In addition to the public discussions scheduled on the new so-called ‘Chips Act 2.0’ Regulation on semiconductor production in the EU and the new EU merger and acquisition guidelines, as well as progress reports on the ‘Industrial Accelerator’, ‘28th regime’ and ‘European Competitiveness Fund’ texts (see EUROPE 13937/11), the EU27 Competitiveness Ministers will be questioned, on Thursday 24 September in Brussels, on a series of ‘other business’ items.
These include: the future ‘European legislative act on products’, the latest activities of the European Alliance for Critical Chemicals, and an update on the ETS emissions trading system, at the request of Poland and Austria.
Products. Belgium, France and the Netherlands have submitted a paper on the future EU Regulation on products and online marketplaces, which have created new challenges in terms of product safety, market surveillance and effective enforcement of Union legislation. At the same time, they risk undermining the level playing field by allowing non-compliant operators to gain a competitive advantage over companies that comply with EU rules.
The coexistence of the General Product Safety Regulation (GPSR), the Market Surveillance Regulation (MSR) and the Digital Services Act (DSA) illustrates the growing complexity of the regulatory framework governing online marketplaces, according to the three countries. The latter is not sufficiently suited to emerging business models, such as dropshipping (an online sales model in which the trader sells products that they do not hold in stock and entrusts delivery directly to a supplier). The future legislative act should therefore clarify responsibilities and, where appropriate, introduce new definitions in order to ensure effective accountability for all the parties concerned.
They propose several adjustments. Online marketplaces should therefore be subject to stricter ex ante controls, including verification of the existence of a registered authorised representative and, where appropriate, relevant information on the product (such as the digital product passport).
Chemicals. A non-paper from the Czech Republic, France, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Slovakia, and Slovenia calls for the swift implementation of the main recommendations made by the EU Alliance for Critical Chemicals, expected on 8 October.
The signatories call on the Commission, among other things, to take immediate measures to ensure the survival of a critical industry by recognising a specific list of critical molecules, optimising trade defence instruments or providing targeted financial support for investments to transform and modernise chemical sites.
Links to the public notes: https://aeur.eu/f/nk0 ; https://aeur.eu/f/nk1
European Competitiveness Fund. The item will only be the subject of information from the Presidency on Thursday. But the ‘battle’ continues behind the scenes as regards the arrangements for participation by third countries in EU defence programmes supported by the European Competitiveness Fund, and a working party meeting on Monday 21 September did not make it possible to close the matter.
While the Irish Presidency of the Council of the EU presented a new compromise on 16 September allowing third countries other than Ukraine and the EFTA countries to be included in this ‘defence’ strand, but subject to certain conditions, another group of countries - namely Sweden, the Netherlands, Germany, Austria, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Portugal, Romania and Slovenia - had asked the Irish Presidency at the end of August to return to the Commission’s initial proposals and the original wording of Article 50 (see EUROPE 13940/11). That proposal argued for “not limiting the possibility of association” for third countries in order to send a strong “signal of openness” to countries outside the EU.
“Everyone shares the objective of strengthening the European defence industry. But a large number of Member States believe that it is necessary to maintain the possibility of cooperating with our trusted partners (non-EU members), particularly those with which we have a strongly integrated value chain”, a European diplomat explains.
But such participation would “not be free and would be based on the principle of financial contribution: (partial) participation is possible, but on condition that (part of) the programme is co-financed. We also expect our trusted partners to show reciprocity by allowing European companies to participate in their respective defence industries and defence procurement markets”.
These countries also believe that participation by third countries would have the effect of increasing the funds available to the EU.
Link to the compromise of 16 September: https://aeur.eu/f/nkb (Original version in French by Solenn Paulic)