Suchergebnisse

We consider a setting in which capital taxation is characterized by two distortions working in opposite directions. On one hand, governments engage in tax competition and are tempted to lower capital tax rates. On the other hand, they are unable to commit to future policies and, once capital has been installed, have incentives to increase taxes. In this setting, there exists a tax that optimally trades off the two distortions. We compare three possible tax harmonization scenarios: no tax harmonization (all countries set taxes unilaterally), global tax harmonization (all countries coordinate their capital taxes), and partial tax harmonization (only a subset of all countries coordinate capital taxes). We show that, if capital is sufficiently mobile, partial tax harmonization benefits all countries compared to both global and no harmonization. ; SCOPUS: ar.j ; info:eu-repo/semantics/published

The Article 13 EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive is home of the meaningful engagement provision. It is significantly more robust than similar provisions in national due diligence legislation in France, Germany and Norway. Despite the fact that a number of differences between EU CSDDD and these national laws is likely to give rise to some "harmonization pains", one silver lining exists: stakeholders gain some leverage.

It is a relatively new concept to use biochar as soil amendment and for climate change mitigation. For this reason, the national and supranational legislation in the EU is not yet adequately prepared to regulate both the production and the application of biochar. Driven by this "regulatory gap", voluntary biochar quality standards have been formed in Europe with the European Biochar Certificate, in the UK with the Biochar Quality Mandate and in the USA with the IBI Standard which is intended to be used internationally. In parallel to this, biochar producers and biochar users in a number of EU countries were partly successful in fitting the new biochar product into the existing national legislation for fertilisers, soil improvers and composts. The intended revision of the EC Regulation 2003/2003 on fertilisers offers the opportunity to regulate the use of biochar at the EU level. This publication summarizes the efforts on biochar standardization which have been carried out by voluntary products standards and illustrates existing legislation in EU member states, which apply to the production and use of biochar. It describes existing and planned EU regulations, which impact biochar applications and it develops recommendations on the harmonization of biochar legislation in the EU. First published online: 24 Jan 2017

It is a relatively new concept to use biochar as soil amendment and for climate change mitigation. For this reason, the national and supranational legislation in the EU is not yet adequately prepared to regulate both the production and the application of biochar. Driven by this "regulatory gap", voluntary biochar quality standards have been formed in Europe with the European Biochar Certificate, in the UK with the Biochar Quality Mandate and in the USA with the IBI Standard which is intended to be used internationally. In parallel to this, biochar producers and biochar users in a number of EU countries were partly successful in fitting the new biochar product into the existing national legislation for fertilisers, soil improvers and composts. The intended revision of the EC Regulation 2003/2003 on fertilisers offers the opportunity to regulate the use of biochar at the EU level. This publication summarizes the efforts on biochar standardization which have been carried out by voluntary products standards and illustrates existing legislation in EU member states, which apply to the production and use of biochar. It describes existing and planned EU regulations, which impact biochar applications and it develops recommendations on the harmonization of biochar legislation in the EU. First published online: 24 Jan 2017