Survey: EU regulation needed to reshore European businesses
A new survey finds that business leaders would consider bringing some parts of their businesses back to Europe if the EU reformed to become more competitive
March 25, 2014 at 05:58 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
A new survey finds that business leaders would consider bringing some parts of their businesses back to Europe if the EU reformed to become more competitive. In a new survey conducted by CBI, a UK-based lobbying group for businesses, senior leaders of firms also called for political action to increase labor market flexibility and ensure that the boundaries between the European Commission and national parliaments are “better respected.”
Research agency Millward Brown, on behalf of CBI, surveyed more than 50 senior business leaders in the UK, Germany, France, Italy and the Netherlands who collectively employ over a million workers and generate billions of dollars in annual revenues. The survey revealed that 60 percent say that EU reform and better regulation would lead them to reshoring their businesses, adding much more can be done to bump up that trend.
The survey comes as a delegation from CBI heads to Brussels to discuss the issue with the UK Prime Minister, ahead of the European Council. According to the UK's the Guardian, the CBI is concerned about the “vociferous” anti-EU rhetoric which will increase support for Britain “going it alone” outside the single market.
“This snapshot survey shows a real appetite across the continent to reform the EU and bring more jobs back to Europe,” says Katja Hall, CBI chief policy director.
“Some companies are already making waves on this front, but it's clear much more must be done by politicians for firms to accelerate the trend for reshoring. European businesses want a single market fit for the 21st century, better regulation and a Commission that respects national boundaries, to help reel in some of the jobs that have been lost overseas.”
The snapshot survey also showed that 40 percent of respondents are in favor returning their businesses “in principle” compared to only 6 perfect who are against it. Some 32 percent have moved some activity back to the home market in the last three years, the survey found. While less than a quarter of firms say they will “probably” or “definitely reshore” in the next three years, a staggering 62 percent say they have no plans to do so.
Of those companies that have reshored, 73 percent identify better quality within their home market as a critical factor. The importance of having access to the Single Market is highlighted by 54 percent of respondents who say faster market responsiveness was behind their decision to reshore.
Fifty-four percent also reshored to improve their proximity to their market and half cited the resilience of supply chains in Europe.
CBI's survey found that companies called for a number of EU reforms to make it more likely they bring operations back to Europe:
- Reduce the EU regulatory burden on business (60 percent)
- Make the European labor market more flexible (52 percent)
- Get a better balance between regulation at the EU and Member State level (39 percent)
- Make progress to complete the EU digital Single Market (29 percent)
- Complete the EU Single market in services (25 percent)
- Sign more EU trade deals with fast-growing economies (21percent)
- Among the types of activity either being reshored or business could reshore, are customer-facing services, manufacturing of goods, final assembly of goods and business process outsourcing.
“We need a Europe that is outward-looking, signing more trade deals and opening up fast-growing markets in all corners of the world,” added Hall. Hall said that the EU must “Think Global First” on regulation, to make sure it remains competitive and helps European firms, not hold them back.
“As for the UK, if we can build alliances to deliver reform in the corridors of Brussels, then we can ensure that the EU supports job creation and growth,” said Hall.
For more regulatory news, check out the following:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrump Likely to Keep Up Antitrust Enforcement, but Dial Back the Antagonism
5 minute readFTC Sues Cash-Advance Fintech Dave, Says It Deceives the 'Financially Vulnerable'
Policy Wonks' Obsession: What Will Tuesday's Election Mean for FTC Firebrand Khan?
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Trump's Return to the White House: The Legal Industry Reacts
- 2Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 3Climate Disputes, International Arbitration, and State Court Limitations for Global Issues
- 4Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 5Judicial Face-Off: Navigating the Ethical and Efficient Use of AI in Legal Practice [CLE Pending]
- 6How Much Does the Frequency of Retirement Withdrawals Matter?
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250