Mediaboss Marketing

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

A wide range of new EU legislative measures on sustainablefinance came into force on 22 August 2021.

In total, there are five Commission Delegated Regulations andtwo Commission Delegated Directives (collectively the"Delegated Acts").

The Delegated Acts seek to integrate sustainability issues andconsiderations into the following EU legislative regimes

On 21 April 2021, the European Commission (the"Commission") published the draft texts of the DelegatedActs as part of its Sustainable Finance Package1.

Final versions of the Delegated Acts were published in the EUOfficial Journal on 2 August 2021.

The Delegated Acts are designed to complement the obligations inRegulation (EU) 2019/2088 ("SFDR") and Regulation (EU)2020/852 (the "Taxonomy Regulation") and form part of theCommission's 'ambitious and comprehensive' package ofmeasures to help improve the flow of money towards sustainableactivities across the EU.

UCITS

Commission Delegated Directive (EU) 2021/12702 (the"UCITS amending Directive") amends Directive 2010/43/EUand imposes obligations on UCITS management companies to:

AIFMD

Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/12553amends Delegated Regulation (EU) 231/2013 and imposes obligationson AIFMs to:

MiFID II

Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/12534amends Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/565 and requires investmentfirms providing financial advice or portfolio management to carryout a mandatory assessment of the sustainability preferences ofclients; take this into account in the selection of financialproducts and prepare client reports explaining how therecommendation meets a client's investment objectives, riskprofile, capacity to bear loss and sustainability preferences.

Investments firm will also need to take into accountsustainability risks when complying with organisationalrequirements and to integrate sustainability into risk managementpolicies.

Commission Delegated Directive (EU) 2021/12695 amendsDelegated Directive (EU) 2017/593 (the "Amending MIFID ProductGovernance Directive") and will require investment firmsmanufacturing and distributing financial instruments to considersustainability factors in the product approval process of eachfinancial instrument and in the product governance and oversightarrangements for each financial instrument that is intended to bedistributed to clients seeking financial instruments with asustainability related profile.

Solvency II and the IDD

Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/12566amends Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/35 and supplements SolvencyII to introduce the integration of sustainability risks in thegovernance, conflicts of interest and risk management of insuranceand reinsurance undertakings.

Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/12577amends Delegated Regulations (EU) 2017/2358 and (EU) 2017/2359 onthe integration of sustainability factors, risks and preferencesinto the product oversight and governance requirements forinsurance undertakings and insurance distributors and into therules on conduct of business and investment advice forinsurance-based investment products.

All the Delegated Acts entered into force on 22 August 2021.

The Delegated Regulations will be directly effective from 1August 20228 .

Member States have until 31 July 2022 to adopt and apply lawsimplementing the UCITS Amending Directive.

Member States have until 22 August 2022 to adopt laws toimplement the Amending MIFID Product Governance Directive. Thosemeasures must apply by 22 November 2022.

We have produced a guide9 focusing on sustainableinvestment fund strategies to help promote environmental, socialand governance aims.

1 https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/210421-sustainable-finance-communication_en

2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32021L1270&from=EN

3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32021R1255&from=EN

4 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32021R1253&from=EN

5 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32021L1269&from=EN

6 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32021R1256&from=EN

7 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32021R1257&from=EN

8 Other than the correcting Delegated Regulation (EU)2021/1254 relating to MiFID.

9 https://maples.com/-/media/files/pdfs/esg/a-guide-to-sustainable-investment-funds.pdf

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

Camilleri Preziosi Advocates

The term green loan' has become increasingly omnipresent in economic and market discourse. What is a green loan' and what distinguishes it from your typical loan'?

Finance Malta

With our 14th annual conference due to take place next week, preparations are in full swing and the deadline to register is fast approaching. Attendees at this year's hybrid event will be able to...

See the original post:
Sustainable Finance: New EU Delegated Legislation - Finance and Banking - European Union - Mondaq News Alerts

Tests on animals for cosmetics ingredients and sales of animal-tested products are banned across the European Union (EU). Yet animals are still being poisoned and killed in tests for cosmetics ingredients there.

Back in 2013, people all over world celebrated when a ban on animal testing for cosmetics came into full force in the EU. Europe had led the way in banning animal tests for cosmetics products and their ingredientsa ban based on the fundamental principle that no new cosmetics are worth the harm caused to animals in these deadly tests. The message was clear: No animal deserves to suffer and be killed for the sake of lipstick or toothpaste, and the EU was taking a stand against animal testing.

But under the guise of chemical-testing legislation called the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) regulation, authorities are now demanding that some cosmetics ingredients be tested on animals under certain circumstances. At least 150 chemicals registered under REACH are ingredients used exclusively in cosmetics, and many of these are subject to new animal testing requests by the European Chemicals Agency.

These tests completely undermine the purpose of the banto bring safe cosmetics to market without requiring new tests on animals. It is inexcusable that animals will still be forced to suffer and die in cruel and excruciating tests for cosmetics ingredients in the EU.

PETA has been campaigning against this issue since it first arose and will keep doing so until animal tests for cosmetics are history. We recently joined forces with other animal protection groups to urge the president of the European Commission to suspend all requests for cosmetics ingredients tests on animals and to allow companies to demonstrate the safety of ingredients using only non-animal methods.

Companies always have the option to choose different ingredients or even decide not to develop products if it means sparing animals lives. Weve let cosmetics companies know that if they test on animals for any reason or buy ingredients from companies that test on animals, they will no longer be eligible for inclusion on PETAs list of companies that dont test on animals. To comply with the strict standards of our program, cosmetics companies must find an alternative source for ingredients or reformulate a product to eliminate any ingredients tested on animals under the REACH program.

To ensure that the products youre buying are truly animal testfree, its more important than ever to use PETAs Global Beauty Without Bunnies database when you shop for cosmetics and personal care products. PETA is dedicated to ensuring that the companies and brands found on our list of companies that dont test on animals are truly animaltest freeall the way down the supply chain. Our program does not allow for any loopholes or exceptions for regulatory testing on animals.

Browse PETAs Global Beauty Without Bunnies Database

Read the original here:
Are Cruel Animal Tests for Cosmetics Back in the EU? - PETA

Indias opposition to the European Unions (EU) proposed carbon border tax has found the backing of its other BRICS partners, namely Brazil, Russia, China, and South Africa.

The 27-member EU had recently decided to levy a border tax on the import of carbon-intensive goods, which will be enforced from 2026 onwards.

Now, India along with other BRICS participants have objected to the aforementioned proposal in the New Delhi statement of the five-nation group.

We noted with grave concern the proposals for introducing trade barriers, such as unilateral carbon border adjustment, that are discriminatory, read the statement, Times of India reported.

The BRICS countries have spoken in one voice on the back of their virtual environmental ministerial meeting that was chaired by India.

The five countries have also decided to worked together for abatement and control of air and water pollution.

Union Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav stressed that the year 2021 is important as the UN Biodiversity Conference and UN Climate Change Conference are slated to be held in October and November this year respectively.

He said that the BRICS countries can play a very significant role in addressing contemporary global climate challenges like marine plastic litter, biodiversity loss, climate change, air pollution amongst others through these multilateral forums.

Read more:
India, Other BRICS Nations Oppose European Union's Proposed Carbon Border Tax - Swarajya

The Talibans rapid, uncertain transition toward ruling Afghanistan exacerbates significant security and defense challenges for North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and European Union (EU) nations, seriously galvanizing Europes two key alliances and making them consider altering where they might head next. These challenges actually present the opportunity for faster action for joint NATO-EU coordination and operations planning. Exploring how such joint operations coordination and planning might unfold and how NATO-EU missions and operations might emerge is important at such a difficult historical juncture, particularly when the world is focused on withdrawals from Afghanistan.

Without the transatlantic linkages binding both continents via NATOs North Atlantic Allies, the U.S. and Canada, to their oldest allies in Europe, these decades-old alliances likely wont take advantage of such historic junctures and, therefore, should explore and consider moving faster to integrate NATO civilian-military planning with vaster, stability-enhancing EU measures. Rooted in NATO and EU institutional ties, partnerships, and treaties, binding membership nations and their respective, independent, and sovereign national commitments, lies the crucial transatlantic underpinning to Europe that reinforces both alliances.

Amid the many challenges to NATO and EU integrity, let alone their existence cyber insecurity, international terrorist network attacks, energy disruption, emerging great power competitions (primarily Russia, China), climate turmoil, pandemic degradation, and mass migration growing practical NATO-EU linkages might enable new resilience. Cooperatively adapting to NATO-EU operations planning, coordination, and implementation might allow both to grapple more effectively with such ever-changing and increasing threats across Europe and North America.

During the past three post-Cold War decades, cooperative security became one of NATOs core tasks. Its development between NATO and the EU created the potential for both alliances to consider fundamental challenges together. By building on NATOs collective defense mantle for defending its members from adversaries, NATO and EU leaders might bind NATO better to the EUs collective security foundation one preventing members from fighting uncontrollably against one another. Certainly, U.S.-Canadian Transatlantic relations face more difficult political problems to press NATO and EU leaders and policymakers to consider finding more effective ways and means to re-solidify enduring transatlantic bonds.

Yet, these alliances endured great threats to their existence and now provide the juncture to begin combining nation-based collective and cooperative advantages across both institutions.

International turbulence and chaos only look to worsen, especially when overlapping alliance responsibilities continue to have NATO and the EU separately project their different alliance operations beyond their territorial borders; witness this centurys missions and operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and elsewhere across North Africa, the Middle East, and Southwest Asia. NATO and the EU might better consider how together they might improve their crisis management planning and swifter, mutually reinforcing policies and joint missions.

Signaling the reinvigorated North Atlantic role from Washington and Ottawa, President BidenJoe BidenFather of slain Marine: 'Biden turned his back on him' US conducts military strike against ISIS-K planner Pentagon official holds first talks with Chinese military under Biden: report MORE met with counterparts on his only trip abroad, discussing and coordinating next steps at book-ended G-7 and US-Russia summits, and revitalizing allies at the NATO and EU summits the latter renewing U.S. participation since 2017.

From these summits NATO-EU ties might expand more quickly, seriously accelerated by Afghanistans disarray, and potentially leading more quickly to better coordinating resources and considering how to synchronize fewer missions and operations doing so by potentially conducting them together. Such operations planning might lead to greater, more practical considerations to coordinate continental, European challenges within their borders to accelerate greater NATO-EU operational and strategic ties.

NATO and EU have already learned lessons for exploring better coordination on operations planning and potential implementation from the thousands of post-Cold War experiences in educating, training, exercising, planning, resourcing, and operating. From these, allied leaders and planning staffs might enhance and adapt NATO-EU cooperative security and defense challenges via joint operations planning on intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance.

Key alliance crisis management strategies already illustrate cooperative baselines for brisker NATO-EU planning, better to protect NATO-EU territories. Such NATO collective defense visions for its Concept for Deterrence and Defence of the Euro-Atlantic Area, Readiness Action Plan, and Warfighting Capstone Concept might now progress better alongside EU collective security commitments under the Permanent Structured Co-operation for its Military Mobility and European Defence Agency.

NATOs Partnership For Peace (PFP) cooperative security process epitomizes essential, operational bridge-building to accelerate NATO-EU planning. Bringing member and partner nations together, even if partners never join either or both alliances, captures PFPs 30-year operational planning successes, particularly NATO and EU missions and operations across the Balkans. For NATO-EU nations to utilize such means to strengthen ties speeds cooperative security expedients, fostering better allied resilience, power projection, and command, control, communication, and computers with intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities.

Resilience and adaptation underscore how the 70-year plus NATO and EU longevity points toward closer coordination, better facing sober realities including chaotic withdrawals from foreign entanglements, continuing financial burdens, duplicative institutional responsibilities, and divisive national policies. Above all, both institutions remain resilient, even with Afghanistans aftermath, the United Kingdoms EU withdrawal, Eurasian and Transcaucasian nations continually wanting to join these institutions over Russias objections, and various member nations differing over energy policies.

Avoiding alliance pitfalls demands practical, realistic, and adequate operations planning. Afghanistans bleak realities propel crucial NATO-EU cooperative security for NATOs collective defense and the EUs collective security to forge ahead.

Dr. Joshua B. Sperois professor of international relations at Fitchburg State University. He served as senior civilian strategic and scenario planner in the Joint Chiefs of Staffs J-5 Directorate for Strategic Plans and Policy/Europe-NATO Division from 1994 to 2000 and was lead joint staffer on the Partnership for Peace (PfP) policy/funding/programs.

Follow this link:
Transatlantic ties that bind Europe | TheHill - The Hill

With the European Union weighing blocking American travelers from visiting, a group representing hundreds of the world's airlines called on countries around the world earlier this week to adopt a COVID digital passport used by the E.U.

"In the absence of a single global standard for digital vaccine certificates, it should serve as a blueprint for other nations looking to implement digital vaccination certificates to help facilitate travel and its associated economic benefits," Conrad Clifford, deputy director general of the International Air Transport Association said in a statement.

The E.U.'s solution, a standardized paper and digital certificate that could be used across the E.U, was first proposed in November and has now reached full adoption in all 27 E.U. countries, and even non-E.U. countries like Switzerland, Turkey and Norway. It could also be appealing to global companies as they implement stricter rules requiring workers and customers to get vaccinated or tested.

Jakub Hlvka, a health policy fellow at the USC Schaeffer Institute who has been looking at the ethics of COVID passports, said these types of passports are especially useful for countries who don't want to limit travel and hurt tourism, while also slowing the spread of the coronavirus.

"A vaccination travel certificate would actually prevent the introduction of cases from countries not covered under travel bans, most notably Mexico, where a lot of people can get infected with delta and bring it into the U.S. without any strong precautions in place," he said.

Here's how it works:

The Digital COVID Certificate, as the passport is called, uses a framework that the E.U. developed so all digital COVID vaccination cards are standardized and can be verified quickly in every participating country.

Each country has a digital and paper version of their vaccination cards. Some countries, like France, have created a downloadable app that stores the DCC. France's app TousAntiCovid, and Italy's Immuni, allow residents to upload their vaccination record and negative COVID tests. Other countries like Belgium rely on a web app or a saved PDF.

There is no universal platform that's used across the E.U.

Non-E.U. residents can ask the country they are traveling to for a DCC, provided that country will accept their proof of vaccination. Only four vaccines (Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca) are accepted by the E.U., meaning Covidshield, a vaccine that has been distributed across low-income countries, is not accepted by the E.U. at large (though some countries will accept it).

The certificate contains one's name, date of birth, COVID-19 vaccine or test information, the date the record was issued and, in a QR code, a unique digital signature every health provider administering the vaccine has.

This digital signature confirms patients have gotten the vaccine, and every country in the E.U. has access to those signatures to verify the legitimacy of the vaccination record. Other information like name and date of birth are not recorded.

The E.U.'s fix for safe travelling in a post-pandemic world is the most-used solution, allowing people to move within the member countries while allowing each flexibility. The IATA said 60 other countries are using the DCC as a blueprint for their own national system.

The widespread adoption of a standardized pass in Europe is in stark contrast to the U.S., which has not pursued any national form of verification outside of the easy-to-replicate CDC-issued paper vaccine cards. States have come up with their own solutions, like California's digital vaccination record and New York's Excelsior Pass, both of which can be used to enter businesses that have some sort of vaccine mandate. But neither are valid for travel in and out of the country, even as the Biden administration continues to uphold the E.U. travel ban.

The biggest hurdle for the U.S. is to build a digital infrastructure that maintains a national registry. That would require real-time data collection from every state. Right now, states have separate data collection streams that harbor information about who is vaccinated, and when they got vaccinated. If a California resident got one vaccine in California, and another in a different state, California's digital vaccination record won't show proof of the second vaccine.

Most countries with a national digital vaccination standard are able to use existing infrastructure from having a form of universal health care. The E.U. leveraged its eHealth Network, a network used by every member of the union. Israel, which developed the Green Pass, also has a compulsory health care plan.

Many states in the U.S. haven't created a centralized state system, making it difficult for 50 states and U.S. territories to coordinate on a standardized system. But the CDC and other agencies regularly collect state and municipal data to track the spread of COVID-19.

Hlvka said the U.S. might be better off considering an opt-in registry that is recognized by other countries, whereby those who want to travel out of the country can voluntarily upload their vaccination record and show proof.

"If we asked a few programmers in Silicon Valley, we could have this in a few hours," Hlvka said. "This is not technically difficult."

And as the U.S. travel ban on the E.U. persists, and the E.U. considers banning American travelers as well, Hlvka said the lack of standardization and a national system is preventing families from reconnecting and hurting tourism.

"The status quo is hurting the U.S. economy and reopening travel, possibly using a mutually recognized vaccination certificate/passport, would be a safe way to reopen borders and increase incentives to get vaccinated," he said.

See more here:
Could the EUs Universal COVID Passport Serve as a Blueprint for the US? - dot.LA