Review of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2025/1393
This regulation adds a review clause to Delegated Regulation (EU) 2025/1184, which lists high-risk third countries for money laundering and terrorist financing. The Commission must now assess by the end of 2025 whether countries with suspended Financial Action Task Force (FATF) membership should be added to this list. This amendment ensures ongoing scrutiny of countries posing elevated financial crime risks.
Review of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2025/885
This regulation supplements MiCA, Regulation (EU) 2023/1114, detailing how to prevent, detect, and report market abuse in crypto-asset markets. It mandates specific arrangements, systems, and procedures for entities professionally involved in crypto-asset transactions. Crucially, it includes templates for reporting suspicious activity and coordination procedures for cross-border cases, emphasizing human analysis alongside ICT systems to combat market manipulation and insider trading.
Review of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/1753
This regulation amends Annex I to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/594, which concerns special disease control measures for African swine fever (ASF). The changes involve updating and correcting the zoning of restricted areas in Croatia, Estonia, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania and Poland, based on recent ASF outbreaks in both domestic and wild pigs. Operators must comply with the updated zoning to prevent the spread of the disease.
Review of Decision amending Decision No 4/2023
This Decision updates the standard forms used for VAT-related communication and information exchange between EU Member States and the UK under the Trade and Cooperation Agreement. The updated forms are aligned with the Exchange of Forms (EoF) system, streamlining administrative cooperation and the recovery of VAT claims.
Review of EFTA Surveillance Authority Decision No. 061/25/COL
This decision identifies specific product and service markets within the electronic communications sector that may be subject to ex-ante regulation in the EEA. It aims to promote competition, the internal market, and end-user interests. The decision lists wholesale local access and wholesale dedicated capacity as markets warranting analysis by national regulatory authorities. Compared to the previous recommendation, wholesale call termination and central access markets are removed.
Review of Joined Cases E-1/24 and E-7/24 (EFTA Court)
In this judgement the EFTA Court provides clarification on access to beneficial ownership information under Directive (EU) 2015/849. It confirms that individuals harmed by predicate offenses related to money laundering or terrorist financing can demonstrate a “legitimate interest” for access. The judgment also balances the need for transparency with the protection of privacy and personal data.
Review of Case E-9/23, EFTA Surveillance Authority v. The Kingdom of Norway (EFTA Court)
The EFTA Court dismissed the application of EFTA Surveillance Authority against the Kingdom of Norway and found that Norway’s rules and practices regarding access to inpatient treatment in other EEA states comply with EEA law.
Review of each of legal acts published today:
Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2025/1393 of 8 July 2025 amending Delegated Regulation (EU) 2025/1184 to introduce a review clause
This Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2025/1393 introduces a review clause to Delegated Regulation (EU) 2025/1184, which concerns the list of high-risk third countries for money laundering and terrorist financing. The new regulation mandates the Commission to assess, by December 31, 2025, whether to amend the list of high-risk third countries, considering those whose membership in the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) is suspended. This assessment will determine if these countries should be added to the list of high-risk third countries as outlined in Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/1675.
The regulation consists of two articles. Article 1 introduces Article 1a into Delegated Regulation (EU) 2025/1184, which stipulates the Commission’s obligation to review third countries with suspended FATF membership and conclude the assessment by the end of 2025. Article 2 states that the regulation will come into force twenty days after its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union and is binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. There are no changes compared to previous versions, except for the introduction of the review clause.
The most important provision of this regulation is the obligation for the Commission to conduct a review of third countries with suspended FATF membership by December 31, 2025, to determine whether they should be classified as high-risk third countries. This review is crucial for maintaining the integrity of the EU financial system, especially considering the current geopolitical situation and the potential increased risk posed by countries with suspended FATF membership.
Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2025/885 of 29 April 2025 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to regulatory technical standards specifying the arrangements, systems and procedures to prevent, detect and report market abuse, the templates to be used for reporting suspected market abuse, and the coordination procedures between the competent authorities for the detection and sanctioning of market abuse in cross-border market abuse situations
This is Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2025/885, which supplements Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 on markets in crypto-assets (MiCA). It focuses on preventing, detecting, and reporting market abuse in crypto-asset markets. The regulation outlines specific arrangements, systems, and procedures that entities professionally arranging or executing transactions in crypto-assets must implement. It also provides templates for reporting suspected market abuse and establishes coordination procedures between competent authorities in cross-border situations.
The regulation is structured around several key articles. Article 1 provides definitions, including that of a “suspicious transaction and order report” (STOR). Article 2 outlines general requirements for establishing and maintaining arrangements, systems, and procedures to monitor and prevent market abuse. Article 3 details the prevention, monitoring, and detection measures, including the need for human analysis and the use of ICT systems. Article 4 focuses on training for staff involved in preventing and detecting market abuse. Articles 5 and 6 cover the reporting of suspicious orders or transactions, including the timing and content of STORs. Articles 7 and 8 address the exchange of reports between competent authorities and coordination procedures for cross-border market abuse situations. The Annex provides a template for STORs.
The most important provisions for those operating in crypto-asset markets are those detailing the specific requirements for monitoring, detection, and reporting of suspicious activities. This includes the need for systems that can analyze transactions both on and off the distributed ledger, the requirement for human analysis of alerts, and the detailed template for submitting STORs to competent authorities. The regulation also emphasizes the importance of ongoing training for staff and the need to maintain records of analyses conducted, regardless of whether they result in a STOR.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/1753 of 18 August 2025 correcting and amending Annex I to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/594 laying down special disease control measures for African swine fever
Here is a detailed description of the provisions of the act you provided:
**1. Essence of the Act:**
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/1753 is a legal instrument that corrects and amends Annex I to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/594. This regulation addresses special disease control measures for African swine fever (ASF). The amendments involve adjustments to the zoning of restricted areas within certain Member States due to the evolving epidemiological situation of ASF. The regulation aims to proactively combat the risks associated with the spread of ASF within the European Union.
**2. Structure and Main Provisions:**
* **Corrections:** Corrects errors in the entries for Lithuania in Parts I and III of Annex I to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/594, as amended by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/1725. These corrections are applied retroactively from August 7, 2025, the date of application of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/1725.
* **Amendments:** Replaces Annex I to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/594 with a new text, which includes updated lists of restricted zones I, II, and III for various Member States. These changes are based on new outbreaks of African swine fever in both kept and wild porcine animals.
* **Member States Affected:** The changes specifically address the situation in Croatia, Estonia, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania and Poland, demarcating new restricted zones based on the epidemiological situation and risk levels.
* **Specific Changes:**
* **Croatia:** Adjusts restricted zones I and III in Osjecko-Baranjska county due to new outbreaks.
* **Estonia:** Modifies restricted zones II and III in Viljandi Counties following an outbreak in kept porcine animals.
* **Hungary:** Lists an area bordering Croatia as a restricted zone I due to outbreaks in Croatia.
* **Italy:** Adjusts restricted zones I and II in Emilia Romagna region due to an outbreak in a wild porcine animal.
* **Poland:** Modifies restricted zones I, II, and III in Lubuskie and Lubelskie regions due to new outbreaks in wild and kept porcine animals.
* **Lithuania:** Corrects errors in the entries for Lithuania in Parts I and III of Annex I.
* **Hungary:** Deletes reference to game management unit 954060 in Békés County, as it has been merged into the adjacent game management unit 953260.
* **Entry into Force:** The regulation enters into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union, with Article 1 applying retroactively from August 7, 2025.
**3. Main Provisions Important for Use:**
* **Zoning Changes:** The most critical aspect is the updated demarcation of restricted zones I, II, and III. Member States and stakeholders involved in the movement of live pigs and pig products need to be acutely aware of these changes.
* **Geographical Boundaries:** The precise geographical descriptions of the restricted zones are essential for compliance. These descriptions define the areas where special disease control measures apply.
* **Compliance:** Stakeholders must ensure that movements of consignments of porcine animals and products thereof comply with the restrictions and measures applicable to the newly defined zones.
* **Retroactive Application:** The retroactive application of corrections for Lithuania from August 7, 2025, means that actions taken since that date must be reviewed and adjusted if necessary to align with the corrected zoning.
**** This act may have implications to Ukraine and Ukrainians, as it is related to the control of African swine fever, which is a threat to the pig population in Ukraine.
Decision No 1/2025 of the Trade Specialised Committee on Administrative Cooperation in VAT and Recovery of Taxes and Duties established by the Trade and Cooperation Agreement between the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community, of the one part, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, of the other part, of 31 July 2025 amending Decision No 4/2023 on standard forms for the communication of information and statistical data, the transmission of information via the common communication network and the practical arrangements for the organisation of contacts between central liaison offices and liaison departments [2025/1755]
This Decision amends Decision No 4/2023 regarding standard forms used for communication and exchange of information related to VAT and tax recovery between the EU Member States and the United Kingdom, as established under the Trade and Cooperation Agreement. The amendment aims to update and improve the standard forms to ensure their continued relevance and usability for tax authorities. This includes aligning the forms with the Exchange of Forms (EoF) system used by EU Member States. The overall goal is to enhance administrative cooperation and the recovery of claims between the parties.
The Decision consists of two articles. Article 1 stipulates that Annex I to Decision No 4/2023, which contains the standard forms, is replaced by the text included in the Annex to this new Decision. Article 2 states that the Decision will come into force on the date of its adoption. The core change lies in the replacement of the existing standard forms with updated versions, as detailed in the Annex to the Decision. These modifications involve structural changes, new labels, and sections to align with the Exchange of Forms (EoF) system, specifically the one referred to in Commission Implementing Decision C(2019)2866, as amended by Commission Implementing Decision C(2024)8903.
The most important provision of this Decision is Article 1, which replaces Annex I of the previous Decision with a new set of standard forms. These forms are crucial for competent authorities when communicating requests for information, spontaneous exchanges of information, requests for administrative inquiries, and feedback related to VAT. The alignment with the Exchange of Forms (EoF) system is also significant, as it aims to streamline and improve the efficiency of information exchange between the EU and the UK in matters of VAT and tax recovery.
EFTA Surveillance Authority Decision No 061/25/COL of 9 April 2025 EFTA Surveillance Authority Recommendation on relevant product and service markets within the electronic communications sector susceptible to ex ante regulation in accordance with the Act referred to at point 5czs of Annex XI to the EEA Agreement (Directive (EU) 2018/1972 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 establishing the European Electronic Communications Code), as adapted by Protocol 1 to the EEA Agreement and by the sectoral adaptations contained in Annex XI to that Agreement [2025/1754]
This EFTA Surveillance Authority Decision No. 061/25/COL outlines the product and service markets within the electronic communications sector that may be subject to ex-ante regulation. The decision aims to ensure a uniform application of the regulatory framework within the EEA, promoting competition, the internal market, and end-user interests, including connectivity and access to very high capacity networks. It identifies markets where ex-ante regulation may be justified, emphasizing the progressive reduction of sector-specific rules as competition develops. The recommendation replaces the Authority’s 2016 Recommendation, adapting to technological, market, and regulatory developments.
The decision is structured around several key considerations, including barriers to entry, market structure, and the sufficiency of competition law. It emphasizes that regulatory intervention should ultimately benefit end-users in terms of price, quality, and choice by achieving sustainable competition at the retail level. The decision also addresses the analysis of markets by national regulatory authorities, the definition of geographic markets, and the impact of the EEA-wide voice termination rates.
The main provisions of the act are:
1. **Analysis of Relevant Markets:** National regulatory authorities should analyze the product and service markets identified in the Annex to determine if they are appropriate for national circumstances.
2. **Three-Criteria Test:** If a national regulatory authority considers that a market listed in the Annex is not susceptible to ex ante regulation, they must perform the three-criteria test (high barriers to entry, market structure not tending towards effective competition, and insufficiency of competition law) and demonstrate that at least one criterion is not met.
3. **Geographic Market Definition:** National regulatory authorities should conduct a granular analysis of demand and supply-side substitutability, starting from an appropriate geographic unit, and aggregating units with similar competitive conditions.
4. **Impact on Prior Regulations:** The Recommendation does not prejudice market definitions, results of market analyses, and regulatory obligations adopted by national regulatory authorities before the adoption of this Recommendation.
The Annex lists the following markets:
* Wholesale local access provided at a fixed location
* Wholesale dedicated capacity
Compared to the Authority’s 2016 Recommendation, this decision removes three markets: wholesale call termination on individual public telephone networks provided at a fixed location, wholesale voice call termination on individual mobile networks, and wholesale central access provided at a fixed location for mass-market products.
Judgment of the Court of 7 May 2025 in Joined Cases E-1/24 and E-7/24 – TC and – AA (Anti-money laundering – Directive (EU) 2015/849 – Article 30(5)(c) – Access to beneficial ownership information – Directive (EU) 2018/843 – Validity of legislative acts – Principle of homogeneity – Fundamental rights – Respect for private life – Protection of personal data – Freedom of expression – National procedural autonomy – Principle of effectiveness – Regulation (EU) 2016/679)
This is a judgment from the Court regarding Joined Cases E-1/24 and E-7/24, concerning the interpretation of Article 30(5) of Directive (EU) 2015/849, which deals with access to beneficial ownership information in the context of anti-money laundering efforts. The cases were brought before the Court by the Administrative Court of the Principality of Liechtenstein. The Court clarifies the conditions under which individuals can access information about the beneficial owners of companies, balancing the need for transparency with the fundamental rights to privacy and data protection.
The judgment addresses two main questions related to access to beneficial ownership information. Case E-7/24 clarifies that individuals whose financial interests were harmed by a predicate offense related to money laundering or terrorist financing may have a legitimate interest in accessing beneficial ownership information. The judgment emphasizes that substantiating a legitimate interest is both necessary and sufficient for accessing this information, and that national procedural rules must comply with the principles of equivalence and effectiveness. Case E-1/24 clarifies that national legislation can require a person requesting access to beneficial ownership information to name the entity in respect of which information is sought, but this requirement should not be applied so rigidly as to make exercising the right to access excessively difficult.
The most important provisions of this act are the clarifications regarding who can demonstrate a “legitimate interest” to access beneficial ownership information and the extent to which national laws can impose requirements on those seeking access. The Court’s interpretation aims to strike a balance between transparency in combating financial crime and protecting the privacy and personal data of beneficial owners. The judgment also underscores that while EEA states have procedural autonomy, they must ensure that their rules do not undermine the effectiveness of the Directive or the fundamental rights involved.
Judgment of the Court of 7 May 2025 in Case E-9/23 – EFTA Surveillance Authority v The Kingdom of Norway (Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 – Inpatient treatment abroad – Alternative schemes – Effective protection of EEA rights – Legal certainty – Article 20(2) of Regulation No 883/2004 – Article 36 EEA – Admissibility – Article 31 SCA)
This is a summary of a judgment by the EFTA Court in Case E-9/23, EFTA Surveillance Authority v. The Kingdom of Norway. The case concerned whether Norway’s national rules and practices regarding access to inpatient treatment in other EEA states were in compliance with Article 36 of the EEA Agreement, Article 20(2) of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 on the coordination of social security systems, Article 3 of the EEA Agreement, and the principle of legal certainty. The EFTA Surveillance Authority brought the action, alleging that Norway had breached these provisions.
**Structure and Main Provisions:**
The judgment is structured as a response to an application by the EFTA Surveillance Authority against the Kingdom of Norway. The core issue revolves around the interpretation and application of EEA law concerning access to inpatient treatment in other EEA states, specifically focusing on the coordination of social security systems.
The operative part of the judgment contains two points:
* The Court dismissed the application, meaning it found in favor of Norway.
* The EFTA Surveillance Authority was ordered to bear its own costs and those of the Kingdom of Norway.
**Main Provisions for Practical Use:**
The key takeaway from this judgment is that the EFTA Court found Norway’s national rules and practices regarding access to inpatient treatment in other EEA states to be compliant with EEA law. This means that other EEA states and individuals seeking cross-border inpatient treatment from Norway should be aware that Norway’s existing system has been deemed legally sound by the EFTA Court.
