The Future Is Here Today

The Future Is Here Today
Where Business, Nature and Leisure Provide An Ideal Setting For Living

Advertise in Almere-Digest

Advertising Options
Showing posts with label US Corporations. Show all posts
Showing posts with label US Corporations. Show all posts

September 5, 2016

Corruption in the European Union: Scandals in Banking, Fraud and Secretive TTIP Negotiations - by Graham Vanbergen

In Brussels alone there are now over 30,000 corporate lobbyists, shadowy agitators as The Guardian puts it, which are responsible for influencing three quarters of legislation in the EU. But even they are left in the shade when it comes to the power being afforded to corporations in the TTIP negotiations.

The US Chamber of Commerce the wealthiest of all US corporate lobbies and DigitalEurope, whose members include all the big IT names like Apple, Blackberry, IBM, and Microsoft are there. So are the Transatlantic Business Council, a corporate lobby group representing over 70 EU and US-based multinationals. ACEA, the car lobby working for BMW, Ford, Renault and others, the Chemical Industry Council lobbying for BASF, Bayer, Dow, and the like, are all there.

The European Services Forum, a lobby outfit banding together large services companies are present as are powerful big Pharma companies and FoodDrinkEurope, the biggest food industry lobby group representing multinationals like Nestlé, Coca Cola, and Unilever are sitting at the negotiating table.

One in every 5 corporate lobby groups, which have lobbied for trade on TTIP (80 out of 372 corporate actors), is not registered in the EU’s Transparency Register. Of 597 closed meetings the EU Commissioners conducted over TTIP, 88% were with big corporations. Just 9% were with public interest groups.

Many, if not most of these corporations are not strangers to scandals of corruption in one sort or another. TTIP if successful, would perhaps be the apex of their achievement.

Transparency International explains the connection between lobbying and corruption thus:

    Any activity carried out to influence a government or institution’s policies and decisions in favour of a specific cause or outcome. Even when allowed by law, these acts can become distortive if disproportionate levels of influence exist — by companies, associations, organisations and individuals. (4)

 It should be clear to anyone that when transparency of policy making, basic safeguards and accountability are limited, this can lead to illegal, undue and unfair influence in a country’s policies and politics. TTIP is the embodiment of a corrupt system where corporations decide what are best, not democratic principles.

In the meantime, Cecelia Malmstrom has faced huge public opposition over TTIP. Millions have signed petitions. Mass protests groups have rallied in many cities across Europe and America, some have turned ugly with protestors facing riot police in Brussels and elsewhere. In response the EU Commission conducted the largest ever survey since its 1951 birth and reluctantly published the results in January 2015 where 97% of 150,000 respondents from 28 nations voiced their unequivocal opposition to the deal. At the same time, the Commission also received individual replies from more than 450 organisations who represented a wider spectrum of EU civil society, including trade unions, NGOs, business organisations, consumer groups, charities, legal firms and academics, all of whom expressed either deep concern or outright opposition – to no avail. (5)

Questioned by a reporter from The Independent on why she continued her persistent promotion of the deal against such massive public opposition, Malmström’s chilling response was: “I do not take my mandate from the European people.” EU commissioners are supposed to follow the elected governments of Europe and so this deal proves it is nothing more than a corporate coups d’état that clearly breaches any definition, no matter how low the bar, of corruption. (6)

This stark reality is highlighted by a report from War on Want who revealed that The European Commissioner for Trade receives orders directly from the corporate lobbyists that swarm around Brussels.

    Given that the European Commission takes its steer from industry lobbies it’s hardly surprising that 70 per cent of Europe’s population think corruption is now centered on politics and corporations.

October 21, 2015

Netherlands and Luxembourgih: Starbucks, Fiat Decisions Seen in First Wave of EU Tax Cases - by Stephanie Bodoni Gaspard Sebag

Starbucks Corp. and a Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV unit are set to be first in the firing line as European Union regulators issue a series of rulings over tax breaks for global companies, including Apple Inc.

The EU may issue decisions against Starbucks and Fiat as soon as next week following a two-year probe into how the companies may have gotten unfair tax treatment from Dutch and Luxembourgih authorities, people familiar with the cases said.

Speculation about the probes intensified.,this week as Margrethe Vestager, the EU’s competition chief, canceled a scheduled visit to China, citing pressing matters relating to her job.

Decisions on whether iPhone maker Apple and Amazon.com Inc. got sweetheart tax deals from Ireland and Luxembourg are expected at a later date, said the people who asked not to be identified because the decision isn’t public.

Read more: Starbucks, Fiat Decisions Seen in First Wave of EU Tax Cases - Bloomberg Business

August 19, 2014

What happens in Europe, doesn't stay in Europe: US giants accused of breaking EU privacy pact - by Jennifer Baker

More than 30 big US tech firms are breaking international agreed-upon US-EU Safe Harbor commitments to safeguard Europeans’ data, according to a complaint filed with the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) on Thursday.

The Washington-based Center for Digital Democracy (CDD) claims tech giants such as AOL, Adobe, Salesforce, Datalogix, Marketo, BlueKai, Criteo, Merkle and others are ignoring their promise to keep EU citizens’ data private – as opposed to sharing it with other organizations.

None of these companies have responded to requests for comment, but we'll update when we hear more. The CDD claims "these companies are compiling, using, and sharing EU consumers’ personal information without their awareness and meaningful consent, in violation the Safe Harbor framework."

The Safe Harbor agreement is a legally enforceable but voluntary "code of conduct" for US businesses that process European citizens’ data. The bilateral deal was reached in 2000 and is supposed to guarantee Europeans data privacy in line with the 1995 EU Data Protection Directive, but following the Snowden revelations last year, many don’t believe it is worth the paper it’s printed on.

The deal let the US off the hook of having to comply with data privacy adequacy requirements for transferring data outside the EU and instead allowed companies to sign up to the agreement on a case-by-case basis. Currently 4,767 companies have so far signed up.

These companies are then authorised to display a logo showing that they are part of the scheme and the rules can be legally enforced. But last year Galexia, an Australian-based consulting company on internet law and privacy, carried out research into the Safe Harbor membership scheme and claimed it had found that around one in every seven claims is false.

According to the CDD, the 30-odd companies in the complaint are actively involved in “data profiling”.
“Our investigation found that many of the companies are involved with a web of powerful multiple data broker partners who, unknown to the EU public, pool their data on them so they can be profiled and targeted online," said CDD executive director, Jeff Chester.

The group has also claimed that the FTC is failing to enforce the Safe Harbor rules. Compiling, using and sharing EU consumers' personal information without their awareness, consent, or ability to opt out is in violation the Safe Harbor framework. In such cases the FTC could enforce sanctions.

Representatives of the EU and US are currently in negotiations to create a new, so-called data privacy “umbrella agreement” which would – possibly – give Europeans the same rights of redress as American citizens if their data is used inappropriately.

In the meantime, many in the European Parliament have called for the Safe Harbor agreement to be suspended. Following an investigation into the NSA spying revelations last year, the parliament voted to suspend the deal, but the European Commission, which would have to act on such a vote, has not done so, preferring instead to continue the “umbrella” negotiations.

Note EU-Digest: If the EU Commissions is able to override the EU Parliament on issues of Personal Privacy etc. there is something horribly wrong with the application of Democratic rule in the EU. In case the so-called "umbrella" rule ever gets implemented without proper review by the EU and national parliaments European citizens will find their personal rights even more curtailed than they are now. The EU Commission and the EU parliament better get their act together.

Read more: What happens in Europe, doesn't stay in Europe: US giants accused of breaking EU privacy pact • The Register