this post was submitted on 09 Oct 2025
41 points (100.0% liked)

Europe

7794 readers
621 users here now

News and information from Europe ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡บ

(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)

Rules (2024-08-30)

  1. This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
  2. No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
  3. Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
  4. No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
  5. Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
  6. If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
  7. Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
  8. Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
  9. No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
  10. Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.

(This list may get expanded as necessary.)

Posts that link to the following sources will be removed

Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media (incl. Substack). Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com

(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)

Ban lengths, etc.

We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.

If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.

If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the primary mod account @EuroMod@feddit.org

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 6 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[โ€“] Lumidaub@feddit.org 21 points 1 month ago (1 children)

changes are needed to avoid overburdening companies with complex reporting requirements

Then make it easier to report, ffs.

[โ€“] shane@feddit.nl 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I assume the complexity comes from corporations who have departments spread out who aren't arranged in a way to easily meet the reporting requirements. So "overburdening" means "spending money and focusing on compliance rather than products or services".

[โ€“] oneser@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The complexity also comes from significant overlap of regulation (e.g RoHS, REACH, WEEE, POP, Battery regulation etc.).

[โ€“] shane@feddit.nl 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

This seems plausible. I get that there is a sense that regulations can be implemented in a more direct way from the government side.

On the other hand, regulators often do more with fewer resources than the industries they regulate. Coordination of different types of regulation is hard, and there are drawbacks to centralizing and/or streamlining such functions, including both making the regulatory body too powerful and alternately a bigger target for corporate regulatory capture.

Companies will always whine about regulation, since they will always try to remove any costs. I don't think we should ever take their complaints too seriously. ๐Ÿ˜„

[โ€“] oneser@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 month ago

A general rule I hold is when companies are complaining about "remaining competitive" as a reason against regulation, you can ignore it.

When they are complaining about "regulatory burden" then it can be worth listening to. The EU has done some fantastic regulations (e.g. USB-C via the radio directive) but also some notably poor ones that it is worth listening to the complaints on (e.g. Medical Device Regulation).

[โ€“] Hotznplotzn@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 1 month ago

Let's hope this will not come true as it goes in the wrong direction. As may experts agree, cutting EU regulation is a gift to Chinaโ€™s car makers

Years were spent on agreeing rules to hold companies accountable for their environmental and social impacts, including the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), and more ... [but] numerous Omnibus proposals have gone beyond [simplification], weakening sustainability rules instead.

The rules are good for all the reasons associated with protecting human rights and combating climate change ...

Asian car makers lag behind in establishing systems to eliminate fossil fuels, environmental harms and human rights abuses from their supply chains. The latest Lead the Charge Leaderboard highlights this - where six of the top ten companies are European automakers. Chinese electric carmakers BYD, GAC and SAIC still do not disclose their scope 3 emissions from their supply chains ...

SAICโ€™s risk assessments focus solely on business-related concerns like chip shortages, while GAC only discloses processes for business and environmental risk management. Grievance mechanisms for affected workers or communities - a requirement under CSDDD - are also largely missing, unlike among EU firms.

These same Chinese manufacturers are ramping up sales in the EU market - until now mostly through imports, and increasingly via local production in Hungary, Spain and beyond. Yet many of these companies are falling short of EU sustainability requirements. This poses not just a regulatory challenge, but a competitive one: under the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, companies face consequences for non-compliance - including potential fines of at least 5% of annual turnover. If these rules are now weakened, we risk letting in lower-standard competition through the front door while failing to reward those who have played by the rules ...