmed their support for the Paris Agreement, the outcomes of this “Amazon COP” fall short of what the global economy urgently requires to deliver resilience, investment and sustainable growth. Against the backdrop of intensifying climate risks, fragile supply chains and tightening global capital markets, businesses expected COP30 to provide a clearer sense of direction. Instead, the outcome leaves key questions unanswered; particularly on adaptation, mitigation and the finance mechanisms needed to connect ambition with real-world investment. A COP of Symbolism, But Not Yet a COP of Solutions The private sector arrived in Belém ready to scale efforts. As the ICC and the broader Business and Industry NGO (BINGO) community have repeatedly stressed, companies are no longer waiting for permission to innovate, decarbonise and build resilience. They are already pouring capital, technology and expertise into climate solutions. But business cannot act alone. Without coherent policies, predictable frameworks and credible financial pathways, private efforts risk being constrained, or worse, stranded. That is why COP30’s inability to provide a robust roadmap is so concerning. Adaptation: Still Treated as an Option, Not an Economic Imperative At a time when the physical impacts of climate change are accelerating, adaptation remains the foundation of economic resilience. Yet COP30 did not deliver a credible adaptation plan capable of mobilising private finance or advancing the scale of innovation needed on the ground. For many economies, particularly developing and climate-vulnerable nations, this gap is not theoretical. It means higher insurance costs, greater infrastructure fragility, increased food insecurity and diminished investor confidence. Businesses need clarity on adaptation pathways to protect workers, assets and supply chains. Without this, risks compound and the cost of inaction grows. Mitigation : Ambition Without Anchors Following the strong political signal sent at COP28 in Dubai, expectations for COP30 were high. Belém should have translated ambition into action, particularly through national plans aligned with a 1.5°C pathway and real milestones for the energy transition. Instead, the Global Accelerator, the Mission to 1.5 and various voluntary roadmaps remain intentions rather than instruments. They are promising initiatives, but without binding frameworks, implementation pathways or investment clarity, they lack the power to shift markets at scale. For businesses planning multi-decade investments, uncertainty around national climate strategies creates hesitation. Combined with uneven global policies, this risks slowing the very transition governments seek to accelerate. Climate Finance: The Missing Foundation More than any other area, climate finance emerged as the defining weakness of COP30 . The statement from the business community could not have been clearer: decisions taken in Belém will not deliver results without a step-change in finance . Roundtables and high-level commitments are not enough. What companies and investors urgently need is a concrete, operational action plan capable of: unlocking private capital at scale integrating the Baku–Belém Roadmap de-risking investments through blended finance accelerating climate-friendly infrastructure development ensuring transparent, predictable financing mechanisms Without financial signals aligned with markets, even the strongest declarations will fall short. The global economy is poised to mobilise trillions, but only if governments provide the frameworks that convert ambition into bankable projects. Cooperation at a Crossroads COP30 was also marked by deep divisions. Yet amidst the tension, one encouraging element emerged: broad recognition that open, fair and rules-based trade is essential to shared climate and economic prosperity. Strengthening this link is vital. Trade is a critical channel for scaling clean technologies, enabling green supply chains and building global resilience. Fragmentation, whether regulatory or geopolitical, only increases costs and slows progress. The business community is calling for a renewed, inclusive dialogue to transform political alignment into cooperative action. This includes aligning climate and trade policies, streamlining standards and using global platforms, including the WTO, to avoid a patchwork of incompatible national rules. Looking Ahead to COP31: A Year for Delivery COP30 was a reminder that the world cannot rely on symbolism. As the ICC’s closing message emphasised, what happens next is what truly matters. For COP31 to succeed, governments must: Produce credible, investment-ready adaptation pathways Anchor mitigation commitments in national plans with measurable milestones Deploy real financing tools that mobilise capital, not just conversations Rebuild trust through cooperation rather than fragmentation Focus decisions on economic realities as much as political ones The global business community remains committed, capable and ready to act; but it needs governments to match this resolve with actionable frameworks that work for people, the economy and the planet. COP30 may not have delivered the clarity that was needed, but it has sharpened the focus for the year ahead. The world’s economies simply cannot afford another missed opportunity.

< 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 > The bigger picture of arbitration Tom Scott 3 Mar 2026 A conversation with Marc Krestin, Partner at Fieldfisher The bigger picture of arbitration A conversation with Marc Krestin, Partner at Fieldfisher Marc Krestin is a dispute resolution lawyer at Fieldfisher with over 18 years of experience in international litigation and arbitration. Having worked in the Netherlands and France, his career path has focused on complex cross-border disputes, with a particular emphasis on arbitration. With an international upbringing spanning Germany, Switzerland, the Netherlands and France, Marc views arbitration as a natural extension of his background. “It is global by nature,” he explains, “and requires cultural awareness, as well as an understanding of international law, economics and geopolitics.” From your perspective, what role does arbitration play today in supporting trust and continuity in international business? Arbitration supports trust and continuity. And therefore it converts some of the uncertainty that businesses may encounter across their lifecycle into enforceable decisions. Arbitration gives companies security and finality about disputes, enabling them to move on with their core business. In cross-border commerce, businesses value predictability, neutrality and enforceability. Arbitration ticks those boxes. Predictability does not mean you can foresee the outcome, but you receive a final award that is, in principle, not subject to appeal. That gives parties closure. There is also perceived predictability in the fact that parties can generally influence the choice of the arbitrator(s). Neutrality is another cornerstone. Arbitration allows disputes to be resolved in a neutral forum, often with decision-makers who have no affiliation with either party’s home jurisdiction. And enforceability is perhaps arbitration’s greatest strength. Under the New York Convention, arbitral awards can be enforced in more than 170 countries. That global enforceability is far more extensive than what is typically available for court judgments outside regional frameworks such as the EU. Where do you see the biggest disconnect between business expectations and legal reality when it comes to arbitration? The largest gap lies between speed and cost expectations on the one hand, and due process requirements on the other. Businesses understandably want disputes resolved quickly and at the lowest possible cost. Arbitration, however, is built on principles of fairness and due process. That can sometimes make the process more complex, time-consuming and costly than parties initially expect. The flip side is that this thorough process leads to a well-reasoned decision that parties can live with and move on from, rather than a quick fix that leaves one side dissatisfied. There is also sometimes a misconception about ‘finality.’ While arbitral awards are final in principle, they can still be challenged on limited grounds. What do you see as the added value of ICC arbitration specifically? The ICC is widely regarded as the gold standard of institutional arbitration. It is one of the most recognised and frequently used arbitral institutions worldwide. A key differentiator is the scrutiny of awards by the ICC Court. Every award is reviewed before it is issued. That quality control mechanism is relatively unique and adds significant robustness to the process. The ICC also benefits from highly experienced administration and case management teams. Given the volume of cases handled, the institutional knowledge and expertise are substantial. Its global reach is another advantage. The ICC has access to arbitrators across jurisdictions and sectors, ensuring both diversity and the necessary local or technical expertise. In addition, the ICC Rules are regularly updated and include tools such as expedited proceedings and emergency arbitration, reflecting technological and sectoral developments. If you could give one piece of advice to Dutch companies entering international contracts in 2026, what would it be? Do not treat the dispute resolution clause as boilerplate. Draft it carefully, taking into account the specific business relationship and the geopolitical context. Think about enforcement risks, choice of seat, applicable law, procedural rules and unforeseen circumstances. Too often, dispute resolution clauses are copy-pasted at the last minute. Once a dispute arises, it is usually too late to find common ground on how to resolve it. It is far better to make thoughtful arrangements while the relationship is still healthy. Choosing a reputable institution, selecting a pro-arbitration seat and seeking proper legal advice can make a decisive difference. How can arbitrators, external counsel and in-house counsel work together more effectively? Although arbitration is adversarial, all stakeholders share a common objective: a fair, efficient and effective resolution of the dispute. We should perhaps approach arbitration more often with a project management mindset. That means adhering to timelines, focusing on issues that truly matter, avoiding unnecessary length in submissions and working collaboratively to shape an efficient process. Cultural differences can add complexity, but they also make arbitration an interesting and enjoyable field to work in. It is essential that arbitrators and counsel bridge those gaps and create a process that both parties can understand and accept. What trends and developments will shape arbitration practice in the next 5-10 years? Several developments are already here at our doorstep. First, disputes in sectors such as technology, life sciences, energy and financial services – particularly fintech and digital assets – will continue to grow. The rise of digital currencies, artificial intelligence and data-driven business models will generate new types of disputes. Second, arbitration will become increasingly digital and interdisciplinary. Cases will require technical expertise in engineering, data science or emerging technologies, alongside legal expertise. Third, ESG and climate-related disputes are likely to increase. While many such cases are currently brought before state courts, more contracts now include arbitration clauses, which means arbitration will increasingly deal with green finance, greenwashing and climate-related claims. Geopolitical fragmentation is another major driver. Sanctions, trade controls, tariffs and disputes involving state-owned entities will continue to shape the arbitration landscape. Finally, we will see more multi-tier dispute resolution clauses combining arbitration with mediation, expert determination or negotiation. Arbitration will increasingly be part of a broader dispute resolution toolkit. What advice would you give your younger self starting out in arbitration? Be deliberate and strategic about your career choices. Arbitration is highly competitive and internationally attractive. Seek out opportunities to gain hands-on experience. Learn from experienced practitioners. Master the facts; arbitration is fundamentally about understanding the record inside out. Networking is also crucial. Arbitration is a people’s business. Knowing the players – including arbitrators, counsel and institutional representatives – is important both for professional development and for staying up-to-date. Above all, never take the learning process for granted and immerse yourself fully in the craft. Marc Krestin Attorney-at-law specialising in international dispute resolution Partner at Fieldfisher Trace, Freeze and Collect – When the Forum Isn’t Your Friend: Enforcement across Eastern Europe and Asia - Paris Arbitration Week Beat the Clock: Essential Skills for Rising Arbitrators in Expedited Proceedings - Paris Arbitration Week

< 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!