Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism What Is The Impact On Developing Countries (1080p) by BruegelEvents

How Are Crises Changing Central Bank Doctrines by BruegelEvents

The Coronavirus outbreak presents a major challenge to the entire European Union and solidarity is an important part of the response to this unprecedented crisis. Cohesion Policy funding is playing a central role in the EU's  Coronavirus Response Investment Initiative, which aims to mobilise cohesion policy to flexibly respond to the rapidly emerging needs in the most exposed sectors, such as healthcare, SMEs and labour markets, and help the most affected territories in Member States and their citizens. At this event Elisa Ferreira, European Commissioner for Cohesion and Reforms was in conversation with Jim Brunsden of the FT and Bruegel's Deputy Director, Maria Demertzis to discuss how the EU is making money available for those who need it the most. This event is part of a series of talks and debates with Europe’s political leaders jointly organised by the Financial Times and Bruegel.

In our second event in our series with the Financial Times, Commissioner Paolo Gentiloni discussed the European response to the coronavirus crisis.

During this online event, Commissioner Thierry Breton spoke with Sam Fleming, Brussels bureau chief of the Financial Times, and Bruegel’s Director Guntram Wolff and discussed the European industrial strategy in face of the coronavirus.

The question whether trade policy instruments are fit for coping with the rise of state capitalism and a new dimension of state subsidies has already been discussed intensively in trade policy debates. Whether in this context competition law might also need to be updated and whether this should encompass new instruments are less debated questions which the first panel addressed. The second panel built on this and discussed whether (and how) competition law needs to be updated with a view to ongoing digitization of the economy, seeing that digital technologies not only change the structure of markets but also open up new levels of strategic global competition. Access to data or digital infrastructure are important facets of this discussion in which Europe needs to find its own answers.

The question whether trade policy instruments are fit for coping with the rise of state capitalism and a new dimension of state subsidies has already been discussed intensively in trade policy debates. Whether in this context competition law might also need to be updated and whether this should encompass new instruments are less debated questions which the first panel addressed. The second panel built on this and discussed whether (and how) competition law needs to be updated with a view to ongoing digitization of the economy, seeing that digital technologies not only change the structure of markets but also open up new levels of strategic global competition. Access to data or digital infrastructure are important facets of this discussion in which Europe needs to find its own answers.

Border Carbon Adjustment (BCA) is justifiably one of top priorities of the European Commission. With a ten-year deadline to drastically lower the GHG emissions, the Commission is planning to test the new measures already later this year, potentially starting with the industries producing steel, cement, and aluminum. Inevitably, there is a lot of negative commentary surrounding the proposal - critics argue that the emerging countries' industries will be put at a disadvantage, they wonder if the BCA is WTO-compatible, and finally, they question the very feasibility of the implementation of the tax. At this event our fellow Georg Zachmann talked about his paper, "A European carbon border tax: much pain, little gain", where he argues that the European Commission should not make the implementation of a carbon border adjustment mechanism into a must-have element of its climate policy. There is little in the way of strong empirical evidence to offer justification for the problem the mechanism looks to address, direct carbon leakage. Furthermore, significant logistical, legal and political challenges will arise during the design. A key problem with the limited form of adjustment currently under consideration will be trade deviation. The EU should instead focus upon the implementation of measures to trigger the development of a competitive low-carbon industry in Europe.

After 8 years, the European Banking Union has not achieved its two stated objectives: breaking future contagion between banks and sovereigns, and creating a true single market for banks. The aim of this event was to discuss possible solutions to revive the Banking Union. More specifically, Luis Garicano argued in his presentation for the empowerment of the Single Resolution Board and the creation of a “Safe Portfolio” model. Following these proposed solutions, the political and economic feasibility were discussed in a panel, together with other possible ways to resurrect the Banking Union.

At this event, the Group CEO of Generali, Philippe Donnet and Guntram Wolff, Director of Bruegel discussed the general state of the financial services industry. In addition, the conversation addressed many topical developments. What is the impact of operating in a low interest rate environment? Should we take a new look at the capital requirements in order to accommodate for further investments in the EU’s priorities such as the European Green Deal and their industrial strategy? Besides these questions, the role of insurance companies as a long term institutional investors and their investment horizon were discussed.

At this event various aspects of the EU taxation policy were discussed such as the closing of the EU VAT gap, closer cooperation between Member States’ tax administrations, introducing a digital tax, and cracking down on tax paradises. These discussions were kicked off by a speech by Tadeusz Kościński, the Polish Minister of Finance. He referred to Poland’s latest experience of improving tax collection (for VAT and other taxes).