Em um vídeo no TikTok, uma repórter pergunta a vários jovens em quem eles pretendem votar para presidente nas eleições deste ano. Todos respondem Lula e apresentam justificativas que vão desde a expectativa por mais oportunidades até relatos sobre sua origem humilde e a percepção de que o petista ajuda “gente como a gente”.

Em outro registro, uma idosa é abordada com a mesma pergunta. “Vou votar no Flávio [Bolsonaro], minha filha, porque o Brasil precisa de uma renovação de verdade na política para garantir segurança e um futuro melhor para nosso país”, responde.

As cenas parecem aquelas entrevistas de rua em formato rápido, conhecidas no jargão jornalístico como “povo fala”. Popular em redes de vídeos curtos, o formato já foi apontado pelo próprio TikTok como uma das tendências de produção de conteúdo na plataforma em 2024.

A novidade é que, agora, nem os repórteres nem os eleitores desses vídeos são reais. Um levantamento do Aos Fatos identificou ao menos 50 conteúdos no TikTok que simulam entrevistas e depoimentos sobre os dois principais candidatos da corrida presidencial deste ano: Lula (PT) e Flávio Bolsonaro (PL).

Publicados antes do início oficial da propaganda eleitoral, nesta segunda-feira (17), os conteúdos acumulavam, até aquela data, 7,4 milhões de visualizações — e apresentavam como espontâneas opiniões produzidas artificialmente. Em 18% deles sequer havia indicação de que as pessoas retratadas haviam sido geradas por IA, contrariando as regras da plataforma sobre conteúdos manipulados.

Especialistas ouvidos por Aos Fatos afirmam que a legislação eleitoral proíbe o uso de personagens fictícios gerados por IA, mas a responsabilização se torna mais complexa quando os vídeos são produzidos por terceiros, sem vínculo aparente com as campanhas.

O TikTok disse nesta sexta-feira (21) que removeu todos os conteúdos identificados por Aos Fatos por violarem as diretrizes da plataforma sobre mídia editada e conteúdo gerado por IA. Veja a íntegra da resposta da empresa no final desta reportagem.

‘Já decidiu seu voto?’

Nas falsas entrevistas, personagens declaram voto, elogiam candidatos ou explicam por que rejeitam determinado nome da disputa presidencial. Nos vídeos favoráveis a Lula, os eleitores artificiais se apresentam como beneficiários de políticas sociais ou atribuem ao petista melhorias em suas condições de vida.

Já nas peças pró-Bolsonaro, os falsos votantes associam o senador à renovação política e ao combate à corrupção e à criminalidade.

Outros conteúdos recorrem a estereótipos para atacar eleitores do PT. Neles, os personagens aparecem em locais insalubres — muitas vezes associados ao Nordeste —, vestem roupas sujas ou rasgadas e se dizem beneficiários de programas sociais, já que “não querem trabalhar”.

Os conteúdos manipulados também os representam como alheios à própria condição de vida: mesmo cercados por lixo ou vivendo em situações precárias, os falsos eleitores agradecem ao governo pelos benefícios recebidos e declaram apoio a Lula.

Para Leandro Petrin, especialista em direito eleitoral e sócio do escritório Callado, Petrin, Paes & Cezar Advogados, vídeos de supostos cidadãos comuns apoiando ou rejeitando uma candidatura podem sugerir que determinada opinião é compartilhada espontaneamente por uma parcela da sociedade.

“Um vídeo que simula um eleitor que não existe e atribui a esse personagem fictício uma declaração de voto não é apenas propaganda: é a fabricação de um fato social que nunca ocorreu”, explica.

Rogério Silva de Vargas, secretário-judiciário do TRE-RS (Tribunal Regional Eleitoral do Rio Grande do Sul), vai além e classifica conteúdos do tipo como fraude lesiva ao processo eleitoral, pois visam “iludir, confundir ou ludibriar o eleitorado” para conferir vantagem indevida.

O levantamento do Aos Fatos reuniu conteúdos encontrados por meio de buscas no TikTok e de recomendações feitas pela própria plataforma durante o monitoramento. Embora a maioria das contas não reúna grandes audiências individualmente, os 50 vídeos analisados somavam 7,4 milhões de visualizações.

Os primeiros registros identificados foram publicados em março, meses antes do início oficial da propaganda eleitoral. O volume começou a aumentar em junho e se concentrou sobretudo em julho e na primeira quinzena de agosto, período que coincide com a intensificação do calendário das eleições.

Aos Fatos não encontrou indícios aparentes de que as contas responsáveis pelos conteúdos tenham ligações com as campanhas de Lula ou Flávio Bolsonaro. A maior parte deles foi publicada por páginas dedicadas à produção de vídeos com inteligência artificial, entre eles perfis que simulam podcasts.

Há também contas voltadas para a produção de conteúdo político ou de apoio a determinado candidato, mas sem vínculo aparente com partidos ou campanhas.

O uso de personagens sintéticos na disputa já chegou à Justiça Eleitoral neste ano. Em abril, o PT acionou o TSE (Tribunal Superior Eleitoral) contra Dona Maria, personagem fictícia criada com IA que acumulou milhões de visualizações com críticas ao partido e ao governo Lula. A sigla pediu a suspensão do perfil sob a alegação de propaganda eleitoral antecipada negativa e disseminação de desinformação.

Legislação proíbe prática

O uso de inteligência artificial para simular depoimentos de votantes inexistentes não está fora do alcance das regras eleitorais. A Resolução 23.610/2019 do TSE proíbe o uso eleitoral de conteúdos sintéticos em áudio ou vídeo que criem ou manipulem a imagem ou a voz de pessoas vivas, falecidas ou fictícias.

A regra, portanto, não se restringe às deepfakes tradicionais, que atribuem falas ou comportamentos falsos a pessoas reais. “É uma irregularidade eleitoral, seja em formato de áudio ou de vídeo, seja para criar a imagem [ou a voz] de uma pessoa fictícia ou de uma pessoa real”, afirma Marcos Rafael Coelho, secretário-judiciário do TRE-MS (Tribunal Regional Eleitoral do Mato Grosso do Sul).

Isso não significa que qualquer vídeo com personagens gerados por IA deva ser automaticamente considerado ilícito. Marcos Jorge, coordenador jurídico do escritório Wilton Gomes Advogados, explica que é necessário verificar se o conteúdo foi produzido ou divulgado para favorecer ou prejudicar determinada candidatura.

A proibição também vale para conteúdos publicados antes do início oficial da propaganda eleitoral, em 16 de agosto. Segundo Jorge, durante a pré-campanha, a prática pode ser enquadrada como propaganda eleitoral por meio de proscrito — ou seja, pelo emprego antecipado de uma forma de propaganda que seria proibida durante a campanha.

A data da publicação tampouco impede que esses vídeos voltem a circular. O sistema de recomendação do TikTok seleciona conteúdos de acordo com as interações do usuário e informações do vídeo. Assim, uma gravação publicada meses antes pode voltar a ser recomendada já durante o período eleitoral.

Questionado por Aos Fatos, o TSE afirmou que não se manifesta sobre temas ou casos que possam vir a ser ou são objetos de análise na Justiça Eleitoral.

Responsabilidades

O fato dos conteúdos não terem vínculo aparente com candidatos ou campanhas não impede que haja irregularidade.

“Perfis de terceiros respondem civil e penalmente pelo conteúdo que produzem e publicam, independentemente de qualquer relação com candidatos. Sem esse vínculo, a resposta tende a ficar no campo da remoção de conteúdo e da responsabilização individual do autor, não alcançando as sanções mais severas do direito eleitoral (multa a candidato, cassação)”, afirma Petrin.

O cenário muda quando há evidências comprováveis de participação, contratação, financiamento, orientação ou conhecimento prévio da campanha. A depender da gravidade e da repercussão, o caso pode ser analisado pela justiça eleitoral sob a perspectiva de abuso de poder ou uso indevido dos meios de comunicação.

Rafael Maciel, sócio e head de inteligência artificial e proteção de dados do Lara Martins Advogados, pontua que há muitas dificuldades práticas para distinguir uma manifestação produzida de forma independente por um apoiador de uma ação coordenada com uma campanha.

Maciel explica ainda que as plataformas também estão sujeitas a obrigações previstas pelas regras eleitorais, como restrições à publicidade com IA, identificação de conteúdos sintéticos e deveres de diligência diante de publicações irregulares.

Segundo o especialista, as redes sociais não respondem automaticamente pelo conteúdo produzido por terceiros, mas podem ser responsabilizadas por falhas próprias, como o descumprimento de notificações ou decisões judiciais e deficiências nos mecanismos de segurança e moderação.

Aviso de IA não libera conteúdo

A presença de um aviso de que o vídeo foi produzido com inteligência artificial também não afasta a irregularidade, já que a resolução do TSE diferencia os usos permitidos de IA, sujeitos a regras de transparência, dos conteúdos sintéticos proibidos para fins eleitorais.

A regra exige que a fabricação ou manipulação seja informada de forma explícita e destacada, explica Coelho, secretário-judiciário do TRE-MS. “Mas quando se criam pessoas fictícias, como se fossem falsos eleitores dando depoimentos, aí a prática já entra na segunda camada porque ela é absolutamente proibida. Não importa se tem um rótulo falando que a inteligência é artificial”, ressaltou.

Marcos Jorge chama atenção ainda para outra questão: dizer apenas que um vídeo foi gerado por IA não necessariamente deixa claro ao usuário que o entrevistado não existe, que a entrevista nunca ocorreu e que a opinião apresentada não é de uma pessoa real.

As consequências podem se tornar mais graves quando o conteúdo sintético é empregado para disseminar desinformação ou atacar adversários.

Nesses casos, outras infrações podem se somar ao uso irregular de IA. Coelho explica que o emprego da tecnologia para atacar candidatos com desinformação ou discurso de ódio pode resultar em multas e, quando houver envolvimento ou responsabilização da candidatura beneficiada, ter consequências mais graves.

A depender das circunstâncias, a prática pode ainda ser entendida como uso indevido dos meios de comunicação social, com sanções que podem chegar à cassação de registro ou diploma e à inelegibilidade.

Porém, a aplicação dessas penalidades depende da comprovação da responsabilidade da candidatura e da gravidade da conduta.

Outro lado

Procurado pelo Aos Fatos, o TikTok informou que removeu todos os conteúdos enviados pela reportagem por violarem suas diretrizes sobre mídia editada e conteúdo gerado por inteligência artificial.

A plataforma afirmou que exige que os criadores sinalizem conteúdos sintéticos e que, mesmo quando rotulados, remove materiais que violem suas regras. Entre os conteúdos proibidos estão aqueles gerados ou significativamente editados por IA que possam induzir usuários ao erro sobre assuntos de interesse público ou simular material proveniente de uma fonte jornalística real.

A empresa também destacou as ações adotadas para as eleições de 2026 e afirmou que, durante o período eleitoral, seu foco “permanece em garantir a segurança das pessoas e proteger a integridade do TikTok”.

A senior political figure has questioned whether the continued detention of the Mayor of Albania’s capital city is “strictly necessary”.

Erion Veliaj (pictured) has remained nominally in office as mayor of Tirana despite being held in what is known as pre-trial detention (PTD) since February 2025.

He is accused of corruption and money laundering but strongly denies any wrong doing.

The latest in a protracted series of court cases takes place on 15 September when his case will be considered by Albania’s Supreme Court.

This comes after the country’s Constitutional Court recently called for a review as required by Albania's constitution.

The hearing has assumed particular importance as it is a review of both his pretrial detention and its proportionality.

The mayor’s local lawyer Plarent Ndreca said that following the Constitutional Court's judgment "the legal basis for maintaining Mr Veliaj in detention has fundamentally changed.”

In an exclusive interview with this website,  a senior figure with the European Democratic Party, a pan-European political party, said the case “raises serious questions of necessity and proportionality.”

Sandro Gozi, the party’s Secretary-General and also a senior French MEP with Renew Europe, a mainstream group in the European Parliament, questioned if his continued detention may be “excessive.”

This website asked Gozi what specific concerns he had about the case.

He said: “Let me be very clear: fighting corruption is essential, particularly in a country seeking EU membership, and asking for respect for the rule of law can never mean asking for impunity.

“Serious allegations must be investigated and prosecuted independently, whoever is involved. But the rule of law also means proportionality, due process and the presumption of innocence.”

He pointed out that Veliaj has been in pre-trial detention since February 2025, adding, “and after such a long period it is legitimate to ask whether continued detention remains strictly necessary or whether alternative measures could be used.”

Some have argued the case “shines a light” on current flaws in the judiciary and rule of law in Albania.

On this,Gozi, secretary general since 2021, said , “One case cannot define an entire judicial system, and Albania has made important progress in fighting corruption.”

He added, “However, there is a broader issue that deserves attention: Council of Europe SPACE data show that 58% of Albania's prison population was being held without a final sentence, the highest proportion in Europe, compared with a European average of 29%.

“The same analysis notes that very high levels of pre-trial detention can be associated with slow proceedings or an excessive reliance on detention as a precautionary measure.”

The MEP said: “These are concerns Albania should address as part of its European path.”

Albania is a leading front runner to join the EU, possibly as soon as 2030, and has been widely lauded by the 27-strong bloc and others, including MEPs, for closing most of the negotiating chapters required for EU membership although some caution that ongoing issues with its judiciary may slow progress towards accession.

Gozi, a member of Mouvement Democrate in France, said: “I strongly support Albania's European perspective, but accession must remain merit-based.

“No judicial system is perfect, including those of existing member states, but respect for the rule of law, judicial independence and fundamental rights must be firmly guaranteed before accession,” added the Euro deputy, who chairs the Delegation to the EU-UK Parliamentary Partnership Assembly.

Asked about the use of PTD in the case of the mayor, not least as an elected official, and also the time taken for his case to come to trial,he said, “Eighteen months of pre-trial detention is an extremely long period and raises serious questions of necessity and proportionality.

“This concern remains entirely unchanged regardless of Mr Veliaj’s political position.”

The MEP, who is from Italy and was former Undersecretary of State for European Affairs in the Matteo Renzi and Paolo Gentiloni governments, declined to be drawn the length of time the case was taking to come to court, saying: “I will not speculate on allegations concerning an independent court.”

The European Democratic Party also recently posted a statement on the case which pointed out the mayor had been as been in PTD since 10 February 2025 —  a year and a half.

The statement adds that formal charges were notified only in July 2025, after 163 days in detention and that, recently, Albania’s Constitutional Court overturned a Supreme Court decision and ordered a new review of his detention “questioning its proportionality in light of his mandate as Tirana’s democratically elected mayor”.

It goes on: “We join those calling on the Albanian authorities to uphold the rule of law, the presumption of innocence and the principle of proportionality. This case comes against a deeply concerning backdrop for Albanian democracy.

“We will keep the spotlight on it, because Albania deserves a European future — one that is fully democratic, transparent and firmly committed to fighting corruption, while guaranteeing that justice is always exercised with fairness, independence and respect for fundamental rights.”

European Democratic Party members include Renew Europe MEPs and, in 2025, RE “strongly condemned” what it called the “politically motivated” arrest on corruption charges against another elected official: Varna Mayor Blagomir Kotsev.

Speaking earlier this year, RE Lithuanian MEP Petras Auštrevičius, the European Parliament's rapporteur on enlargement, highly praised Albania's reform effort but said that concerns regarding pre-trial detention practices in Albania "demonstrate precisely why judicial reforms must deliver real results.”

Ben Brandon, of Mishcon de Reya LLP, is one of Veliaj's international counsel based in London. He is just returned from Tirana where he was able to visit the mayor in prison for the first time since the official's arrest.

Speaking to this site,  Brandon said: "We have long argued that Erion Veliaj's pre-trial detention is unnecessary and disproportionate. Until the Constitutional Court examined his case, no court in Albania properly considered the relevance of his status and responsibilities as the democratically elected Mayor of Albania's capital city, or the available alternatives to detention. The Supreme Court has been directed to re-examine the proportionality of his continued detention by the Constitutional Court on 15 September.

“We hope that the Supreme Court will follow the clear reasoning of the superior court, correct the obvious errors that have been made in Mayor Veliaj's case over the past 18 months, and release him immediately."

Currently, there are local media reports that a separate investigation has now been opened against the Mayor, focused on expenses, though this has not been confirmed.

With the clock ticking on Albania seeking to close its last remaining EU negotiating chapters, some argue it is not a coincidence there has been a perceived crackdown in the justice sphere, with a spate of cases brought against high profile public figures and elected officials, including Veliaj.

Veliaj’s case is not the only one to have captured the Albanian media’s attention in recent times, with a former environment minister among those charged with corruption.

However, for Veliaj the most immediate concern is his detention at a centre close to the Albanian coast.

His local lawyer points out it is not the first time concern has been raised about the use of pre-trial detention in Albania with most recent data showing that  about 58 per cent of its prison population, approximately, 2,653 people, are held in remand, a rate up to five times higher than the EU average.

PTD is said to frequently be used for crimes like corruption but Veliaj and his lawyers argue that to detain someone for so long – the average stay is 253 days  – is “highly unusual” unless it is a case relating to drug trafficking, organised crime and/or terrorism.

The spotlight has, to some extent, also fallen on the organisation in Albania charged with the task of rooting out corruption and tackling serious crime.

SPAK, as it’s commonly referred to, has been widely praised for its concerted efforts in this regard and has been hailed by many for its work, including by the European Parliament’s rapporteur on Albania, Socialist MEP Andreas Schieder, as being “essential”, not least in helping to fulfil the country’s pre-accession reforms.

The MEP has, in the past, said SPAK was playing a “crucial role” in the fight against corruption and “shows the Albanian government is taking this task very seriously”.

Asked to comment on the Veliaj case a SPAK spokesman said: “We can confirm that the Special Prosecution Office has concluded its investigation and has formally submitted the case for trial before the Special Court Against Corruption and Organised Crime (GJKKO), where proceedings are now under way.Any submissions relating to these matters should be made directly to the Court (GJKKO), in accordance with the procedures and timeframes set out under the Criminal Procedure Code.”

The comment was made in July and, at the time of going to press, no-one from SPAK had replied to a most recent query from this site.

More than 5,500 participants from over 80 countries are expected to gather in Kazakhstan’s capital on 9-10 September for the ninth Astana Finance Days (AFD) 2026 forum, hosted by the Astana International Financial Centre (AIFC). The forum will bring together investors, representatives of the financial and technology sectors, regulators, government and quasi-state institutions, and international businesses.

Since its launch in 2018, Astana Finance Days has developed into one of the region’s major financial forums, providing a platform for discussions on capital markets, investment and financial cooperation. The 2026 program will focus on capital markets and investment products, regulation and market confidence, institutional innovation, financing the real economy, and regional and cross-border capital cooperation. Confirmed speakers include Minister of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Development Zhaslan Madiyev, National Bank Governor Timur Suleimenov, Association of Financiers of Kazakhstan Chairperson Yelena Bakhmutova and Secretary General of the Organization of Turkic States Kubanychbek Omuraliev.

Representatives from international financial institutions and global companies are also expected to participate, including the Islamic Development Bank Institute, Freedom Holding, Binance, Mastercard, Bloomberg and the Shanghai Stock Exchange. The forum will feature the AFD Exhibition, bringing together financial institutions, banks, investment and asset management companies, as well as fintech and technology projects. According to the AIFC, the event will provide participants with opportunities to discuss global financial trends, explore investment and business opportunities, and establish contacts with investors, company executives and industry leaders.

The forum will also highlight business development opportunities within the AIFC ecosystem, featuring case studies on company growth, capital raising and expansion into international markets. For Kazakhstan, which is seeking to strengthen its position as a financial hub connecting Central Asia with global markets, the forum provides an opportunity to bring global investors and financial institutions into closer contact with the region.

Issue 639: A study shows that seagrass meadows have the capacity to be one of the largest carbon sinks among plant ecosystems, with the Mediterranean holding the highest seagrass biomass carbon stock per hectare.

Seagrass meadows, formed by densely growing flowering plants such as Posidonia, Zostera and Thalassia in shallow waters, are key coastal ecosystems. As well as offering important habitat for marine biodiversity, seagrass plays a crucial role in mitigating climate change through carbon storage.

However, these ecosystems are under threat from coastal development, pollution, eutrophication, and climate change, with implications for global carbon stocks. At EU level, conserving and improving seagrass meadows falls under wider legislation such as the Marine Strategy Framework Directive and Nature Restoration Regulation. The EU has also funded research and innovation projects looking at various threats facing seagrass, and published its Blue Carbon Road Map, which moves towards including ‘blue carbon’ – the carbon stored by coastal vegetation such as seagrasses, tidal marshes, mangroves and seaweeds – in carbon and nature credit schemes (e.g. via the Road Map towards Nature Credits). Additionally, the UN has called for a redoubling of efforts on seascape restoration to maximise the potential of blue carbon for climate change mitigation.

Much research has focused on how seagrass promotes the accumulation of organic carbon in seabed soils, as opposed to in plant material above and below the soil. Its net primary productivity (NPP) – the amount of organic carbon the plants absorb minus their own respiration – also deserves more attention, say the researchers behind a new study looking at the importance of seagrass meadows in global carbon stocks.

To better understand the role of seagrass in carbon cycling, researchers in Spain analysed a 2023 dataset on seagrass meadow structure, biomass and NPP, drawn from a major literature review covering 1975–2020. They supplemented this with their own review of studies containing original data, including previously unidentified sources. They assigned data points to global seagrass bioregions and compared above- and below-ground biomass and NPP across different types of seagrass (genera) and in different regions.

They estimated global seagrass carbon biomass at 24-40 megatonnes (Mt) – among the highest plant organic carbon stocks on Earth – with NPP fixing 83-137 Mt of carbon annually. Both metrics varied widely by area, bioregion and country. The Mediterranean had the highest seagrass biomass carbon stock per hectare, followed by the Tropical Indo-Pacific and Atlantic, while NPP was highest in the Temperate Southern, North Pacific and North Atlantic East bioregions. With this in mind, the Mediterranean offers a significant opportunity to maximise the climate benefit of blue carbon strategies through targeted conservation and restoration measures.

They reported substantial differences between genera in carbon biomass stocks, with the highest, Posidonia, holding 50 times more carbon biomass than Halophila, the lowest. Long-lived, large, and persistent seagrass species within the genera Posidonia, Enhalus and Thalassia predominate in bioregions such as the Mediterranean and the Tropical Atlantic, contributing to higher biomass carbon stocks per hectare compared to bioregions such as the Temperate North Atlantic and Pacific, which are dominated by relatively small opportunistic (Zostera, Cymodocea) or colonising (Halophila, Ruppia) genera. However, regions dominated by more transient species still play a significant role in the carbon cycle as they have exceptionally high NPP, exceeding that of regions with larger overall biomass.

Based on the study’s estimates, Australia has the highest annual CO₂ emissions from seagrass loss, accounting for 52% of the global total – followed by Spain, Mexico, Italy and the United States. Targeted conservation efforts in these countries would therefore have the most notable impact in delivering the greatest CO₂ mitigation.

Meanwhile, although net seagrass losses in the Temperate North Atlantic East region are high, the associated emissions are relatively low due to a) the limited biomass carbon storage capacity of the dominant seagrass types in this region (Zostera), and b) their limited extent compared to other bioregions. Emissions within the Temperate North Pacific and North Atlantic West bioregions were negligible due to the absence of net seagrass meadow loss in these areas.

The results suggest that the biomass of persistent, long-lived seagrasses should be included in carbon accounting (assuming that conservation and restoration actions contribute to maintaining these carbon pools in a steady state condition, so they are not lost). The researchers note that there are challenges to scientists’ ability to ‘measure’ organic carbon stocks, with extreme variation between locations and stocks changing over time – as illustrated by the broad estimates in the research. Despite this limitation, the improved data published in this study could inform new frameworks for climate mitigation through carbon sequestration, with the work providing a 91% increase in seagrass biomass data and adding data from previously underrepresented regions. 

Reference: 

Gomis, E., Strydom, S., Foster, N.R., Montemayor, D., Mateo, M.A., Serrano, E., Inostroza, K., McCallum, R., Lafratta, A., Webster, C.L., O’Dea, C.M., Said, N.E., Dunham, N., Bernasconi, R., Werner, A., Vitelli, F., Puigcorbé, V., D’Cruz, A., Salinas, C., McMahon, K.M., Hyndes, G.A., Lavery, P.S., Pessarrodonoa, A., Duarte, C.M., Serrano, O., 2025. Global estimates of seagrass blue carbon stocks in biomass and net primary production. Nature Communications, 16(1), p.9530. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-64667-6

To cite this article/service:

'Science for Environment Policy': European Commission DG Environment News Alert Service, edited by the Science Communication Unit, The University of the West of England, Bristol.

Notes on content:

The contents and views included in Science for Environment Policy are based on independent, peer reviewed research and do not necessarily reflect the position of the European Commission. Please note that this article is a summary of only one study. Other studies may come to other conclusions.

The Commission adopted a legislative proposal to simplify Regulation (EU) 2017/1369 on Energy Labelling and Regulation (EU) 2020/740 on Tyre Labelling on 24 June 2026 (COM (2026) 565 final). The objective of this proposal is to ensure simpler and more effective implementation of the rules without undermining the original policy objectives that give customers the right to have energy and tyre labels in display at the point of sale. 

This adopted act and its accompanying impact assessment are now open for feedback for a period of 8 weeks until 15 October 2026. All feedback received will be summarised by the European Commission and presented to the European Parliament and Council with the aim of feeding into the legislative debate. 

You can provide your feedback here: Energy-efficient product legislation – Omnibus simplification

Register for the 2026 Internal Audit Service Conference 

Registration is still open.  Join us on 11 September 2026 in Brussels and experience face‑to‑face networking opportunities with with Europe’s leading internal‑audit professionals.

The European Commission’s Internal Audit Service (IAS) will host its annual conference on 11 September 2026, in Brussels at the Charlemagne building.

This year’s theme is  Internal Audit in Motion: Keeping Pace with a Changing Europe and will feature keynote speakers, three discussion panels, and a TEDx-style session to examine the challenges of internal audit in the public sector within an increasingly complex environment. The programme will cover:

• The transformation of the EU budget and new MFF 
• The impact of technology on the future of internal audit work 
• Organisational culture and adding value via internal audit

The conference is open to all Commission officials as well as external professionals with an interest in internal audit and can be attended in person or online. CPE points will be awarded for participation and registration is free.

The Commission looks forward to welcoming you to an insightful and engaging day of discussions on the future of internal audit in the European Commission.

Programme and registration

The European Commission has approved a €4.5 million German state aid scheme for fishing and aquaculture companies facing increased fuel prices due to the Middle East crisis.

The scheme was approved under the Middle East Crisis Temporary State Aid Framework (METSAF) adopted by the Commission on 29 April 2026.

The German scheme

Germany notified to the Commission a €4.5 million scheme to support companies active in the primary production of fishery and aquaculture products. The scheme, which will run until 31 December 2026, aims to mitigate the impact of the increase in fuel prices.

The aid will take the form of direct grants. The scheme concerns the grant of a limited amount of aid based on the increase of fuel prices. The aid intensity corresponds to 70% of the estimated increase in fuel costs for fishery and aquaculture companies during the period from 1 March until 23 July 2026. The aid will not exceed €50,000 per company.

The Commission assessed the scheme under EU State aid rules, in particular Article 107(3)(c) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU, which enables member states to support the development of certain economic activities subject to certain conditions, as well as Sections 1 and 2.1 of the METSAF.

The Commission found that the scheme is in line with the conditions set out in the METSAF. In particular, aid will be granted based on a scheme with a clear estimated budget and will be provided to temporarily support the development of companies active in primary production of fishery and aquaculture products. The Commission concluded that the scheme is necessary, appropriate and proportionate to facilitate the development of an economic activity and does not adversely affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest.

On this basis, the Commission approved the German scheme under EU State aid rules.

Background

On 29 April 2026, the Commission adopted the METSAF to enable member states to support the EU economy in the context of the Middle East crisis. The METSAF is a targeted and temporary framework to address the effects of the crisis on some of the most exposed sectors of the economy: agriculture, fishery, transport and energy-intensive industries. The METSAF will be in place until 31 December 2026. During its period of application, the Commission will keep the content, scope and duration of the framework under review in the light of developments in the Middle East and of the general economic situation.

While the transition towards a clean economy remains the long-term solution to shield EU companies from the effects of global energy shocks, the METSAF allows member states to act immediately to make sure that the growth of the most exposed companies is not irreparably hampered by the current crisis.

To this end, support can take various forms for companies active in the agriculture, fishery and transport sectors. This includes aid based on actual consumption to cover part of the price increases for fuel or fertilisers, and a simplified approach for small amounts of aid.

The METSAF also includes a temporary adjustment to the Clean Industrial Deal State aid Framework allowing for further flexibility and higher aid intensities to address electricity price spikes.

More information on the METSAF can be found online.

For more information

The non-confidential version of today's decision will be made available under case number SA.124349, in the state aid register on the Commission's competition website. New publications of state aid decisions on the internet and in the Official Journal are listed in the Competition Weekly e-News. 

Related topics

Competition

State aid

The European Commission has published an updated version of the guidance document to help stakeholders prepare for the implementation of the Digital Batteries Passport under Regulation (EU) 2023/1542 concerning batteries and waste batteries.

The Guidance Document: Digital Batteries Passport – data points by category provides a structured overview of the data points relevant to electric vehicle (EV) batteries, light means of transport (LMT) batteries and industrial batteries covered by the passport requirement. For each battery category, it indicates whether individual data points are mandatory, optional, applicable only in specific circumstances, or do not have to be completed or displayed as of February 2027, when the Batteries Passport requirements will begin to apply. In total, the document brings together 71 data points, showing their legal sources and their applicability to each battery category.

Supporting industry preparations

The guidance is intended primarily for economic operators across the batteries value chain, including manufacturers, importers and other organizations responsible for making information available through the Batteries Passport. It may also be useful for conformity assessment bodies, market surveillance authorities and other stakeholders involved in implementing the Batteries Regulation.

By bringing the relevant data points together in a single document, the guidance aims to promote a common understanding of the Batteries Passport information requirements and a consistent approach across the sector. It can help organisations identify the information they may need to collect, assess and make available, and begin aligning their internal processes, data systems and reporting practices.

From 18 February 2027, each EV battery, each LMT battery and each industrial battery with a capacity greater than 2 kWh that is placed on the market or put into service shall have a battery passport.

How to use the guidance

The guidance should be read together with Regulation (EU) 2023/1542 and any relevant delegated or implementing acts. It does not introduce additional legal requirements and should not be regarded as an authoritative interpretation of the legislation or as representing the European Commission’s official position. The document may be developed further as implementation progresses. Future updates may provide further clarification of individual data points and indicate possible measurement units or reporting formats, supporting greater comparability and consistency.

È celebre la definizione di capitalismo di Joseph Schumpeter: distruzione creatrice.

L’ansia di fare tabula rasa, di ri-creare il mondo senza limiti a immagine e somiglianza del febbrile tipo umano del capitalista/imprenditore animato dal desiderio di innovare per guadagnare e dominare ha raggiunto il suo apice con lo sviluppo della tecnologia informatica ed elettronica.

L’ultima tendenza è rendere ogni cosa immateriale, una bolla tecnica controllata da chi ha scoperto i segreti dell’ordine naturale e li piega ai propri interessi. Di dominio ben più che di arricchimento.

Si può affermare che la nuova geopolitica ha per oggetto il controllo prima, il superamento poi della creatura umana. Lo strumento più raffinato, l’innovazione più disruptiva (ciò che spezza una continuità, interrompe un processo o produce un cambiamento improvviso e radicale) è l’Intelligenza Artificiale.

Siamo arrivati al punto che l’IA, ossia i suoi padroni, gli Altman, i Karp, i Thiel e pochi altri, stanno distruggendo a tappe forzate il patrimonio comune più alto dell’umanità, i libri, che custodiscono e trasmettono il sapere umano.

Anthropic, Open AI, Palantir e le altre aziende tese all’onnipotenza tecnologica, compresa Amazon, acquistano biblioteche intere, specie testi rari e antichi, si appropriano delle ultime copie di manuali tecnici, scientifici, storici, filosofici e di ogni altro testo utile ai loro fini; scansionano il contenuto e poi lo distruggono.

Immagazzinare fisicamente libri cartacei costa troppo, meglio cancellare la traccia di millenni di conoscenza umana dopo averla messa a disposizione dei modelli previsionali e predittivi – gli LLM, large linguistic model – dell’Intelligenza Artificiale.

Sapere non è più per tutti, ma oligopolio di un grumo di giganti privati. Forse l’ossessione di Peter Thiel per la figura biblica dell’Anticristo è un capitolo ulteriore del mondo al contrario.

Per il tecnocrate filosofo l’Anticristo contemporaneo è la resistenza all’accelerazione tecnologica e alle sue possibilità. Lucida follia rovesciata di geni ossessionati dal dominio e dalla propria personale caducità.

Non è certo la prima volta che i libri, il lascito ai posteri di ogni ambito della cultura, sono oggetto di distruzione. Sono noti il rogo di testi storici e filosofici ordinato dal primo imperatore cinese nel 213 a.C, la distruzione della biblioteca di Alessandria – summa della sapienza antica – da parte dell’invasore maomettano nel VII secolo, il falò delle vanità (arte, libri, abiti, gioielli) dell’allucinato Savonarola nella Firenze di fine secolo XV, l’incendio nazista nel 1933, la distruzione di libri imposta da Mao Tze Tung negli anni tragici della cosiddetta rivoluzione culturale.

In Fahrenheit 451, distopia letteraria di Ray Bradbury ambientata nell’America del XXI secolo, i libri sono vietati e un corpo specializzato ha il compito di rintracciare gli ultimi esemplari per distruggerli.

Ma ciò che viene compiuto dalla cupola tecnocratica e tecnolatrica padrone dell’IA è del tutto inusitato, non solo nelle modalità.

La cultura viene sottratta alla fruizione libera, acquisita per nutrire l’IA e poi distrutta per motivazioni economiche e ostentare il monopolio assoluto sulla conoscenza: padroni del passato per dominare il presente e ipotecare il futuro.

Tutto diviene semplice traccia elettronica, teoricamente indelebile, trasferita nei magazzini virtuali, i clouds, le nuvole elettroniche che uniscono la potenza di calcolo dei grandi data center agli algoritmi di apprendimento automatico.

Tutto viene sottratto all’umanità che ha prodotto per millenni conoscenza per accumulo di esperienze; tutto diventa “cosa loro”. Non si perde completamente, come nei roghi antichi, ma è privatizzata.

Sarà disponibile a discrezione, scegliendo con cura chi avrà accesso, perché, a che scopo e a quale prezzo.

Si chiama “progetto Panama”, sino a pochissimo tempo fa negato e secretato. L’intero scibile umano si trasforma in materiale disponibile, il Bestand di Heidegger, ma solo per la tecno oligarchia dominatrice del tempo presente.

Non si sfugge alla prigione tecnocratica, si diventa plastilina nelle mani di chi è in grado di nascondere o rendere fruibile il sapere secondo interesse o capriccio.

A noi resta un nichilismo smemorato, spensierato, colmato a richiesta e dietro pagamento attraverso lo schermo dello smartphone e la scatola magica dell’Intelligenza Artificiale, cornucopia postmoderna della dea Atalanta.

Forse chi scrive parla pro domo sua, in quanto autore di oltre dieci libri, ma vorrebbe che l’oblio di ciò che ha scritto e pensato avvenisse per scelta e per la legge del tempo, non per sottrazione deliberata da parte di pochi potenti che si appropriano di tutto, materiale e immateriale, lo immagazzinano nella dimensione virtuale e ne fanno oggetto di allenamento intensivo per il cervellone artificiale che oltrepassa tutte le intelligenze che una volta chiamavamo umane.

Non solo la cupola tecnocratica si impadronisce delle risorse del pianeta, acqua, fonti energetiche, porzioni sempre più ampie del territorio per dedicarle ai giganteschi apparati da alimentare continuamente, raffreddare, ingrandire a scapito dell’antiquata civiltà degli uomini e della persistenza dei viventi, ma la trasforma in trust privato della conoscenza e dell’intelligenza, destinata a decadere nel residuo homo (non più) sapiens. Schiavitù assoluta per de-umanizzazione.

È obsoleto anche lo studio di Howard Gardner sull’intelligenza umana. Le sue conclusioni verranno rinchiuse nel cloud, a disposizione esclusiva della tecnostruttura e dei suoi servi più eminenti?

Gardner identificò nove tipologie differenziate di intelligenza umana, più una decima, speculativa, ciascuna deputata a differenti settori del nostro agire.

Intelligenza logico-matematica; linguistica; spaziale; musicale; cinestetica o procedurale; interpersonale; intrapersonale; naturalistica; filosofico-esistenziale.

Dopo di lui, Antonio Battro e Percival J. Dunham identificarono una nuova tipologia, l’intelligenza digitale. Successivamente Gardner fece una sintesi delle abilità necessarie nell’età contemporanea proponendo una classificazione alternativa: intelligenza disciplinare, sintetica, creativa, rispettosa ed etica, dopo aver esaminato diverse attitudini, dall’intelligenza tecnologica a quella digitale, mercantile, emotiva e perfino spirituale.

Lo psicologo americano ha lavorato per il re Prussia? Probabilmente sì, se l’IA si appresta a sostituirci nelle decisioni, nelle iniziative, perfino in certi ambiti della creatività. Dunque, l’homo sapiens è una creatura fungibile, fastidiosa, perché ancora dotata di giudizio e raziocinio.

Perciò, dopo averla ridotta a puro impulso ed esecutrice immediata dei propri istinti con la cantilena dei “diritti”, i padroni universali hanno ogni interesse a ridurne il numero. Umanità inutile è un’espressione usata apertamente da Yuval Harari e Bill Gates.

Una volta incorporata nel magazzino universale dell’Intelligenza Artificiale l’intera produzione intellettuale e scientifica dell’uomo, messo da parte per inservibilità pratica il suo pensiero etico, morale, spirituale, bruciata o resettata ogni sua traccia, il mondo di Fahrenheit 451 sarà perfettamente realizzato.

La residuale futura umanità insipiens regredirà ad animale dalla scarsa dotazione istintuale, la nostra condizione primigenia. I più abili diventeranno cyber uomini al servizio della megamacchina.

E non ci sarà un Guy Montag ribelle a salvare i libri, accaparrati dai signori dell’Intelligenza Artificiale.

Aveva ragione Martin Heidegger: solo un Dio ci può salvare. Ma lo vorrà?

L'articolo Se l’Intelligenza artificiale distrugge i libri proviene da Blondet & Friends.

The EU has spoken out in support of “all those who have suffered under totalitarian and authoritarian regimes”. This comes on the eve of the Europe-wide Day of Remembrance of the victims of all totalitarian and authoritarian regimes on 23 August. Ahead of the Day, senior EU political figures have issued a strongly-worded statement against “hatred, intolerance and the denial of human dignity. The statement was issued by the EC Executive Vice-President for Tech Sovereignty, Security and Democracy, Henna Virkkunen, and Democracy, Justice, the Rule of Law, and Consumer Protection Commissioner Michael McGrath (pictured).

It reads: “On 23 August, we commemorate the anniversary of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, signed in 1939 between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. “That pact, and the war and devastation that followed, brought intolerable suffering to millions of people across Europe and beyond. The years that followed were marked by occupation, repression, deportation and violence on a massive scale.”

It goes on: “Today, we honour the memory of all those who have suffered under totalitarian and authoritarian regimes. “The pain endured by victims, survivors and their families echoes across generations. Every EU country is now home to a generation that has grown up free from tyranny and oppression.

“For many, freedom, democracy and peace may appear self-evident, but they are not. They were secured through extraordinary courage, sacrifice, resistance and resilience, and they must never be taken for granted. Remembering the past is therefore not only a duty to those who came before us. It is also a responsibility to future generations.”

The statement continues: “This day is a solemn reminder of the consequences of hatred, intolerance and the denial of human dignity.

“It calls on us to remain vigilant in defending the values on which the European Union is founded: respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and fundamental rights.

"By preserving the memory of the past, we reaffirm our commitment to a Europe built on peace, justice and solidarity.”

Special events will take place this weekend to mark the anniversary of the First Battle of Mons on 23 August, the first major action of the British Expeditionary Force (BEF) in World War I. 

Commemorations, which take place on Monday 24 August, start at 1pm at the Hôtel de Ville in Mons.

Representatives of RBL Brussels branch will also lay a wreath at the town's British Empire Memorial which was first unveiled by King Baudouin on 11 October 1952.

Several representatives of Royal British Legion Brussels will be taking part.

The RBL delegation is comprised of Captain (retd) Dennis Abbott (RBL Brussels Chair) (pictured); Colonel (retd) William Bache (ex-US Special Forces, Vietnam veteran and Co-Chair Brussels Battles and Books Club) and  Lieutenant-Colonel (retd).

Others present will be Matt Hill (ex-US Marine Corps); Andrée Ferrant (RBL Brussels Joint Secretary); Mireille Picron (RBL Brussels Joint Secretary); Freddy Roiseux (RBL Brussels Standard Bearer); Professor Jean-Francois Husson (RBL Brussels committee, Namur representative) and Ela Nora Fidan (Brussels Battles and Books Club).

Wreaths will be laid at the Hôtel de Ville (Dennis Abbott), Nimy railway bridge where Lieutenant Maurice Dease and Private Sidney Godley each won the Victoria Cross (Ela Nora Fidan) and Saint Symphorien military cemetery (Col William Bache at British memorial, Lt Col Hill at German memorial).

Similar wreath-laying commemorations take place at the British Empire memorial at Place de la Bascule (Mireille Picron et Andrée Ferrant) and at the Irish Cross (Jean-François Husson).

There will also be commemorations in Brussels and Antwerp to mark the anniversary of the Liberation (3-4-5 September). Full info/timings are on the RBl Brussels website under “calendar.”

Speaking about the upcoming events, Abbott said: “The Brussels branch of the Royal British Legion has taken part in the commemorations to mark the anniversary of the Battle of Mons since its very formation in 1922.”

He added: "The battle has gone down in the annals of British military history thanks to the heroic stand by troops of the British Expeditionary Force (BEF) in their first major engagement of 1914. Outnumbered three to one by the Germans, they held out for hours before withdrawing, preventing the enemy from outflanking French positions.

"Wilhelm, the German Kaiser, is said to have dismissed the BEF as a 'contemptible little Army' before the battle, but the British fought tenaciously, none more so than Lieutenant Maurice Dease and Private Private Sidney Godley who were each awarded the Victoria Cross, the highest award for gallantry, for their defence of the railway bridge over the canal at Nimy." 

Four German battalions attacked the bridge, which was defended by a company of the Royal Fusiliers.

Despite being mortally injured, Dease held the position until he was overcome by his wounds. Godley took over and despite sustaining a head wound covered the withdrawal before disabling the weapon.

Abbot added: "The branch lays a wreath at the position they held, which is marked by a plaque recalling their exploits."

Lance-Corporal Charles Jarvis and Captain Theodore Wright of the Royal Engineers were also each awarded the VC for preventing the enemy from seizing a bridge at nearby Jemappes. Wright was mortally wounded less than a month later. 

The British suffered over 1,600 casualties (killed, wounded or missing) at Mons, around half from two battalions – the 4th Middlesex and 2nd Royal Irish. The German army lost about 5,000 men killed or wounded.

The Germans later established the St Symphorien Military Cemetery which contains the graves of graves of 284 German and 229 British and Commonwealth soldiers.

Among them are the graves of the first and last Commonwealth soldiers killed during the First World War, Private John Parr and Private George Price.

After the war, the veterans who took part in the Battle of Mons proudly called themselves the "Old Contemptibles" in response to the Kaiser's slur. 

At the inauguration of the British Empire Memorial in Mons, the British Defence Minister, Field Marshal Lord Alexander of Tunis, recalled his "baptism of fire" in his first action as a young lieutenant in the battle on 23 August 1914. 

The VIPs present included Belgian Prime Minister Jean Van Houtte, Major General Sir Edward Spears, who served as a liaison officer with the French forces during the battle, and British Ambassador Sir Christopher Warner, a Captain in the Royal Fusiliers in the First World War.

The memorial was originally erected in the Belfry Park, but was moved to the original frontline at La Bascule crossroads and re-dedicated in 1986. It is close to the Celtic Cross Memorial, which honours the Irish soldiers who fought in the First Battle of August 1914 and the Second Battle of Mons in November 1918.

The European Commission has approved, under the EU Merger Regulation, the creation of a joint venture by AI Infrastructure Development, S.L. (‘ACS AIID'), Telefónica S.A. (‘Telefónica'), Banco Santander, S.A. and Entidad Pública Empresarial Sociedad Española para la Transformación Tecnológica, E.P.E. (‘SETT'), all of Spain.

The transaction relates primarily to third-party data centre colocation services in Spain and contributes to the EU's tech sovereignty strategy of strengthening and expanding sovereign cloud and AI infrastructure in Europe, as part of the EU's AI Gigafactories Initiative.

The Commission concluded that the notified transaction would not raise competition concerns, given the companies' limited market positions resulting from the proposed transaction. The notified transaction was examined under the simplified merger review procedure.

More information is available on the Commission's competition website, in the public case register under the case number M.12498.

The EU economy’s seasonally adjusted greenhouse gas emissions in the first quarter of 2026 were estimated at 837 million tonnes of CO2-equivalents (CO2-eq), a 0.3% increase compared with the fourth quarter of 2025 (835 million tonnes of CO2-eq). At the same time, there was no change to the EU’s gross domestic product (GDP) in the first quarter of 2026, compared with the last quarter of 2025. 

The economic sector with the largest increase in greenhouse gas emissions was electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply (+4.8%), while households (-1.3%), manufacturing and transportation and storage (both -0.6%) recorded the biggest decreases.

Click to enlarge

Source datasets: env_ac_aigg_q and namq_10_gdp

Compared with the first quarter of 2025, emissions went down by 1.2%, while the EU’s GDP increased by 0.8%.

Greenhouse gas emissions decreased in 7 EU countries 

In the first quarter of 2026, seasonally adjusted greenhouse gas emissions increased in 20 EU countries and decreased in 7 countries, compared with the fourth quarter of 2025.

The largest reductions in greenhouse gases were estimated for Slovenia (-5.0%), Luxembourg (-3.8%) and Romania (-2.7%).

The largest increases in greenhouse gas emissions were estimated for Estonia (+9.7%), Finland (+6.4%) and Bulgaria (+4.6%). The increases in these countries are largely due to growing emissions by economic producers in construction and electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply.

In the first quarter of 2026, 20 EU countries recorded increases in greenhouse gas emissions, out of which 18 also increased their GDP. 7 countries reduced their greenhouse gas emissions. Out of these, 4 countries recorded a higher or stable GDP.

Click to enlarge

Source datasets: env_ac_aigg_q and namq_10_gdp

This information comes from data on seasonally adjusted quarterly estimates of greenhouse gas emissions by economic activity, published by Eurostat. Quarterly estimates of greenhouse gas emissions complement quarterly socio-economic data, such as GDP or employment.

For more information

• Statistics Explained article on quarterly greenhouse gas emission
• Thematic section on climate change
• Database on climate change
• Environmental accounts dashboard

Methodological notes

• Metadata on quarterly greenhouse gas emissions.
• The data presented here are estimates by Eurostat, except for the Netherlands, Slovenia and Spain which provided their own data.
• The greenhouse gas emission figures are seasonally adjusted. These adjusted series enable quarter-on-quarter change analyses. Data provided by countries are seasonally adjusted by Eurostat. The GDP figures are seasonally and calendar adjusted. More information on the seasonal adjustment is provided in a technical note. Eurostat’s methodology attributes international transport emissions to individual countries according to the country of residence of the emitting economic producer, following the international System of Environmental-Economic Accounting (SEEA) standard. This is in line with the European System of Accounts used for the GDP and differs from the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement rules.
• The EU and the EU countries report annually on their greenhouse gas emissions to the UN. The so-called ‘Kyoto basket’ of greenhouse gases includes carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O) and fluorinated gases. They are expressed in a common unit: CO2-equivalents. EU countries are required to monitor their emissions of these gases for all source sectors based on internationally agreed obligations and rules. The EU greenhouse gas inventory managed by the European Environment Agency covers emissions from 1990 to 2 years before the current year and is submitted to the UN each spring after quality checks. 
• According to the European Climate Law, the EU’s climate target is to achieve a -55% net reduction by 2030 and climate neutrality by 2050. The European Commission monitors and reports progress towards their GHG emission reduction targets on an annual basis using the inventory data in the Climate Action Progress Report.

The Commission has presented an action plan for the chemicals industry to strengthen the competitiveness and modernization of this sector.

The action plan addresses key challenges – high energy costs, unfair global competition, and weak demand, while promoting investment in innovation and sustainability. It proposes the following measures

• Resilience and level playing field: establishing a Critical Chemical Alliance to address the risks of capacity closures in the sector and applying trade defence measures to ensure fair competition
• Affordable energy and decarbonisation: swiftly implementing the Affordable Energy Action Plan to help reduce high energy and feedstock costs
• Lead markets and innovation: highlighting fiscal incentives and tax measures to boost demand for clean chemicals
• Taking action on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS): minimizing PFAS emissions through a robust, science-based restriction, while ensuring continued use in critical applications under strict conditions where no alternatives are available

The plan is accompanied by a simplification package, the so-called 6th Omnibus, to further streamline and simplify key EU chemicals legislation. This includes simplifying hazardous chemical labelling rules, clarifying EU cosmetics regulations, and easing registration for EU fertilising products. These measures should save at least €363 million annually for the industry. 

The EU chemical industry is the 4th largest manufacturing sector, with 29 000 companies providing 1.2 million direct jobs and supporting 19 million across supply chains. The European chemicals industry action plan builds on the Competitiveness Compass and Clean Industrial Deal, while the simplification package delivers on President von der Leyen's commitment to simplify EU laws and cut administrative burdens, helping businesses innovate and grow.

For more information

Press release: Chemicals package

Q&A: Chemicals package

Factsheet: Chemicals package

Action plan Chemicals

Proposal for an Omnibus for the Chemicals Industry

Competitiveness

In 2023, public spending on education (from pre-primary to the tertiary level) in the EU accounted for 4.7% of its gross domestic product (GDP). Compared with 2022, this figure did not change; however, it represents a slight decrease of 0.3 percentage points (pp) from 2020 (5.0%), the year with the highest level of public expenditure on education since the data collection started in 2012.

Among the EU countries, the highest level of public expenditure on education relative to the GDP was observed in Sweden (6.8%), followed by Finland (6.3%) and Belgium (6.2%). The lowest levels were registered in Romania (3.0%), Greece (3.3%) and Malta (3.4%).

Click to enlarge

Source dataset: educ_uoe_fine06

For more information

• Statistics Explained article on educational expenditure statistics
• Thematic section on education and training
• Database on education and training 

In 2025, the EU produced 3.44 billion litres of ice cream, representing a 1.9% increase compared with 2024 (3.38 billion litres).

Germany remained the top producer of ice cream in the EU, with 608 million litres in 2025. Italy (549 million litres) and France (525 million litres) followed at the top. The list of main producers also included Spain (457 million litres) and Belgium (274 million litres). 

Compared with 2024, all of these 5 EU countries registered an increase in production; +10% for Italy, +6% for Belgium, +4% for France, +2% for Spain and +0.2% for Germany.

Click to enlarge

Source dataset: DS-059367

France: top exporter of ice cream in the EU 

In 2025, EU countries exported 289.8 million kg of ice cream to non-EU countries and imported 77.8 million kg. Exports increased by 10% compared with 2024 (+26 million kg), while imports rose by 12% (+8.5 million kg).

As in previous years, France was the largest ice cream exporter in the EU, exporting 59.1 million kg of ice cream to non-EU countries in 2025. This represented a fifth of the total extra-EU ice cream exports (20%). France was followed by Italy (55.2 million kg of ice cream; 19% of EU ice cream exports), Belgium (34.5 million kg; 12%), Germany (29.9 million kg; 10%), and the Netherlands (26.5 million kg; 9%).

Click to enlarge

Source dataset: DS-045409

For more information

• Thematic section on prodcom – statistics by product
• Database on prodcom – statistics by product
• Thematic section on international trade in goods
• Database on international trade in goods

Methodological notes 

• Cyprus, Luxembourg and Malta: exempt from providing data on production due to their economic sizes.
• Production ranking is based on available and non-confidential data. Sold production quantities are confidential for Hungary, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia and Sweden.
• In this news article, production of ice cream is expressed in litres, while imports and exports are expressed in kg.

In the face of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the EU, together with Ukraine and Moldova launched the EU-Ukraine Solidarity Lanes in May 2022, establishing new transport routes to keep Ukraine’s imports and exports flowing via rail, road and inland waterways. Today, the EU-Ukraine Solidarity Lanes have become a lifeline for Ukraine’s economy.

In July 2026 the Solidarity Lanes allowed:

• Around 90% of Ukrainian imports (in comparison to around 10% through the Black Sea)
• Around 95% of Ukrainian exports of non-agricultural products (in comparison to around 5% through the Black Sea)
• Around 20% of Ukrainian exports of grain, oilseeds and related products (in comparison to around 80% through the Black Sea)

Ukrainian exports

Since May 2022, the Solidarity Lanes have allowed Ukraine to export ca. 230 million tonnes (Mt) of goods, according to data from the Ukrainian customs registers. Within this amount, it can be estimated that the Solidarity Lanes enabled exports of around 103 million tonnes of Ukrainian agricultural products (including ca. 95 million tonnes of Ukrainian grain, oilseeds and related products) and around 127 million tonnes of non-agricultural goods including ores, steel and related products.

In total, around 255 Mt of Ukrainian grain, oilseeds and related products were exported through the Solidarity Lanes (40%) and the Ukrainian Black Sea ports (60%) since May 2022 [1].

Imports to Ukraine

The Solidarity Lanes also play a crucial role for Ukrainian imports. Since May 2022, they have allowed Ukraine to import ca. 111 Mt of goods, such as fuel, vehicles, fertilisers as well as military and humanitarian assistance.

Value of trade

The total value of trade via the Solidarity Lanes since May 2022 is estimated at around EUR 304 billion, with around EUR 78 billion for Ukrainian exports. The total value of imports to Ukraine is estimated at ca. EUR 226 billion.

Background

Since Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine and the blockade of Ukrainian seaports, Ukraine has been unable to export its produce and import what it needs via its usual transport routes.

Against this background, the EU established 'Solidarity Lanes' to ensure Ukraine can export grain, iron ore, steel and other products and to import the goods it needs, from fuel to military and humanitarian assistance, via alternative transport routes: inland waterways, rail and road. The Solidarity Lanes cover trade across all sectors and are an unprecedented cooperation of authorities and businesses in EU Member States, Ukraine and the Republic of Moldova.

The Solidarity Lanes’ work is carried out in close cooperation between the European Commission, concerned authorities and the transport community. The focus is on addressing bottlenecks to enhance the capacity and smooth functioning of the Solidarity Lanes to sustain Ukrainian exports and imports across sectors. This includes measures to improve traffic management and streamlining of border procedures and checks, as well as investments in infrastructure or logistics equipment.

The Solidarity Lanes are also laying the ground for the longer-term connectivity between Ukraine and the EU and will play a key role for Ukraine’s reconstruction and integration in the EU single market.

---

[1] Between May and July 2022, the Solidarity Lanes were the only option for Ukraine to export its agricultural produce. In August 2022, the UN-brokered Black Sea Grain Initiative (BSGI) helped relaunch grain shipments from Ukraine’s Black Sea ports. In mid-July 2023, Russia terminated its participation in the BSGI, which was consequently discontinued.

In August 2023, Ukraine launched a new Black Sea corridor for trade vessels heading to and from Ukrainian sea ports despite Russia’s withdrawal from the BSGI. Ca. 2.4 Mt of grain, oilseeds and other related products have been exported this way in July 2026.

This week, Mark Leonard is joined by Janka Oertel, director of ECFR’s DARE* initiative, and Andrew Small, head of ECFR’s Asia programme, to examine the growing impact of the “China shock 2.0” on Germany and Europe.  

A new wave of Chinese competition, driven by overcapacity and state-backed industrial strength, is hitting sectors such as car manufacturing, chemicals and machine tools. Germany is at the epicentre, with mounting job losses raising questions about Europe’s long-term economic resilience and competitiveness. The crisis is reshaping German politics, exposing government divisions and putting pressure on Chancellor Friedrich Merz ahead of September’s potentially divisive regional elections.

Together, Mark, Janka and Andrew discuss the policy options being considered in Brussels and in European capitals—from emergency trade measures to new industrial strategies. Can Europe protect its industrial base without triggering a damaging escalation with China? Is Germany able to lead a coherent European response amid its own political turbulence?

This podcast episode was recorded 12th August 2026.

Bookshelf
China Shock 2.0: The Cost of Germany’s Complacency, by Brad Setser and Sander Tordoir
The art of the swarm: Systemic rivalry with China on European terms, by Andrew Small
Dear Britain, by Annette Dittert

Source

💾

A Trump-Kim summit would be a spectacle like no other. A carnival extravaganza with the Korean Peninsula holding center stage, and every handshake, expression, seating arrangement, and stray remark dissected by troupes of North Korea pundits across the world’s news networks. But like any great traveling carnival, a few days later ticket holders will be […]

È indispensabile difendere il denaro contante, quello che sta nel nostro portafogli. Chi ama pagare con carta di credito ha un’idea di libertà declinata come comodità.

È comodo non avere contante: non si rischia il furto o lo smarrimento; non ci si sente limitati nelle spese. Una libertà negativa, consumistica, tipicamente moderna, finta, da mondo al contrario.

L’individualismo spinto, unito all’indifferenza per le motivazioni reali dei comportamenti diretti dall’alto, rovescia le prospettive.

Parliamo di libertà ma accettiamo senza battere ciglio che il potere finanziario sia il vero padrone del “nostro” denaro, che ci consegna in piccole quantità, non prima di avere estratto uno strano plusvalore, la commissione, il pizzo del grassatore.

I signori del denaro ci controllano, sanno tutto delle nostre propensioni, spese, preferenze, in nome della maledetta “trasparenza”, ovvero della fine della privatezza, dell’intimità e della riservatezza; trattengono il nostro denaro e decidono insindacabilmente se e in quale misura restituircelo.

Per questa operazione estrattiva – trasferimento di risorse dal basso all’alto – hanno bisogno della complicità dello Stato, le cui leggi rendono sempre più complicato usufruire liberamente del nostro peculio e utilizzare il contante come mezzo di pagamento.

Il potere pubblico condivide con gli emittenti di denaro la capacità di conoscere tutto di noi, quindi anche di estrarre alla fonte parti del reddito. Una rapina legale della quale siamo vittime impotenti.

La maggiore libertà dei pagamenti elettronici riguarda solo chi gestisce il rubinetto – emittenti di moneta, banche, società finanziarie – chi orienta le norme a favore di quei poteri fortissimi, oltreché i padroni delle complesse tecnologie alla base del gesto di appoggiare una carta elettronica al POS, digitare il codice relativo e attendere il buon fine, accompagnato dalla dicitura “transazione approvata”.

Qui dovrebbe sorgere la prima reazione e, invece, no. L’omuncolo postmoderno, superbo cultore delle sue (apparenti) libertà, per quale motivo dovrebbe vedere approvate da qualcuno – l’entità sovraordinata, impersonale, la Matrix finanziaria – le sue spese, scelte di consumo, preferenze?

Non sono forse suoi i quattrini?

Perché Stato, tecnostruttura e banche dovrebbero sapere per filo e per segno dove, quando e per quali spese abbiamo usato i nostri (!) soldi?

Il potere fonda la sua presa ferrea sulla maggioranza sulla reiterazione ossessiva di messaggi, in gran parte falsi o fuorvianti.

Ripetiamolo a nostra volta: l’uso del contante è la pietra angolare della sovranità personale, che è innanzitutto padronanza di se stessi.

Il denaro contante, misura del valore ma anche valore della misura (Giacinto Auriti) è un sistema efficiente, semplice e immediato per condurre transazioni finanziarie da oltre quattromila anni.

L’uso della moneta il cui valore nominale corrispondeva al contenuto in metallo, risale a Babilonia prima del 2000 a.C..

L’introduzione della cartamoneta deriva dalle cambiali dell’antica Cina, dai titoli di credito ebraici e da Cartagine. La banconota nella forma odierna nacque nel VII secolo in Cina.

Oggi siamo esposti a un rischio mortale per la libertà con la diffusione obbligata della valuta digitale emessa da una banca centrale (privata, sottratta per legge al controllo pubblico dei governi e dei parlamenti), destinata a fungere da unica unità di pagamento, vietando di fatto l’uso del contante.

L’acronimo a cui dovremo abituarci – e sottometterci – è CBDC (Central Bank Digital Currency, valuta digitale della banca centrale). Sono stati lungimiranti gli svizzeri, che hanno imposto con referendum l’inserimento nella costituzione elvetica del diritto all’uso del denaro contante.

Sotto forma di legge di iniziativa popolare, il movimento Italia del Domani di Marco Rizzo sta cercando di offrire agli italiani la medesima possibilità.

La valuta digitale ha gravi conseguenze per la libertà dei cittadini. Le tutele previste per l’uso del contante negli USA possono essere un punto di riferimento per resistere alle catastrofiche conseguenze dell’instaurazione del tecnofeudalesimo monetario.

La prima linea di difesa della costituzione americana è avere stabilito l’autorità del parlamento federale sul denaro.

L’articolo 1, sezione 8, conferisce al Congresso il ​​potere esclusivo di “coniare moneta, regolarne il valore e quello della valuta, e fissare gli standard di pesi e misure”.

La Corte Suprema – massimo organo giurisdizionale Usa –  non si è ancora pronunciata direttamente sulla questione delle CBDC.

Le principali decisioni in merito sono state le sentenze Knox contro Lee (1871), che sancì la costituzionalità dell’autorizzazione federale della stampa di moneta legale e McCulloch contro il Maryland (1819), che stabilì il diritto e il potere governativo di creare una banca federale.

I principi della Costituzione statunitense proteggono dunque il diritto di utilizzare il contante nelle transazioni finanziarie.

L’istituzione delle CBDC come unità monetaria obbligatoria rappresenterebbe una novità assoluta negli USA e un precedente di capitale importanza.

Il Quarto Emendamento (clausola I) garantisce i cittadini rispetto a perquisizioni, sequestri e confische, con l’esplicito divieto di entrare nella proprietà privata, nonché l’opposizione alla confisca illegale e arbitraria di beni; protegge la sicurezza di persone, abitazioni, documenti ed effetti personali.

Sancisce, cioè, il diritto fondamentale alla privatezza contro le intrusioni governative, a cui oggi si affianca il potere della tecnostruttura privata.

Eliminare il contante come mezzo di pagamento legale annullerebbe il diritto alla privacy sancito dal Quarto Emendamento. Le persone non avrebbero più riservatezza nelle transazioni quotidiane e sarebbero assoggettate a un’inaccettabile intrusione da parte del governo, degli emittenti di moneta, delle entità finanziarie e dei possessori delle tecnologie applicate alla monetazione elettronica.

Chi detiene moneta a corso legale, ovvero contanti, possiede il valore di tale valuta senza intermediari. L’utilizzo delle valute digitali delle banche centrali annullerebbe la proprietà effettiva di un bene o di una somma di denaro, poiché le CBDC sono diverse dai contanti soprattutto perché rappresentano una promessa di pagamento che le banche possono interpretare, ritardare, sospendere, disattendere.

Esiste una differenza fondamentale tra una promessa di pagamento e il pagamento effettivo, ossia i contanti, proprietà incondizionata e assoluta.

Il più sinistro esempio di coercizione digitale è stato l’atteggiamento del governo liberale canadese contro il cosiddetto Canadian Freedom Convoy (convoglio canadese della libertà) nel 2022, con cui gli autisti di camion si opposero alla vaccinazione contro il COVID-19.

Il governo bloccò settantasei conti bancari dei dirigenti della protesta. A chi manifestava pacificamente contro l’obbligo di sottoporsi a una terapia genica sperimentale fu impedito di accedere al suo denaro.

Il congelamento dei conti bancari fu una palese coercizione politica per costringerli a fare ciò che non volevano bloccando il mezzo della loro sopravvivenza.

Non esiste un modo più semplice per bloccare l’accesso ai conti bancari che utilizzare la valuta digitale al posto del contante, ben più difficile da confiscare. Non esiste un metodo più perfetto per sovvertire la libertà che costringere a utilizzarle.

La stabilità di un sistema politico si fonda sulla proprietà diffusa, che garantisce sicurezza poiché consente ai singoli di controllare i mezzi di produzione, protezione e sopravvivenza.

Il denaro, in quanto mezzo di scambio, assicura la stabilità economica, incoraggia gli investimenti e la crescita nazionale.

Il dollaro statunitense è stato la valuta di riserva mondiale per decenni anche perché non ha mai confiscato denaro ai cittadini. Nessuna nazione responsabile investirebbe in una valuta di riserva gravata dall’abolizione o dal difficile uso del contante come mezzo di pagamento legale.

I CBDC aumentano il rischio di furto e criminalità informatica e possono, in casi estremi, mettere in pericolo la vita delle persone. Esiste una vasta letteratura sui furti informatici ai danni dei conti bancari, così come sulle fughe di informazioni personali.

Secondo il Fondo Monetario Internazionale, la CBDC crea un ecosistema vasto e complesso, che amplifica i rischi esistenti e ne genera di nuovi.

Pensiamo a situazioni come guerre, interruzioni o crisi energetiche, malfunzionamenti, disastri naturali che causano guasti alle reti energetiche o bancarie, rendendo impossibile l’accesso ai fondi.

Già questo giustifica l’imperativa necessità di conservare il contante. Non esiste migliore garanzia indipendente da qualsiasi ente o potere che preservi l’accesso alle risorse finanziarie per famiglie e individui in ogni momento.

Le valute digitali (CBDC) istituiscono e legittimano un sistema di credito sociale sul modello cinese, ponendo il potere politico, dirigenti ed azionisti della banca centrale, l’élite tecnologica e i banchieri nella posizione di signori tecno feudali.

Il sistema di credito sociale cinese valuta l’affidabilità di individui e imprese, monitora il comportamento e assegna un punteggio,  con tutto ciò che comporta in termini di diritti politici, opportunità sociali e sanzioni.

Un punteggio negativo può comportare restrizioni di viaggio, impedire l’accesso a posizioni professionali, difficoltà nell’ottenere prestiti, umiliazione pubblica.

Le valute digitali delle banche centrali facilitano l’imposizione di controllo sociale e politico per promuovere, colpire o vietare mandati politici, culturali, legali e religiosi, cancellando la privacy e la libertà di espressione.

Il governo indiano ha ritirato improvvisamente due banconote che rappresentavano l’86 per cento del circolante, ufficialmente per  combattere la corruzione. La scomparsa del contante ha causato un’ondata di suicidi tra chi non sa orientarsi nella complessità dei sistemi digitali o ne è escluso.

Adottare le valute digitali rappresenta il compimento della transizione a una drammatica forma di feudalesimo, l’arma assoluta della tecno tirannia. Difendere e sancire legalmente l’uso del contante è la chiave per preservare le concrete libertà individuali.

Laddove il governo non rispetta i diritti civili, il contante aiuta a proteggere la società dall’uso illegittimo del potere pubblico, dalla sorveglianza e dall’intimidazione, ha dichiarato Heike Mai, dirigente di Deutsche Bank. È tanto difficile da capire?

L'articolo Il denaro contante è libertà proviene da Blondet & Friends.