27 January 2025
- Lower tariffs, greater competition: EU updates the list of goods benefiting from import duty suspensions to improve its competitive capacity
- The Johor-Singapore Special Economic Zone: A new cooperation model to strengthen ASEAN integration?
- Does “Dubai chocolate” have to come from Dubai and can it be denominated “chocolate”? Origin labeling and other legal issues surrounding the hype
- Recently adopted EU legislation
Lower tariffs, greater competition: EU updates the list of goods benefiting from import duty suspensions to improve its competitive capacity
By Stella Nalwoga, Amanda Carlota, and Paolo R. Vergano
On 27 December 2024, the EU published the amended list of agricultural and industrial products benefiting from duty suspensions when imported into the EU. The products listed in the Annex to Council Regulation (EU) 2024/3211 of 16 December 2024 amending Regulation (EU) 2021/2278 suspending the Common Customs Tariff duties referred to in Article 56(2), point (c), of Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council on certain agricultural and industrial products, which entered into force on 1 January 2025, are allowed to enter the EU “at reduced or zero duty rates without any limitation as regards their quantity” during the period of validity of the duty suspension. This article provides an overview of the products currently benefitting from duty suspension and aims at guiding businesses to understand the conditions for securing a duty suspension.
Duty suspensions
Council Regulation (EU) 2021/2278 of 20 December 2021 suspending the Common Customs Tariff duties referred to in Article 56(2), point (c), of Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 on certain agricultural and industrial products, and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1387/2013 sets the EU legal framework for duty suspensions. Recital 7 thereof states that duty suspensions pursue the objective of “improving the competitive capacity of Union industry” by lowering the cost of raw materials, semi-finished goods, or components that are either unavailable or not available in sufficient quantities in the EU, and which are needed by EU manufacturers for their finished products. Importantly, this Regulation is reviewed and amended twice a year, typically in January and July, to reflect changes requested by EU Member States, or on the basis of the European Commission's (hereinafter, Commission) own initiative.
The Communication from the Commission concerning autonomous tariff suspensions and quotas of 13 December 2011 lays down the procedure and conditions for granting duty suspensions. Businesses interested in obtaining a duty suspension for a product of relevance to their activities must apply to the competent authority in the EU Member State where they are based. To qualify for a duty suspension, the applicant must prove, inter alia, that no competing product is available in the EU and that the amount of uncollected customs duty is at least EUR 15,000 per year, although individual applicants can group together to reach this threshold. National EU Member States' authorities must check all requests for completeness and accuracy, before transmitting the applications to the Commission, which examines them with the support of the Economic Tariff Questions Group. The Commission then submits its proposed amendments of Council Regulation (EU) 2021/2278 to the Council of the EU for approval.
Key amendments to the list of duty suspensions
Recitals (3) to (6) of Council Regulation (EU) 2024/3211 enumerate the key amendments to Council Regulation (EU) 2021/2278 introduced by Council Regulation (EU) 2024/3211: 1) Partial duty suspensions to certain products related to battery production; 2) Updates to the “product description, classification or end-use requirement” for certain products; and 3) Removal of duty suspensions for some products and extension of duty suspensions for others.
To promote integrated battery production in the EU, Council Regulation (EU) 2024/3211 applies partial duty suspensions to certain products related to battery production that were not previously listed under Council Regulation (EU) 2021/2278 and the EU production of which is “inadequate to meet the specific requirements of the user industries in the Union”. Examples of such products are lithium-ion rechargeable battery cells for use in the manufacture of rechargeable hybrid and electric vehicle batteries and lithium-ion accumulators for use in the manufacture of cordless vacuum cleaners or rechargeable power sources therefor. In the previous list of duty suspensions published in July 2024, the duties for these goods were set at 1.30%, compared to the Most Favoured Nation (hereinafter, MFN) rate or non-preferential third-country rate of 2.70%. While the previous list stated that these partial duty suspensions would be subject to a mandatory review by 31 December 2028, the new law sets an earlier deadline of 31 December 2025 “to take into account the short-term evolution of the battery production sector in the Union”.
Council Regulation (EU) 2024/3211 also updates the product descriptions, classifications, or end-use requirements of certain products “to take into account the technical product developments and economic trends in the market.” For example, in the previous list of duty suspensions published in January 2024 (see Trade Perspectives, Issue No. 1 of 15 January 2024), the product description for Combined Nomenclature (CN) code 15179099 was “Vegetable oil, refined, containing by weight 25 % or more but not more than 50 % arachidonic acid or 12 % or more but not more than 65 % docosahexaenoic acid and standardized with high oleic sunflower oil (HOSO).” Council Regulation (EU) 2024/3211 amends the product description for CN code 15179099 to “Vegetable and/or microbial oil, refined, containing by weight; — 25 % or more but not more than 70 % arachidonic acid, or — 12 % or more but not more than 65 % docosahexaenoic acid, and Whether or not: — standardized with high oleic sunflower oil (HOSO), — containing by weight 0,005 % or more, but not more than 0,1 % of antioxidants”. The full duty suspension for this product, which was already previously granted, remains in place, as only the product description and, therefore, the scope of the goods covered, has been amended.
Furthermore, the EU removed from the list certain products whose duty suspensions are considered to be “no longer in the interest of the Union”. Examples include frozen peas in pods to be used in the manufacture of prepared meals, and passion fruit juice and passion fruit juice concentrate to be used in the manufacture of food and drink products. In the past, these goods benefited from full duty suspensions. Now, they are subject to the MFN tariff rate rates of 14.40% and 11%, respectively.
Lastly, for those products whose continued duty suspensions are in the interest of the EU, Council Regulation (EU) 2024/3211 sets new dates for their next mandatory reviews. Examples include frozen pulp from açai berries; pineapple juice, other than in powdered form; and cranberry juice (Vaccinium macrocarpon) concentrate, all of which currently benefit from full duty suspensions. These suspensions were subject to a mandatory review before 31 December 2024 and have now been extended until 31 December 2029. Importers of these products can continue to enjoy full duty suspensions at least until then.
How can businesses benefit?
Duty suspensions are an important opportunity for businesses, especially those involved in key technologies or in processing industries in the EU, as the duty suspensions to promote integrated battery production in the EU show. Businesses should carefully assess the raw materials, semi-finished goods, or components they rely on for their products, and determine whether these may be eligible for duty suspensions.
Following the publication of Council Regulation (EU) 2024/3211, the Commission will now review the requests received for duty suspensions for implementation in July 2025. To be considered for the January 2026 round, Member States must submit their requests by 15 March 2025. Interested businesses are advised to urgently seek legal advice to engage with the competent authorities at EU and national EU Member States’ level, properly structuring their applications and fine-tuning the advocacy arguments.
For any additional information or legal advice on this matter, please contact Paolo R. Vergano
The Johor-Singapore Special Economic Zone: A new cooperation model to strengthen ASEAN integration?
By Alya Mahira, Caitlynn Nadya, and Paolo R. Vergano
On 7 January 2025, Malaysia and Singapore signed an Agreement establishing the Johor-Singapore Special Economic Zone (hereinafter, SEZ), a groundbreaking collaboration that aims at combining Malaysia’s infrastructure and industrial strengths with Singapore’s investment expertise. The signing took place one year after the signing of an initial Memorandum of Understanding (hereinafter, MoU) on 11 January 2024, under which both sides committed to work on a Johor-Singapore SEZ in order to strengthen their economic connectivity and attract investments. This article highlights the key features of the Johor-Singapore SEZ, the commercial opportunities for investors and businesses, and discusses its potential to strengthen ASEAN integration.
The path to establishing the Johor-Singapore SEZ
“Special Economic Zone” refers to a designated area within a country that offers fiscal and/or non-fiscal incentives in order to, inter alia, attract foreign direct investment (hereinafter, FDI). SEZs have become a key driver of regional development in developing countries, including in the 10 Member States of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (hereinafter, ASEAN), with around 70 SEZs currently operating across the region. For instance, Indonesia currently operates 22 SEZs, focusing on industrial, tourism, and digital sectors, while Malaysia has established five investment corridors, which are designated areas prioritised for investments. While ASEAN Member States have established SEZs within their individual territories, the Johor-Singapore SEZ marks the first cross-border SEZ in ASEAN.
The Johor-Singapore SEZ leverages the industrial growth of Johor in Malaysia and Singapore’s substantial investments in the region. Malaysia’s State of Johor and Singapore are connected by rail and road. In 2023, Singapore was Malaysia’s second largest trading partner and its largest source of foreign direct investment (hereinafter, FDI), contributing USD 9.61 billion, corresponding to 23.2% of Malaysia’s total FDI. In the same year, Johor attracted USD 6.51 billion in FDI, with Singapore and the US as leading investors in the manufacturing sector. The Johor-Singapore SEZ aims at further strengthening the competitive position of Johor and Singapore by, inter alia, improving cross-border goods connectivity and strengthening the business ecosystem within the region. As agreed under the 2024 Memorandum of Understanding, Malaysia and Singapore launched several early initiatives for the Johor-Singapore SEZ, including a passport-free QR code clearance system at Singapore’s land checkpoints with Malaysia, which has been implemented since March 2024, as well as streamlined Customs procedures for intermodal land transshipments. Since 1 January 2025, traders only need to apply for a single transshipment permit with Singapore Customs, replacing the previous requirement for two separate permits.
Key elements of the Johor-Singapore SEZ
The Johor-Singapore SEZ covers strategic areas across Malaysia’s State of Johor and comprises nine specific areas, including the Iskandar Development Region and Pengerang. The Johor-Singapore SEZ aims to attract global investments with an initial target of securing 50 projects within the first five years of the SEZ’s establishment and attracting 20,000 skilled job opportunities. To achieve these objectives, Malaysia and Singapore agreed to cooperate in the areas of economy, movement of people and goods, talent development, and ease of doing business. With respect to economic cooperation, Malaysia and Singapore will, inter alia, promote investments in 11 economic sectors, namely “manufacturing, logistics, food security, tourism, energy, the digital economy, the green economy, financial services, business services, education, and health”, facilitate the development of renewable energy projects to accelerate renewable energy trading, and consider the development of “new areas for free zones”.
With respect to the movement of people and goods, Malaysia and Singapore intend to, inter alia, explore potential data sharing to “enhance customs processes in facilitating the cross-border movement of goods” and strengthen local transport links. These appear to be critical areas of improvement and trade facilitation, as everyone that has ever navigated the crossing of that border knows. Going from Singapore to Johor Bahru (and vice versa) can now take people from 2 to 3 hours and much longer for goods. Infrastructural connectivity can and should be improved, and facilitated processing procedures (e.g., common control areas) are low-hanging fruits that would boost economic integration, investment attraction, and the evident synergies between Johor and Singapore.
To improve the ease of doing business, Malaysia will establish the Invest Malaysia Facilitation Centre-Johor, a “one-stop centre in facilitating investments and businesses” in the Johor-Singapore SEZ. On 8 January 2025, Malaysia’s Ministry of Finance announced a comprehensive tax incentive package to drive high-value investments the Johor-Singapore SEZ, consisting of: 1) A corporate tax rate of 5%, instead of the standard rate of 24%, for up to 15 years for certain qualifying manufacturing activities, such as for the manufacture of medical devices and aerospace products; 2) A 15% flat income tax rate for 10 years for eligible knowledge workers, instead of the progressive rate of 1% to 30% applied to total taxable income; and 3) An entertainment duty of 5%, instead of the standard rate of 25% for relevant activities, such as theme parks, conventions, and exhibitions.
According to Malaysia’s Minister of Economy, Rafizi Ramli, the Agreement establishing the Johor-Singapore SEZ outlines the funding responsibilities for both countries, with Malaysia financing the necessary infrastructure projects and Singapore funding efforts to attract investments. However, as opposed to the traditional arrangement of developing infrastructures to attract investments, the Johor-Singapore SEZ will operate on a “project-by-project” basis. In other words, the necessary infrastructure will be built as investments are agreed. This approach aims at ensuring that infrastructure development is closely aligned with the needs of investors.
Expected benefits and early reactions from stakeholders
For Malaysia, the Johor-Singapore SEZ is set to contribute an annual USD 26.33 billion to its economy and attract significant FDI. For Singapore, the SEZ provides access to additional land, offering a cost-effective alternative for companies facing rising expenses in the country. By relocating to Johor, Singapore-based companies could optimise their operating costs, while still maintaining a strategic connection to Singapore. The Johor-Singapore SEZ has garnered positive reactions from stakeholders. Companies from China, Dubai, the United Arab Emirates, and South Korea reportedly already expressed their interest, noting that the Johor-Singapore SEZ presents an opportunity to expand their investments and establish a market presence in ASEAN. According to the chairman of the Johor-Singapore SEZ Singapore Business Working Group within the Singapore Business Federation (SBF), more than 60 Singaporean companies had expressed their interest in joining a business mission to Johor, which is scheduled for mid-February 2025, signalling strong interest from Singaporean companies on the Johor-Singapore SEZ. With the Johor-Singapore SEZ in development, interested investors should evaluate their eligibility for the tax incentives package, monitor the rollout of other economic initiatives, and familiarise themselves with the relevant regulatory frameworks for doing business.
The Johor-Singapore SEZ as a means to strengthen ASEAN integration
The Johor-Singapore SEZ is a noteworthy example of how two ASEAN Member States with complementary strengths can collaborate to promote mutual benefits and drive economic growth. By combining Malaysia’s abundant land, skilled labour force, and industrial know-how with Singapore’s advanced economy, financial expertise, and connectivity, the Johor-Singapore SEZ could become a new competitive regional hub in ASEAN for investment and innovation. According to Malaysia’s Minister Ramli, Malaysia, which currently holds the ASEAN chairmanship, intends to “drive this message of collaboration and further economic integration among ASEAN as a top agenda”, noting that the Johor-Singapore SEZ “is basically a test case”. The establishment of the Johor-Singapore SEZ should serve as an incentive for other ASEAN Member States to consider similar collaboration with neighbouring countries.
For any additional information or legal advice on this matter, please contact Paolo R. Vergano
Does "Dubai Chocolate" have to come from Dubai and may it be denominated "chocolate"? Origin labelling and other legal issues surrounding the hype
By Ignacio Carreño García and Tobias Dolle
Dubai chocolate, which appears to have been created for the first time by chocolate manufacturers in Dubai, the largest city in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and the capital of the Emirate of Dubai, has recently been the subject of a real hype and owes its popularity to social media. Dubai chocolate bars are filled milk chocolate bars, where the filling consists of roasted and chopped kadayif or kunafa dough threads, better known for its use in baklava, chopped pistachios or pistachio paste and often also tahina (sesame paste). Dubai chocolate has caused long queues in front of shops and is sold at premium prices, 100 grams of Dubai chocolate marketed at between EUR 8 and 10, while resales on the Internet are sometimes offered for hundreds of euro. This article addresses legal issues on origin labelling, geographical indications, quality issues, such as the fat content of Dubai chocolate, and the use of additives. Finally, food safety matters are discussed, as food contaminants like glycidol esters and aflatoxins have recently been detected in Dubai chocolate following tests in Germany.
May Dubai chocolate contain other vegetable fats than cocoa butter?
Products marketed as Dubai chocolate often contain vegetable fats other than cocoa butter, particularly palm oil. May these products still be denominated as “chocolate” in the EU? The EU defines a number of specific common rules for cocoa and chocolate products, which complement the general legislation applicable to foodstuffs. These rules concerning the composition, sales names, labelling, and presentation are set out in Directive 2000/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council relating to cocoa and chocolate products intended for human consumption. With respect to the composition of cocoa and chocolate products, this Directive determines the possibility to use a quantity of vegetable fats other than cocoa butter, but which may not exceed 5% in the end product. The vegetable fats (other than cocoa butter), which may be used, are listed in Annex II to the Directive, namely listing palm oil and five other non-lauric vegetable fats. The rules on other vegetable fats were established after a compromise was reached between countries like the UK and Ireland, where chocolate usually contains also vegetable fats other than cocoa, and ‘traditionalists’ like Belgium and Italy, where chocolate producers only use cocoa butter. It was basically agreed to state on the label whether it is made of pure cocoa butter or not (see Trade Perspectives, Issue No. 22 of 3 December 2010). According to Article 2(2) of Directive 2000/36/EC, the labelling of chocolate products, such as milk chocolate, containing vegetable fats other than cocoa butter, must bear the statement: “contains vegetable fats in addition to cocoa butter”. This statement is to be placed on the packaging in the same field of vision as the list of ingredients, clearly separated from that list, in lettering at least as large and in bold with the sales name nearby. Dubai chocolate with an additional amount of vegetable fat other than cocoa butter may, therefore, be legally denominated as “chocolate”, provided that it bears a statement on the label in that regard.
Court Injunctions in Germany temporarily prohibit the sale of certain Dubai chocolate
There are already Court decisions regarding Dubai chocolate. According to the Cologne Regional Court’s (Landgericht Köln) decision of 13 January 2025 (case 33 O 544/24), a product may only be called Dubai chocolate or similar in Germany if it is manufactured in Dubai or has some other geographical connection to Dubai. The Court issued an injunction against the retailer Aldi Süd, temporarily prohibiting the sale. Since December 2024, Aldi Süd had offered ‘Alyan Dubai Homemade Chocolate’ in its stores, but the chocolate is produced in Türkiye, as indicated on the back of the pack. Section 127(1) of the German Act on the Protection of Trade Marks and other Signs (hereinafter, Trade Mark Act) provides that “Indications of geographical origin may not be used in trade for goods or services which do not originate from the place, area, territory or country which is designated by the indication of geographical origin if it is likely to mislead concerning the geographical origin if such names, indications or signs for goods or services of different origin are used”.
Under Section 128(1) of the Trade Mark Act, any person who, in trade, uses names, indications or signs contrary to Section 127, may be sued by persons entitled to assert claims in accordance with Section 8 (3) of the Act Against Unfair Competition for injunctive relief in the event of the risk of recurrent infringement. In the Court’s view, the reference to Türkiye on the back of the packaging is not sufficient. Because of the designation, there is a risk that consumers would be misled if they were to assume “that the product was actually manufactured in Dubai and imported into Germany”. The same Court had already ruled in this way in two other recent cases issuing preliminary injunctions prohibiting two companies from marketing their products, which is neither manufactured in Dubai, nor has any other geographical connection to Dubai, as Dubai Chocolate. In these cases, the Court found that the “product design misleads customers”. In the specific cases, the packaging provided phrases such as “Taste of Dubai”, “a touch of Dubai”, or “this chocolate brings the magic of Dubai directly to your home”.
On 21 January 2025, in a case of chocolate marketed by retailer Lidl, the Frankfurt Regional Court (case 2-06 O 18/25) ruled differently, notably finding that “the term Dubai chocolate has become a generic term”. Therefore, consumers would not necessarily assume that the individual ingredients of Lidl’s chocolate came from Dubai or that the product was manufactured there. The court also refers to the presentation of the chocolate and to the indicated designation of origin: “with chocolate, pistachios and kadayif from EU/non-EU”. The decisions are specific to the respective cases and do not have broader legal validity. For other products, the peculiarities of design and advertising will have to be carefully examined and it may well be that other courts will also assume that consumers understand Dubai chocolate to mean a certain type of chocolate with special ingredients or a method of production or recipe, rather than an indication of origin.
May Dubai chocolate be protected as a Geographical Indication (GI)?
In general terms, food products can have their designations of origin legally protected against competitors if certain criteria are met. An example is sparkling wine from the Champagne region, which may only be marketed as champagne if it actually originates from the region and adheres to certain production criteria. Protecting certain products through geographical indications (hereinafter, GIs) plays a major role in EU agricultural policy, as well as in ongoing international trade negotiations. The approach aims at supporting regional specialities, while, at the same time, enhancing and safeguarding their reputation.
In the EU, Regulation (EU) 2024/1143 of the European Parliament and of the Council on geographical indications for wine, spirit drinks and agricultural products, as well as traditional specialities guaranteed and optional quality terms for agricultural products designates two types of GIs: 1) Protected Designations of Origin (PDO), which apply to foodstuffs that are produced, processed and prepared in a given geographical area using recognised ‘know-how’; and 2) Protected Geographical Indications (PGI), which indicate a link with the area in at least one of the stages of production, processing or preparation. Names that have become generic (e.g., Dijon mustard) may not be registered as GIs in the EU. More than 30 third country GIs are registered in the EU. This includes Tequila (from Mexico), Darjeeling tea (India), Tørrfisk fra Lofoten fish (Norway), and ‘Rooibos’ tea (South Africa) (see Trade Perspectives, Issue No. 12 of 18 June 2021).
Other GIs are protected on the EU market through bilateral agreements between the EU and third countries. It would need to be assessed whether Dubai chocolate has special characteristics or ingredients that distinguish it from others and whether there is a link to Dubai. If so, the UAE could protect the name Dubai Chocolate domestically and then seek recognition from the EU. In this context, the Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement on Appellations of Origin and Geographical Distinctions protects appellations of origin for food and beverages worldwide. However, such legal protection is only available to the signatories of this agreement, and the UAE has not signed it.
Food contaminants in Dubai chocolate: Food safety concerns?
In December 2024 in Germany, the food control authority in Baden-Württemberg (Chemisches und Veterinäruntersuchungsamt, CVUA) carried out an examination of eight samples of imported Dubai chocolate, five from the UAE and three from Türkiye, and declared that “The first results are worrying”. Several issues were found, including “the use of undeclared allergens and the use of palm oil instead of cocoa butter in samples from the UAE”. The authorities detected significant amounts of the process contaminants 3-MCPD and glycidyl fatty acid esters in six of the eight samples examined. In only one of these samples, the levels were below the maximum permitted level set in Commission Regulation (EU) 2023/915 on maximum levels for certain contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006, but five of the samples from the same manufacturer in the UAE were assessed as “unsuitable for consumption and thus as ‘not safe’ due to an almost double exceedance of the maximum level for glycidyl fatty acid esters, which is a substance classified as probably carcinogenic”.
The CVUA notes that, “Presumably, these substances that are harmful to health got into the Dubai chocolate via contaminated palm oil” and that “Palm oil is particularly susceptible to the formation of 3-MCPD and glycidyl fatty acid esters”. Undeclared sesame seeds were detected in the samples from Türkiye, which poses a health risk to people with a sesame allergy. Almost all samples examined also contained synthetic colours and the authority states that “the use of synthetic colours achieves a more intensive colouring of the filling. It is obvious that this is intended to simulate a higher pistachio content”. In response to these results, the Ministry of Food, Rural Areas and Consumer Protection within Germany’s State of Baden-Württemberg announced a statewide special program to inspect such products to ensure compliance with food law.
In this context, via the EU’s Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed (hereinafter, RASFF), on 20 December 2024, Germany notified the presence of “Aflatoxins and ochratoxin A in Dubai chocolate from United Arab Emirates” and, on 15 January 2025, notified the presence of “Glycidol in Dubai Chocolate with kunafa & pistachio from the United Arab Emirates”. On 3 January 2025, Sweden notified an “undeclared allergen (pistachio nuts) in FIX chocolate with Knafeh and Pistachio from the United Arab Emirates”.
Outlook
As evidenced above, the popular Dubai chocolate may give rise to various legal and food safety issues. Food business operators and retailers should diligently assess the emerging issues related to the indication of origin, the labelling of the ingredients, and ensure that products placed on the market are safe for human consumption.
For any additional information or legal advice on this matter, please contact Ignacio Carreño Garcia
Recently adopted EU legislation
Trade Law
- Decision No 1/2025 of the EU-Switzerland Joint Committee of 13 January 2025 amending Tables III and IV of Protocol 2 to the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Swiss Confederation of 22 July 1972 [2025/128]
- Decision No 1/2024 of the EU-Ukraine Association Council of 1 October 2024 on the granting of reciprocal market access for supplies for central government authorities in accordance with Annex XXI-A to Chapter 8 of the Association Agreement between the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community and their Member States, of the one part, and Ukraine, of the other part [2025/59]
Customs Law
- Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/60 of 15 January 2025 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty, definitively collecting the provisional duty imposed on imports of erythritol originating in the People's Republic of China and levying the definitive anti-dumping duty on the registered imports of erythritol originating in the People's Republic of China
- Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/120 of 23 January 2025 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of electric bicycles, originating in the People's Republic of China following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016 /1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council
Food Law
- Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/3153 of 18 December 2024 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1793 on the temporary increase of official controls and emergency measures governing the entry into the Union of certain goods from certain third countries implementing Regulations ( EU) 2017/625 and (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L, 2024/3153, 19.12.2024)
- Regulation (EU) 2025/40 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 December 2024 on packaging and packaging waste, amending Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 and Directive (EU) 2019/904, and repealing Directive 94/62/EC (Text with EEA relevance)
- Commission Regulation (EU) 2025/115 of 21 January 2025 amending Annexes II and III to Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards maximum residue levels for fluxapyroxad, lambda-cyhalothrin, metalaxyl, and nicotine in or on certain products
Amanda Carlota, Ignacio Carreño García, Tobias Dolle, Alya Mahira, Caitlynn Nadya, Stella Nalwoga, and Paolo R. Vergano contributed to this issue.
Follow us on X @FratiniVergano
To subscribe to Trade Perspectives © , please click here . To unsubscribe, please click here .
Back Download