Challenge

Our client Heel leading manufacturer of homeopathic medicinal products dedicated in research, dealt with a non-suitable regulatory environment. Existing requirements as applied by national authorities did not honor investments in scientific research. Alber & Geiger faced a European Commission reluctant for legislative changes and differing Member State approaches.

Strategy

The strategy co-ordinated legal, ethical, medical and scientific concepts into coherent arguments. It showed the European Commission and the EU institutions but also relevant national competent authorities more broadly, the particularities of homeopathic medicinal products, as well as their effectiveness and safety and the different national approaches in the EU Member States.

Results

Ultimately our strategy allowed our client to enter into a constructive dialogue with relevant national authorities. Alber & Geiger followed the maxim that sometimes less regulation is more, reflecting the priorities of our clients’ industries.

Challenge

The European Commission initiated anti-dumping proceedings concerning imports of polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) originating from China. The investigation on the dumped PVA was worth more than $33 million. Solutia, a U.S. Fortune 500 firm and a Monsanto spin off, was one of the parties concerned by this investigation. Solutia relied heavily on PVA to produce polyvinyl butyral (PVB), a material used in glass, construction and auto industries. With only 5-months’ notice, Solutia sought Alber & Geiger’s help to avoid import duties on PVA.

Strategy

Alber & Geiger produced a narrative that included an understanding of the Chinese economy and the PVA market in China. Our message was strongly embedded in the European Commission’s approach to trade and competition law, while taking into account the global political consensus on Chinese PVA dumping. More concretely, we put forward arguments that the dumping was a natural consequence of China’s macro-economic situation and production pressures.

Our team demonstrated that other market factors had contributed to the EU economic injury. We argued that the European Commission had not shown a causal link between the detriments suffered by the EU market and dumped imports from China. Moreover, our message cast doubt on the way the European Commission had defined the market of PVA in light of the broader range PVA uses.

Results

Alber & Geiger’s lobbying activity led to the European Commission revising its preliminary duties decision on PVA imports. As we had argued, the European Commission concluded that there was no evidence that would link dumping and injury. The tariffs were lifted. Solutia’s profitability and position on the global market remained intact.

Challenge

Alber & Geiger represented Panama in the aftermath of the “Panama papers” with regard to the new EU anti money laundering blacklist. As a result of the “Panama papers” the EU decided for the first time to set up its own blacklist. Before that, the EU would copy the international Financial Action Task Force (FATF) lists.

In Summer 2019, Panama was added to the grey list of FATF, at a time when the country was finalizing its reforms. Alber & Geiger was called to halt the result in FATF from spilling over in the EU and to weigh in the new EU methodology and the procedural gaps in the EU listing. Panama was caught in a timing paradox: Its automatic EU listing would be followed by a potential delisting from FATF, without clear assurances that the latter would be reflected in an EU delisting.

Strategy

Our goal was straightforward: raise awareness for Panama’s advances in combating money laundering and through that ensure that the EU will not unjustly list Panama as a high risk third country. Our message had to circle in the three key EU institutions. The architect of the procedure and list of high risk third countries, the European Commission, and the gatekeepers of the procedure, the European Parliament and the Member States.

Our message was tailor made for each front, appealing the several working levels and directorates of the Commission, the Committees of the European Parliament and different levels of organization in the Member States. Alber & Geiger grasped the opportunity of the drafting of the new methodology for the EU listing of high risk third countries, to engage with the different Commission directorates involved in the process and apply Panama’s position. In the Parliament, we focused on rewarding a third country such as Panama, which is determined to turn a bad precedent into a success story and we stressed upon the bilateral relationships of Panama towards the Member States.

Results

The EU did not implement its list and methodology as planned. Panama being listed by the EU as a high risk third country within the EU anti money laundering framework now is based on an automatic listing/delisting process with FATF. Our lobbying efforts enhanced the visibility and acknowledgement of Panama’s efforts in modernizing its anti-money laundering regime and changed the original EU methodology draft according to the demands of Panama.