Mediaboss Marketing

European Community (EC), previously (from 1957 until Nov. 1, 1993) European Economic Community (EEC), byname Common Market, former association designed to integrate the economies of Europe. The term also refers to the European Communities, which originally comprised the European Economic Community (EEC), the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC; dissolved in 2002), and the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom). In 1993 the three communities were subsumed under the European Union (EU). The EC, or Common Market, then became the principal component of the EU. It remained as such until 2009, when the EU legally replaced the EC as its institutional successor.

The EEC was created in 1957 by the Treaty of Rome, which was signed by Belgium, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and West Germany. The United Kingdom, Denmark, and Ireland joined in 1973, followed by Greece in 1981 and Portugal and Spain in 1986. The former East Germany was admitted as part of reunified Germany in 1990.

Read More on This Topic

international trade: The European Economic Community

The European Coal and Steel Community represented only an initial step in the movement for European integration. On March 25, 1957, its...

The EEC was designed to create a common market among its members through the elimination of most trade barriers and the establishment of a common external trade policy. The treaty also provided for a common agricultural policy, which was established in 1962 to protect EEC farmers from agricultural imports. The first reduction in EEC internal tariffs was implemented in January 1959, and by July 1968 all internal tariffs had been removed. Between 1958 and 1968 trade among the EECs members quadrupled in value.

Politically, the EEC aimed to reduce tensions in the aftermath of World War II. In particular, it was hoped that integration would promote a lasting reconciliation of France and Germany, thereby reducing the potential for war. EEC governance required political cooperation among its members through formal supranational institutions. These institutions included the Commission, which formulated and administered EEC policies; the Council of Ministers, which enacted legislation; the European Parliament, originally a strictly consultative body whose members were delegates from national parliaments (later they would be directly elected); and the European Court of Justice, which interpreted community law and arbitrated legal disputes.

Members revamped the organization several times in order to expand its policy-making powers and to revise its political structure. On July 1, 1967, the governing bodies of the EEC, ECSC, and Euratom were merged. Through the Single European Act, which entered into force in 1987, EEC members committed themselves to remove all remaining barriers to a common market by 1992. The act also gave the EEC formal control of community policies on the environment, research and technology, education, health, consumer protection, and other areas.

By the Maastricht Treaty (formally known as the Treaty on European Union; 1991), which went into force on November 1, 1993, the European Economic Community was renamed the European Community and was embedded into the EU as the first of its three pillars (the second being a common foreign and security policy and the third being police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters). The treaty also provided the foundation for an economic and monetary union, which included the creation of a single currency, the euro. The Lisbon Treaty, ratified in November 2009, extensively amended the governing documents of the EU. With the treatys entry into force on Dec. 1, 2009, the name European Community as well as the pillars concept were eliminated.

See the rest here:
European Community | European economic association ...

A total of 37,800 people sought international protection in the European Union countries in May 2021, according to the recent report of the European Asylum Support Office (EASO).

The agency revealed that the main origin countries in May 2021 were Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, stressing that Afghans logged more applications for the third consecutive month, SchengenVisaInfo.com reports.

According to the report, citizens from West African countries accounted for a significant number of applications filed for international protection in the European Union countries in May 2021.

The agency revealed that Moroccans, Tunisians, and Algerians lodged surprisingly few applications over the past 12 months, even though many nationals of these countries attempted to reach European countries in an unlawful way.

Nationals of Morocco, Tunisia, and Algeria have been the most prominent after Syrians in terms of illegal border-crossings detected at the external EU border over the past 12 months. Anyway, they lodged fewer asylum applications during the same period than the number of detected illegal border-crossings, the statement clarifies.

On the other hand, asylum applications were higher than illegal border-crossings for all other main origin countries, indicating that many citizens of Morocco, Tunisia, and Algeria who unlawfully entered the European Union countries didnt apply for international protection possibly due to low recognition rates for these nationalities.

The report reveals that West Africans accounted for a large number of applications lodged for international protection in the EU countries (5,500 applications) in May. Nigerians filed a total of 1,300 applications in May, remaining the most significant group among West Africans.

The relatively high number of asylum applications by West Africans partly reflects increased irregular migration on the Western African road towards the Canary Islands, the report reads.

In May, self-claimed unaccompanied minors filed 1,500 applications for international protection in EU countries, representing 4 per cent of applications filed in May. More than two-fifths of applications were from Afghans, followed by Syrians and Bangladeshis.

In May, asylum authorities in European Union countries issued 41,500 first instance decisions.

This was lower than in April (- 17 per cent) as far fewer decisions were issued on repeated applications, which had been numerous in recent months, the statement reads.

However, despite the decline, the number of first instance decisions issued exceeded the number of applications.

The recognition rate in the EU countries in May 2021 was 32 per cent. The recognition rates were especially high for Eritreans (80 per cent), Syrians (75 per cent), and Somalis (59 per cent).

Previously, the EASO report revealed that in 2020, a total of 48,578 Afghans applied for asylum in the European Union countries, remaining the second-largest group of applicants in the EU.

Follow this link:
EASO: 37,800 People Applied for International Protection in EU Countries in May - SchengenVisaInfo.com - SchengenVisaInfo.com

23 July 2021

Ganado Advocates

To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

The distribution of funds on a cross-border basis within theEuropean Union (the "EU") is the next important topic ofthe year for EU fund managers. The relatively new 'CBDFframework', which will come into force on 2 August 2021, willimpact alternative investment fund managers ("AIFMs") andUCITS management companies ("UCITS ManCos") as they willhave to ensure that marketing communications produced for fundsunder their management are compliant with this new framework. Thisarticle is aimed at: (i) providing a brief overview of the CBDFframework; and (ii) discussing the main challenges which AIFMsand/or UCITS ManCos may face once the framework is brought intoeffect.

Overview of the CBDF Framework

The 'CBDF Framework' is an EU legislative frameworkintended to facilitate the cross-border distribution of funds inthe EU by removing barriers to create a more competitive EUinvestment landscape. It is made up of two main legislativeinstruments - Directive (EU) 2019/1160 (the "Directive")and Regulation (EU) 2019/1156 (the "Regulation")supplemented by a Commission Delegated Regulation 2021/955 andguidelines issued by the European Securities and Markets Authority("ESMA") published on 27 May 2021. Most of thesubstantial provisions will apply as of 2 August 2021.

As a framework, it forms part of the capital markets union, aflagship initiative of the European Commission intended tostrengthen the European capital markets, which seeks to harmonisenational processes for the verification of marketing material bycompetent authorities and enables ESMA to monitor investment fundsmore closely. It allows managers to test the market and assess theappetite of potential investors for new investment strategies.Consistency regarding the way regulatory fees are determined willalso be introduced.

The main provisions of the CBDF Framework can be grouped underthe following five headings:

Main Challenges

The CBDF Framework is helpful to managers in certain respects,yet particular provisions require further clarification. The newrules will compel managers to decide whether to actively promote anew fund to potential investors or to rely on the reversesolicitation rule, but not to depend on both. The new frameworkindirectly imposes an 18-month ban on reverse solicitation if fundmanagers decide to pre-market a fund or sub-fund as a subscriptionwithin an 18-month period after the pre-marketing start date willautomatically be deemed to be marketing, triggering notificationrequirements. This is quite an unfavourable provision for fundmanagers. It is also unclear whether this automatic rule appliesonly within the member state where pre-marketing takes place orwhether it bans reverse solicitation anywhere within the EU.

Another provision that may be an issue for certain fund managersis the 36-month ban on pre-marketing of a de-notified fund withinthe member state. Managers are interested in launchingsuccessor/continuation funds, which increased in popularity in theprivate equity space over the pandemic, maybe hit by this avoidableharsh rule.

All the above could cause confusion and potentially damage EUinvestment. The industry hopes that national legislators andregulators tasked with the job of transposing the Directive intotheir respective national laws, by 2 August 2021, clarify thechallenges highlighted above by adopting narrow interpretations onthe bans. This may however result in differing views being adoptedby different member states which goes against the spirit of theCBDF Framework. Eventually, EU policymakers may need to revisit therules to resolve the issues altogether, as otherwise, barrierswithin the EU will continue to be present, compelling the EU toregress in its progress towards expanding the EU single market andcreating a capital markets union.

This article was first published in The Times ofMalta.

The content of this article is intended to provide a generalguide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be soughtabout your specific circumstances.

POPULAR ARTICLES ON: Finance and Banking from European Union

Read more:
Cross-Border Distribution Of Funds In The European Union - Finance and Banking - European Union - Mondaq News Alerts

He did not want to die until Brexit was reversed. These words were spoken at the funeral last week of my dear friend and former Observer colleague Dick Leonard.

Dick died a month ago at the ripe old age of 90. The speaker was his widow, Irne Heidelberger-Leonard, before a group of mourners who included the Labour leader Keir Starmer, to whom Dick had been something of a political mentor.

Dicks devotion to the European cause was such that he jeopardised his political career he was parliamentary private secretary to the Labour cabinet minister Anthony Crosland from 1970 to 1974 when he joined 68 other Labour rebels, led by Roy Jenkins, in voting in 1971 in favour of joining the European community, against Labour policy at the time. Yes, Labours attitude towards what is now the EU has always been a rollercoaster ride, and here we go again, with prominent Labour politicians lamely accepting a Brexit that is manifestly a disaster and needs to be reversed.

Why, even that prominent culprit and architect of the lying Leave campaign appeared to be having second thoughts about it all in his BBC Two interview last week. Is Brexit a good idea? No one on Earth knows, averred the shameless Dominic Cummings. Indeed, said the prime ministers former best friend, it was perhaps perfectly reasonable to say Brexit was a mistake.

Ill say it is perfectly reasonable. Many of us here on Earth know that only too well. But Cummings almost indicating that in delivering Brexit for Johnson he was merely acting in the capacity of a hired mercenary also told us that anyone convinced that Brexit was a good thing must have a screw loose.

The media are now replete daily with disaster stories. The Northern Ireland protocol is unworkable. The egregious Brexit minister Lord Frost makes this country a laughing stock every time he says the deal that the UK signed up to for the short-term political convenience of Johnson should be renegotiated on the grounds that the EU is being wait for it unreasonable! He calls to mind the Groucho Marx quip: These are my principles. And if you dont like them well, I have others.

One begins to wonder whether Cummings now thinks that, on top of all the other well-publicised prime ministerial gaffes, the chaos of Brexit may contribute to Johnsons downfall a significant signpost being the way freedom day on 19 July swiftly turned into fiasco day in the same week that the Northern Ireland crisis became wholly manifest. In the former case it did not need footballers to embarrass the government: just the chief executive of Marks & Spencer.

But back to my late friend Dick Leonard, with whom I often worked covering European matters when he was based in Brussels. Many of the problems brought about by the Brexiters might have been avoided if they had consulted the invaluable guides to the EU he jointly wrote for the Economist and later the publishers Routledge. In the 2016 edition of The Routledge Guide to the European Union, the authors Dick and another EU expert, Robert Taylor observed of the impending UK referendum: Not everybody would accept that it would be a win-win situation for both Britain and the EU if voters choose to remain, but it will assuredly be a lose-lose one if they decide to quit.

If the Brexiters had consulted the guide, they could have discovered what the customs union and the single market actually were, and what making the crass decision to abandon the hard-won privileges of membership would entail (privileges won, in the case of the single market, not least by their ostensible political heroine Margaret Thatcher). It beggars belief that, after the deed was done and the cabinet Brexiters were faced with reality, they had to have both institutions explained to them by our former ambassador to the EU, Sir Ivan Rogers.

Alas, as that astute observer Denis MacShane a former Labour minister for Europe recently pointed out, Johnson needs a permanent war with the EU to prove that the Battle of Brexit is not over. This in the name of a country that went to war in 1939 to save Europe, and whose prime minister, Winston Churchill, even proposed, in 1940, what would have in effect been a political union of the UK and France.

Above all, says MacShane who probably coined the term Brexit and certainly forecast the result of the referendum Johnson wants the main opposition, Labour, to say nothing about Brexit.

But the time has assuredly come, and those words of our friend Dick Leonards widow he did not want to die until Brexit was reversed will, I hope, stiffen Starmers resolve.

Read more from the original source:
Labour must say it out loud: Brexit needs to be reversed - The Guardian

LONDON, ENGLAND - JUNE 09: Cabinet Minister Lord Frost (R) chairs the first meeting of the Partnership Council followed by the eighth meeting of the withdrawal agreement joint committee with his EU counterpart Maros Sefcovic (L), Richard Szostak, Principal Adviser, Service for the EU-UK Agreements (2ndL) and Paymaster General, Penny Mordaunt (2ndR), on June 9, 2021 in London, England.

Eddie Mulholland - WPA Pool/Getty Images

The European Union rejected a call from the British government to overhaul the Northern Ireland Protocol, a key tenet of the agreement that saw the U.K. leave the EU in 2020.

U.K. Brexit Minister David Frost and Secretary of State for Northern Ireland Brandon Lewis on Wednesday set out a "command paper" urging European leaders to renegotiate the protocol, on the basis that it has turned out to be unworkable in practice.

"We are ready to continue to seek creative solutions, within the framework of the Protocol, in the interest of all communities in Northern Ireland," the European Commission said in a statement late on Wednesday. "However, we will not agree to a renegotiation of the Protocol."

The deal was negotiated and signed by the British government in 2019 and ratified by the British Parliament, but the government is now seeking to renege on its commitments due to the challenges arising from its implementation.

The protocol, in principle, helps prevent customs checks and an effective land border between Northern Ireland, which is part of the U.K., and the Republic of Ireland, which remains in the EU.

BELFAST, NORTHERN IRELAND - APRIL 07: Nationalists and Loyalists riot against one another at the Peace Wall interface gates which divide the two communities on April 7, 2021 in Belfast, Northern Ireland.

Charles McQuillan/Getty Images

However, it has led to port inspections on goods traveling between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, a development that has angered businesses and drawn criticism for effectively creating a border in the Irish Sea. This has stoked historical sectarian tensions in Northern Ireland.

Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Kwasi Kwarteng told Sky News on Thursday that "nobody could guarantee the effects of the Northern Ireland Protocol until we left the EU."

Kwarteng also claimed the agreement wasn't "written in stone," despite it being written into international law.

Christopher Granville, managing director for EMEA and global political research at TS Lombard, told CNBC Thursday that the process of kicking the can down the road on Northern Ireland has already begun, with a three-month extension in place until September of a grace period on food and other products being transported between Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

The British government said in its command paper that it believes the current situation satisfies the criteria for invoking Article 16 of the Protocol, which allows for its suspension in the case of "serious economic difficulties." However, it has expressed reluctance to trigger this clause just yet. The EU, Granville said, will take the position that a party cannot claim "serious difficulties" before the full terms of the agreement have been implemented.

A lorry passes through security at the Port of Larne in Co Antrim, Northern Ireland on December 6, 2020.

PAUL FAITH | AFP | Getty Images

"These positions point to the following kind of negotiation: the EU rejects the U.K. proposal for an 'honesty box' approach to goods shipments from GB to NI; but the EU will propose fast-track regulatory checks on shipments of foodstuffs arriving in NI from GB with additional facilitations for trusted traders," Granville explained.

"To the extent that such negotiations produce any agreements, both sides will be able to claim victory: the UK will say that it has renegotiated the Protocol, the EU will say that it has found the best way to implement the Protocol."

However, he noted that such agreements will be difficult to establish, and there will be "cliff-hangers" as the grace periods approach their expiry date and the parties come out with the "usual threats" of withdrawal and litigation.

While these disputes grab the headlines, Granville said the crucial reality unfolding beneath the surface will be a fundamental shift in supply chains.

"Essentially these will shift from east-west (i.e. GB-NI) to north-south (i.e. ROI-NI, with ROI in this context meaning both Ireland in its own right and as a channel for shipment from all of the rest of the EU)," he explained.

LONDON - Brexit minister Lord Frost making a statement to members of the House of Lords in London on the government's approach to the Northern Ireland Protocol.

House of Lords/PA Images via Getty Images

"This adjustment will mean over time (even in time for Christmas) that there will be no empty shelves in NI supermarkets on the basis of which U.K. politicians could invoke the 'serious economic difficulties' criterion of Article 16."

British businesses such as Marks & Spencer that are facing delays in fresh produce delivery from Great Britain to Northern Ireland would then have to either expand their supply chains within the Republic of Ireland, Granville suggested, or leave their Northern Irish market share to be taken up by a company operating in the Republic or the broader EU.

James Smith, developed markets economist at ING, said there are two possible ways the renewed stand-off could affect the British economy.

"A positive though seemingly unlikely outcome is that the UK government opts to align more closely to EU food standards after all, removing barriers not only for GB-NI trade, but also on exports to the EU," he told CNBC on Thursday.

"But with trust between both sides clearly low, the bigger near-term question is whether further legal steps are taken by Brussels that eventually culminate in tariffs and in a negative scenario, some form of mini trade war."

Although things may not get that far in reality, Smith said, such a scenario would reintroduce disruption to U.K. exports which have partially recovered from the sharp decline in January, after the U.K.'s formal separation from the bloc.

BELFAST, Northern Ireland: A Loyalist holds a placard with words 'Stormont Or The Protocol?' during a protest against the Northern Ireland Protocol at the entrance to Belfast Harbour.

Artur Widak/NurPhoto via Getty Images

"At a bigger macro level however, the effects of Covid-19 are still likely to dominate the outlook over coming months, with the impact of Brexit likely to have a less noticeable impact on GDP in the short-term," Smith added.

TS Lombard's Granville suggested that the main opposition Labour party in the U.K. may push for the "easy and instant solution" of aligning with the EU's food standards, which Prime Minister Boris Johnson's pro-Brexit Conservative government will be reluctant to do as it undermines the "sovereignty" at the core of its electoral platform.

He anticipates that if the process of kicking the can down the road lasts until the Northern Irish elections next May, and present polling remains consistent, pro-Irish republican party Sinn Fein will emerge as the largest single party in the devolved Northern Irish Assembly.

"I haven't yet got a clear view for now on exactly how this might change the political dynamic over the Protocol dispute, but it will surely do so," Granville said.

See original here:
Mini trade war imminent? EU rejects the UK's attempts to overhaul the Brexit deal - CNBC