The Elon Musk-led American EV titan is preparing to bring its semi-electric truck to Europe, while Chinese companies led by BYD are already laying plans to build and sell electric heavy-duty trucks on the continent.

Intensifying the competition further, Chinese self-driving technology company Pony.ai is looking to bring autonomous electric trucks to the same market as well.

Talking about Tesla, the latter plans to bring its Semi to Europe, expanding into a heavy-duty vehicle market where rivals already offer battery-powered trucks.

Tesla’s renewed European push comes nearly a decade after the automaker unveiled its Semi in 2017. Production was initially targeted for 2019 but got repeatedly delayed as the company prioritised battery-cell supplies for its passenger vehicles.

Tesla began limited deliveries of the vehicle to US customers, including PepsiCo, in late 2022.

In April 2026, Tesla said its first Semi had rolled off a high-volume production line in Nevada. Its July shareholder update, however, said production would begin in 2026, while removing an earlier forecast for volume production this year.

Tesla’s German website has now listed a version of the truck with a range of up to 550 kilometers at a gross combination weight of 40 tonnes. Energy use has been specified at about 1 kilowatt-hour per kilometer.

The company says the truck weighs about 9,100 kilograms without a trailer or cargo. It can also recover around 60% of its range in 30 minutes using Tesla’s Megacharger network, which can deliver up to 800 kilowatts.

Tesla is also highlighting route-based charging scheduling and dedicated service centers, features aimed at reducing downtime for operators.

BYD, which has already established itself as Tesla’s global rival, is planning to launch its first heavy-duty truck in Europe in 2027 and ultimately manufacture trucks locally, according to Stella Li, the company’s executive vice president and head of international business.

While stating that BYD’s long-term plan was to produce locally everything it sells in Europe, Li said the strategy would also help the Shenzhen-based automaker deal with one of the biggest issues facing Chinese EV manufacturers in the region: tariffs.

European manufacturers, including Traton’s MAN brand, have called on the European Union (EU) to impose tariffs on Chinese electric trucks similar to those already applied to the electric vehicles arriving from the world’s second-largest economy and the biggest auto market.

Unbothered, BYD is already preparing to expand its passenger-car manufacturing footprint in Europe. Its factory in Szeged, Hungary, is expected to begin mass production in 2027.

Apart from focusing on local manufacturing, BYD is also looking to offer truck fleet operators a broader package covering financing, solar-powered charging infrastructure, and a workshop network supported by mobile roadside assistance.

Pony.ai has introduced a new Level 4 autonomous heavy goods vehicle at the IAA Transportation trade fair. The fully electric truck, jointly developed with Chinese state-owned automaker GAC, will be entering volume production later in 2026.

Level 4 autonomy allows a vehicle to drive itself without a human driver under specific conditions and within designated zones. Pony.ai already has its Level 4 truck line-ups operating in China, with participation from human safety drivers.

Pony.ai said it was talking to European governments and potential customers about road tests, while its robotruck unit plans to launch in European and Middle Eastern markets over the next two years.

The company, particularly interested in markets riddled with high labour costs or labour shortages, sees Europe as an important arena for its robotic trucks.

While the company has already approached several ports and European governments about testing, only a handful of them currently have regulations that allow self-driving vehicle testing.

Geely unit Farizon, Sany, Sinotruk, and startups like Windrose and SuperPanther, along with Pony.ai and BYD, are also seeking a share of Europe’s road-based freight network.

Image Credit: Tesla & BYD USA

The post IAA Trade Fair: Europe’s trucking sector braces for Tesla-China EV battle appeared first on International Finance.

Under the terms of the deal, EasyJet shareholders will receive 7.15 pound a share, a price Apollo had tabled last month after the airline’s board initially recommended a rival offer from Castlelake.

Castlelake had been given until 5 pm on Friday to table a final bid but declined to escalate the contest, saying it was “very appreciative” of its engagement with the EasyJet board.

Founder Sir Stelios Haji-Ioannou and his family will retain a shareholding under the new ownership structure, with existing investors offered the option to sell or transfer stakes up to a maximum of 49.9%.

The post EasyJet accepts Apollo Global’s 5.7 billion pound offer as Castlelake exits the race appeared first on International Finance.

That defence is falling apart. In 2026, four different governments, in India, the European Union (EU), Australia and the United States, are attacking Meta on completely different fronts.

The target this time is the actual design of its products. Not what people post, but how the apps are engineered to keep people scrolling, how they verify identity, and who profits from the news content that flows through them.

Taken together, these fights amount to the most serious challenge Meta has ever faced, hitting its products, its finances and its business model all at once.

A Privacy Feature Becomes a Fraud Tool in India
In late June 2026, WhatsApp rolled out “usernames,” a feature letting people message each other without sharing their phone numbers. It sounds like a simple privacy upgrade. But within three days, India’s IT ministry froze the rollout before it fully launched.

The reason comes down to a very specific, very costly problem in India, so-called “digital arrest” scams. Fraudsters pose as police officers or bank officials over video calls, falsely claim the victim is under arrest, and pressure them into transferring their life savings.

These scams work because they feel official. Investigators found that during WhatsApp’s early testing, usernames mimicking the Prime Minister, Bollywood stars and government agencies like the CBI could be claimed by anyone, with no ID checks at all.

In India, a phone number is tied to a SIM card and identity documents, which makes it traceable. A username needs none of that. In its notice to WhatsApp, the ministry warned the feature could “materially increase the incidence of online fraud, phishing, digital arrest scams” and impersonation attacks.

WhatsApp pushed back, insisting that “other users need to know the exact username to message you” and pointing to built-in limits on how many strangers an account can contact. The government judged these safeguards too weak against panicked victims mid-scam.

This fits a bigger pattern. India has built a huge digital identity system around Aadhaar (its national ID) and UPI (its payments network), and it wants foreign apps to work within that verified system rather than introduce anonymous alternatives. Digital rights groups have challenged the freeze in court.

The Internet Freedom Foundation branded the move “a licence raj for software features,” arguing the government has no legal right to pre-approve product features before they launch. Regardless of how that case ends, India has made clear that it now treats app design choices affecting hundreds of millions of people as a matter of national security.

Europe Punishes the Apps for Being Addictive
On 10 July 2026, the European Commission issued preliminary findings that Instagram and Facebook likely breach the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA) because of features that make the apps addictive.

The specific culprits named were infinite scroll, videos that autoplay without being asked, constant push notifications, and recommendation algorithms tuned purely to keep people watching. European regulators argue these features put users, especially teenagers, into an “autopilot” state where they keep consuming content without meaning to.

Under the DSA, very large platforms must assess risks their design poses to users and fix them. Announcing the findings, the Commission’s tech sovereignty chief, Henna Virkkunen, said “protecting the physical and mental health of Europeans must be a priority.” Brussels says Meta simply didn’t do that seriously enough.

Meta points to its “Teen Accounts” safety tools, which cap usage and block nighttime access, and told reporters “we disagree with these preliminary findings.”

But independent researchers testing teen accounts found notifications, autoplay and endless scrolling still showed up constantly, and that screen-time reminders were easy to ignore. Regulators also argue it’s unfair to rely on parents to manage settings they may not understand or have time for.

The financial stakes are enormous. EU fines under the DSA can reach 6% of a company’s global revenue, which for Meta could mean a fine north of USD 12 billion. But experts believe Brussels isn’t necessarily aiming for a drawn-out legal battle.

The DSA deliberately avoids strictly defining “addictive design,” giving the Commission room to use the threat of a huge fine as leverage to push Meta into voluntarily switching off things like autoplay by default. A negotiated settlement, not a courtroom win, may be the real goal.

Australia Wants Meta to Pay for News
Australia’s fight with Meta isn’t about addiction or fraud. It’s about money, specifically, who pays for journalism.

In April 2026, Australia proposed the News Bargaining Incentive (NBI), replacing an earlier law that required platforms to negotiate payments with news publishers. Under the new system, platforms like Meta, Google and TikTok face a 2.25% levy on their Australian revenue unless they strike deals with local news outlets.

Sign enough deals, and the levy drops to 1.5%. Refuse entirely, and the government pockets the full amount and hands it to publishers based on how many journalists they employ.

Meta has hit back hard. In its formal submission on the draft law, the company wrote that “it is a discriminatory tax, applied only to a handful of foreign companies.”

Its arguments run along three lines. Publishers benefit just as much from the traffic social media sends them; audiences increasingly come to Meta’s apps for entertainment, not news, as shown by the fact that engagement didn’t drop when Meta pulled news from its platforms in Canada; and propping up legacy media with tech company money removes any pressure on publishers to modernise. Meta also argues the levy may violate trade agreements between Australia and the United States.

Australia’s urgency is understandable. Since 2008, the country has lost more than 19,500 journalism jobs as advertising money moved online.

But critics note the scheme has a major blind spot, since it exempts AI chatbots like Meta AI and ChatGPT, even though these tools increasingly answer questions using scraped news content without sending any traffic, or money, back to publishers at all.

In America, Juries Are Now the Threat
Unlike India, the EU or Australia, the US has no single federal law governing platform design. Instead, individual states and courts have become the battleground, and 2026 has already produced landmark defeats for Meta.

In March, a New Mexico jury ordered Meta to pay USD 375 million in punitive damages, finding the company misled the public about child safety on its platforms.

New Mexico’s Attorney General, Raul Torrez, called the verdict “a historic victory for every child and family who has paid the price.” Meta said in response that it would “respectfully disagree with the verdict” and confirmed it planned to appeal.

The very next day, a Los Angeles jury found both Meta and Google liable in a case brought by a young woman who started using YouTube at age 6 and Instagram at age 9, awarding her USD 6 million and ruling that features like infinite scroll, autoplay and beauty filters had directly caused her addiction and psychological harm. Meta was found 70% responsible and Google 30%.

These verdicts are just the opening act. A much larger federal case is underway, consolidating claims from more than 2,600 individuals, school districts and local governments, alongside a separate suit from attorneys general in 29 states.

In July, four of those states, California, Colorado, Kentucky and New Jersey, filed a jaw-dropping penalty demand of USD 1.4 trillion, calculated by counting every teenage user and every month they spent over 30 minutes a day on the app as a separate violation.

Meta called the figure “outlandish” and argued in its court filing that a penalty of that scale “has no analog in the history of consumer protection enforcement.”

California’s Attorney General’s office defended the claim, saying its case alleges “Meta has prioritized profits over the safety of kids.” Meta also pointed out that “social media addiction” isn’t a recognised medical diagnosis.

What makes these cases different from past lawsuits is the legal strategy. Rather than suing over content posted by users (which Meta has long been shielded from under a law called Section 230), plaintiffs are suing over the design of the product itself, the algorithms, the notifications, the engagement loops.

That reframing has worked. A federal judge has repeatedly refused to throw the cases out, and internal Meta documents, including one memo stating “if we wanna win big with teens, we must bring them in as tweens,” have strengthened the plaintiffs’ case that the addictive design was intentional.

Trouble Inside the House Too
While fighting on four fronts abroad, Meta is also under pressure internally. In May 2026, it cut around 8,000 jobs as part of a shift toward AI-assisted operations, a move now facing a discrimination lawsuit from former employees who claim an AI system used performance data to unfairly target staff who had taken medical or maternity leave.

Separately, an employee tracking tool built to gather data for AI training was suspended after 1,600 staff signed a petition calling it a privacy violation.

And a new feature called “Muse Image AI,” which let people generate AI images from other users’ photos, was automatically switched on for all public adult Instagram accounts, drawing comparisons to the Cambridge Analytica scandal and raising fresh questions about compliance with European privacy law.

All this is happening while Meta pours between USD 115 billion and USD 135 billion into AI infrastructure in 2026 alone, nearly double what it spent the year before.

What It All Means
What’s happening to Meta in 2026 isn’t a series of unrelated headaches. It’s a shift in how the world regulates big tech.

Governments have stopped playing catch-up on individual pieces of harmful content and started targeting the architecture underneath, including the algorithms, the verification systems and the revenue models.

India wants identity and traceability. Europe wants proof that apps aren’t designed to be addictive. Australia wants a cut of the revenue to save its news industry. America’s courts want someone held financially responsible for the mental health toll on a generation of teenagers.

The result is a Meta that can no longer run one single global product. Usernames may stay frozen in India while working fine elsewhere. Instagram’s feed may need to become calmer and less algorithm-driven in Europe while staying exactly as engaging as ever in less regulated markets.

News might vanish from the platform entirely in Australia to dodge the levy. Piece by piece, the borderless internet Meta was built on is being replaced by a patchwork of national rules, and the company is now spending as much energy fighting sovereign governments as it is building the next generation of AI.

The post Meta is fighting governments, and the walls are closing in appeared first on International Finance.

The scale of the exercise is worth noting. More than 5,800 companies across 43 countries and 20 industries were assessed, with 750 selected worldwide. The selection began with a shortlist of over 5,000 of the world’s largest and most influential firms, chosen for their revenue, market capitalisation and public prominence, before a four step process narrowed the field. Companies tied to fossil fuels, deforestation or major environmental scandals were automatically ruled out at the first stage, before the rest were scored against more than 20 sustainability indicators.

Topping the list this year is Schneider Electric, the French energy management giant. This is no one-off. The company has held the number one spot for three years running, in 2024, 2025 and now 2026, a run that analysts put down to the growing demand for decarbonisation technology.

How companies reacted
For firms that made the cut, the recognition has become something to shout about. Japan’s Ricoh, which has now appeared on the list for three consecutive years, had its sustainability chief call it a reflection of the firm’s push to embed transparency and accountability into daily operations.

Canada’s CAE described the listing as a considerable honour tied to its climate transition work, while Michigan based BorgWarner’s chief executive linked the recognition directly to long term growth, arguing that sustainability and business strength go hand in hand. Finland’s Elisa, ranked just behind fellow Finnish firm Nokia, called its own three year streak on the list proof of steady, long term work rather than a quick fix.

The broader picture
The context behind this year’s list is more complicated than the celebratory press releases suggest. Sustainability chiefs have had a difficult year, with many companies shifting focus towards cost savings, the US government withdrawing renewable energy tax credits and rolling back environmental rules, and an energy crisis stemming from the war in Iran threatening to push up prices across the board. Despite this, experts argue that most companies are staying the course. Maria Mendiluce, head of the We Mean Business Coalition, says pragmatism is taking hold among both companies and regulators, with Europe and Asia continuing to back green policy even as the politics get noisier.

One driver of this staying power is regulation. The European Union’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, a tariff on carbon heavy imports that took effect at the start of 2026, has pushed more companies to pay closer attention to disclosure data so they can gauge how the tax will hit their bottom line. Similarly, the EU’s 2025 rule requiring a minimum share of sustainable aviation fuel at European airports has made operators like ninth placed Aena more active in encouraging its uptake.

Oxford researcher Kaya Axelsson sums up where this is heading. She argues that the next phase of corporate climate action will be less about setting individual targets and more about changing the systems companies operate within, even as economics make the case for a green transition clearer than the politics.

For everyday readers, the takeaway is simple. Sustainability is no longer a side project chasing good headlines. It is increasingly being tracked, measured and, as this list shows, rewarded.

The post TIME and Statista name world’s most sustainable companies for 2026 appeared first on International Finance.

The new offer at 6.90 pounds a share represents a 73% premium to easyJet’s closing price on May 29, when the private equity fund manager disclosed its interest in the airline to British regulators. Since then, as the takeover talks held ground, the shares went up steeply as well. As per the latest updates, the budget carrier’s shares rose 10% during trading at London, hitting 6.16 pounds.

Castlelake’s successful offer also gives easyJet an equity value of 5.23 billion pounds (USD 6.98 billion), rising to 5.52 billion pounds on a fully diluted basis. The bid is 24% above easyJet’s closing price on Friday (3rd July).

The deal, which would see the American investor take 31-year-old easyJet private, coincides with operating challenges for airlines globally as they grapple with sharply higher ⁠fuel prices and profit pressure due to the Iran war. So severe were the disruptions that they forced budget carrier Spirit Airlines to file for bankruptcy in the United States.

Locked in fierce competition with rival Ryanair, easyJet had long been viewed as a takeover target with its valuable landing slots at airports, including London Gatwick, Paris, and Geneva, which made the entity attractive to potential bidders.

The carrier in June rejected a 4.93 billion pound proposal from Castlelake but signaled an interest in continuing talks by granting the private equity manager limited access to the venture’s commercial data.

On Sunday (July 5), easyJet’s board said that the latest bid was at “a value that the board would be minded to recommend to easyJet shareholders.” However, it has put the ball firmly in Castlelake’s court by asking the latter to submit its firm intention to make an offer by August 3. Castlelake, an established lender to the global aviation sector, apart from leasing airplanes to about 200 airlines, will now have to meet the European Union’s (EU) regulations requiring airlines operating in the bloc to be majority owned and controlled by EU nationals.

“The financial terms of the proposed offer are at a value that the board would be minded to recommend to easyJet shareholders should a firm offer be made,” the company said.

Castlelake, during one of its failed bids, said it would own 49% of the investment vehicle with the remainder held by two EU nationals, former Malaysia Airlines CEO Peter Bellew ⁠and senior industry executive Mark Breen. Bellew was easyJet’s chief operating officer from 2019 to 2022. Breen, on the other hand, runs an aerospace consultancy and has previously held senior roles at a number of airlines, including the ones in the Middle East.

EasyJet, which flies low-cost routes in 38 European countries, operates 355 aircraft across more than 1,200 routes. The business, since the COVID-19 pandemic, has failed to recover financially, despite having bright spots like package holiday business and an efficient Airbus ⁠fleet.

British-Cypriot entrepreneur Stelios Haji‑Ioannou, who established easyJet in 1995, left the board in 2010 but remains the biggest investor with a roughly 15% stake alongside his family.

The British market is on course to set a mergers and acquisitions record in 2026 as weaker valuations among London-listed companies attract buyers. EasyJet initially said Castlelake’s approach was “highly opportunistic” as the Iran war turmoil depressed its shares.

Former aviation executive John Strickland, while interacting with the BBC, has said that in addition to being a “profitable, successful airline,” easyJet also has attractive features like high brand recognition.

“Looking at the business itself, it has a substantial fleet of aircraft, numbering over 350 planes, and a massive order book—aircraft slots on production lines are hard to get your hands on. In addition, they have a very strong slot position at a number of large, congested airports around Europe, including Gatwick and Paris Charles de Gaulle. The most popular slots can be worth tens of millions of pounds when traded between airlines,” Strickland told the BBC’s “Today” program.

He doesn’t see CastleLake slimming down EasyJet’s organizational structures. Castlelake has assets under management worth USD 36 billion (27.3 billion pounds).

The post After four failed bids, Castlelake gains ground on easyJet appeared first on International Finance.

Shares of easyJet, which operates more than 350 aircraft on over 1,200 routes in 37 countries, on 25th June, jumped by as much as 8% to around 5.80 pounds. Still, they were below Castlelake’s latest offer of 6.50 pounds per share.

While rejecting Castlelake’s fourth bid, the budget carrier’s board unanimously accused the American firm of attempting to undervalue the airline. As per them, giving Castlelake limited access to easyJet’s books might produce ⁠a “more attractive proposal.”

“While the latest proposal was higher than Castlelake’s previous 6.25-pound-per-share offer, it is also tracking towards the 7-pound-apiece price tag easyJet investors were hoping to get,” reported the Financial Times (FT).

As per Dudley Shanley, an analyst with Goodbody Stockbrokers, the latest move from the easyJet board has now ensured that the carrier is willing to enter serious negotiations with Castlelake, eyeing a sale at the right price.

Castlelake’s deadline to table a firm offer for easyJet’s acquisition has been extended to July 5 under the United Kingdom’s takeover rules. And as per the budget carrier, the American alternative investment fund had indicated it hoped to further improve its bid following limited access to easyJet’s commercial information.

While Castlelake has “welcomed” the constructive engagement from the easyJet board and the deadline extension, analysts are unsure about whether the American alternative investment firm could structure a deal that would comply with ‌European Union (EU) ⁠ownership rules requiring carriers to be majority EU-owned and controlled while also satisfying easyJet investors on price.

Samuel Ziff, a portfolio manager at Oldfield Partners, an easyJet investor, said that any new bid price would need to be “significantly higher” than the rejected proposal.

“EasyJet has got a very valuable fleet; they’ve got very valuable slots, and management has got this clear target that they want to hit by 2030 in terms of profitability,” Ziff told Reuters.

Castlelake has also ⁠named New York-based Brookfield Asset Management as a co-investor, along with two previously disclosed partners, former Malaysia Airlines CEO Peter Bellew (a former easyJet employee) and senior industry executive Mark Breen.

Under the proposed terms, the bidding vehicle would be owned 49% by Castlelake and co-investors, including Brookfield. The remaining 51% would be owned by EU ⁠nationals Bellew and Breen.

“The reality is price is much more important than who’s actually buying. Concerns over ownership structure and an absence of a European airline investor might be ignored for the right price,” Shanley said.

Brookfield, in 2025, was also part of a consortium ⁠that acquired one of the world’s largest aircraft lessors, Air Lease, in a USD 7.4 billion cash deal.

EasyJet, which competes with other low-cost carriers such as Ryanair, hit the warning bells in May by informing its investors that its full-year forecast remained uncertain due to factors like higher jet fuel costs and disappointing summer bookings since 2025.

The post EasyJet rejects Castlelake’s takeover attempt, demands ‘more attractive proposal’ appeared first on International Finance.

“We welcome that the European Parliament’s ECON Committee has agreed on its position on the single currency package, which will safeguard euro cash as legal tender while also shaping the digital euro,” the ECB said in a statement.

The digital euro, as an electronic wallet guaranteed by the central bank but marketed by banks or fintech companies, will allow eurozone residents to make payments online and in person. While the project has been ongoing for the last six years, it only got the push in 2025 as Republican Donald Trump entered the White House for his second stint as the United States president.

His tariff-heavy trade policies, which hit the allies and adversaries alike, raised fear in the European political circle about Uncle Sam potentially weaponising its dominance over payment networks like Visa and Mastercard.

And the fear is not unfounded, given the fact that as per the European Central Bank (ECB) data, Visa and Mastercard account for 61% of card payments in the euro area and almost all cross-border card transactions.

The approval of draft rules by the European Parliament’s Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee officially ended the three years of stalemate between the ECB and banks, which have been concerned about deposit outflows and lost revenues and sought to limit the digital euro’s scope.

“The introduction of the ⁠digital euro would… reduce overreliance on non-European providers by becoming a pan-European means of payment and would bring the single currency into the digital era by giving Union citizens the freedom to opt to pay with central bank money in their daily transactions,” the draft regulation says.

However, there is still a bit of opposition against the digital euro, as Siegbert Frank Droese of the far-right “Europe of Sovereign Nations,” a political group in the European Parliament, said his group had voted against the proposal, raising the likelihood that a further vote would be needed at the Parliament’s plenary.

Notwithstanding this, lawmakers are now in a position to start negotiating with the European Council of EU governments and the European Commission from July onwards, aiming for final approval for the digital euro’s rollout by the 2026 end.

The ECB, which plans to run a 12-month pilot of the digital euro starting in the second half of 2027, before a full launch in 2029, said it looked forward to Parliament adopting its final position.

Among other nations, China has been piloting a digital yuan at scale, while countries like India and Brazil have conducted trials of their respective CBDCs (Central Bank Digital Currencies). The United Kingdom, on the other hand, has focused on research amid concerns over privacy, financial stability, and banking-sector impact. Trump, on the other hand, through an executive order, has forbidden the Federal Reserve from issuing a digital currency.

The Republican, instead of a CBDC, has backed the development of stablecoins, privately issued crypto assets designed to maintain a stable value.

Since the vast majority of global stablecoins are denominated in US dollars, the cryptocurrency’s backers argue that the technology could reinforce the dollar’s international role and expand its use in cross-border payments.

Coming back to the digital euro, based on an ECB recommendation, lawmakers have proposed in the draft regulation that the European Commission should be the final deciding authority in terms of determining how many digital euros every user could own. The ceiling, in consultation with the central bank, can be reviewed at least every two years.

“Businesses would not be allowed to hold digital euros for longer than 24 hours. The digital euro would not earn any interest or cost anything to its users,” the proposal stated further.

“The proposal reflects political compromises. It keeps commercial banks at the center of distribution, with only a limited role for public channels and ⁠other providers, and does not go as far as presenting the digital euro as a true alternative to bank deposits,” Laura Casonato, head of policy at Positive Money Europe, an advocacy group for monetary reform, told Reuters.

“Such concessions were likely crucial to win over critics such as Fernando Navarrete Rojas, the parliament’s negotiator on this file, who only recently dropped his opposition to making the digital euro available online,” she stated further.

As per the latest ECB simulations, depositors could withdraw up to 699 billion euros (USD 795.88 billion) from eurozone banks if a limit on digital euro holdings was set at ⁠3,000 euros each.

“This is equal to 8.2% of all retail sight deposits, although the impact would be greater for small-market lenders and retail banks,” the ECB noted.

As per the draft proposals, the ECB would provide the underlying infrastructure, while commercial banks and payment service providers would offer digital euro services to customers.

“Financial institutions are expected to be compensated for their participation in the scheme, while merchants will pay fees that are expected to be lower than those associated with current card transactions,” the proposals stated further.

However, the compensation’s structuring is expected to be one of the bones of contention ahead of negotiations between the EU and its member states.

The post With parliamentary nod, digital euro inches closer to reality appeared first on International Finance.

Minneapolis-based Castlelake, which manages about USD 38 billion in assets and has invested over USD 24 billion ⁠into the aviation sector since 2005, said the latest move would allow easyJet shareholders to consider the bid’s merits and relay their views to the low-cost carrier ahead of a June 26 deadline for a formal offer.

Castlelake’s 6.25-pound-per-share proposal represents a premium of about 57% to ‌easyJet’s ⁠share price of 3.94 pounds on May 29 before the American venture disclosed its interest in the low-cost carrier. The two previous failed bids had figures worth 5.6 euro and 6.0 euro, respectively.

Castlelake also said its arrangement for easyJet’s ownership takeover ⁠is consistent with those adopted by other European airlines to ensure full regulatory compliance on the continent.

The venture also plans to offer a partial equity alternative so that easyJet shareholders ⁠remain invested in the airline as a privately held business in partnership with the alternative investment fund, subject to a maximum participation limit.

As per the European Union’s (EU) rules, any move by Castlelake to acquire easyJet would have to meet the politico-economic union’s ownership requirements, despite the budget carrier being based in the non-member nation called the United Kingdom.

The reason lies behind easyJet’s move of establishing an EU-based subsidiary, “EasyJet Europe,” to maintain access to the intra-EU aviation market. As per the EU rules, Castlelake would need to ensure that the ownership criteria are preserved, any violation of which will bring the risk of losing traffic rights in the continent.

To deal with this, Castlelake has brought Bellew, along with Mark Breen (Managing Director at Quinbrook Infrastructure Partners), two prominent European citizens, as the individual investors for the takeover deal.

While Bellew, apart from being an easyJet veteran, held a leadership role in Ryanair too, Breen has held senior board roles at budget carrier Flyadeal and other airlines (notably in the Middle East). Breen also founded the Irish-based consultancy Oneiros Aerospace.

As per Castlelake, Bellew and Breen would invest and participate in the proposed acquisition of easyJet through their ownership and control of an EU-domiciled company, which would have a majority share in the overall structure.

“Bellew has recently made investments in EasyJet with the acquisition of a relatively small number of shares over the course of March-May. This proposed structure is consistent with structures adopted by a number of other European airlines that are subject to the same EU ownership rules as [EasyJet]. [We are] highly confident that the transaction will be structured and completed in full compliance with all applicable regulatory requirements, with any required formal approvals obtained swiftly,” the alternative investment fund remarked further.

It also cited easyJet’s “unwillingness to engage meaningfully” as a reason for going public with the bid.

While Castlelake said it aims to support easyJet, respecting its “valuable” assets and sustaining its network, the low-cost carrier, in response, stated that 51% of the proposed ownership vehicle would be held by EU interests, including potential investors whose identities have not been disclosed, apart from describing the structure as “opaque.”

“The Board believes that the Third Proposal represents an opportunistic attempt to acquire easyJet ‘on the cheap,’ and that it is therefore not in the best interests of easyJet shareholders,” the budget carrier said in a statement.

EasyJet also reiterated that it was focused on its medium-term targets, apart from growing its holidays business, ‌which ⁠has accounted for a steady increase in share of profit despite geopolitical uncertainties.

The post Backed by former easyJet veteran, Castlelake launches fourth bid for airline appeared first on International Finance.

On June 10, Annick De Ridder, the transport minister of ⁠the Flanders region, made the announcement through a post on the popular micro-blogging platform X (formerly Twitter), stating, “I just signed the approval that allows Tesla to roll ‌out ⁠its technology after the company successfully carried out a series of tests in the country.”

⁠Authorizations granted in one of the three Belgian regions are considered valid in all ⁠the country’s territories. This came just a day after the EV giant securing a similar approval in Denmark. The Netherlands, Lithuania, and Estonia have already taken similar steps.

In Denmark, the Danish Road Traffic Authority granted provisional approval after reviewing the original type approval issued by the Dutch vehicle authority (RDW) on April 10, 2026. As per the reports, individual countries are now bypassing slower European Union-wide harmonization processes, accelerating the FSD’s deployment.

FSD Supervised comes with advanced driver assistance capabilities, including automatic steering, acceleration, braking, lane changes, and navigation through complex urban and rural environments. Tesla has designed the system for supervised use, making sure drivers get the opportunity to take over the vehicle’s control if the mechanism doesn’t perform as per their expectations, especially in situations like rain, night driving, and varied road types.

Early data from the Netherlands, the first EU member nation that approved the FSD’s launch within its territory, highlighted strong safety performance.

Between April 10 and June 5, vehicles using FSD Supervised recorded 3.5 times fewer collisions than manual driving overall, with zero crashes reported on highways across more than 16.6 million kilometers driven. As part of its European push, Tesla now has reached 12 countries with FSD supervised availability.

In Denmark, owners with compatible hardware, especially newer vehicles equipped with Hardware 4 (HW4), may gain the FSD’s access first, though exact timelines and eligibility details are not clear yet.

After securing regulatory nods in four European markets in just two months, the FSD technology is steadily advancing toward wider availability across the continent. The Elon Musk-led automaker is looking to refine the system further through ongoing data collection and software iterations.

The post Amid SpaceX IPO glitz, Elon Musk’s Tesla scores regulatory wins in Europe appeared first on International Finance.

While the legislation’s aim is to include cryptocurrencies in the country’s tax code, taxation of cryptocurrencies among European countries varies from 8% in Cyprus to 30% in France. However, in all the places, these taxes come under the “capital gains” category.

As per Reuters, the Greek government wants to make the first 500 euros (USD 580) of gains tax-free. The tax will not apply to individual cryptocurrency mining, but ⁠the clause of exception will come into force if the entity mining is registered as a corporation.

As per an analysis from the Crypto Briefing, a 15% flat tax will be imposed on profits from crypto asset disposals. This will apply to individuals, with the 500-euro annual exemption likely giving smaller investors some breathing room.

Losses incurred on crypto transactions could be used to offset gains within the same tax year. Crypto Briefing further anticipates the likelihood of the bill having provisions that will allow investors to carry forward losses for up to five years.

The European Union’s decision to roll out its Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) framework has put tremendous pressure on individual member states in terms of formalizing their ways of handling digital asset taxation. Greece has been one of the laggards in this regard, operating without a cohesive crypto tax framework while other nations moved ahead with clear guidelines.

In fact, in Greece, there is no clarity on the legal status of cryptocurrencies to date. Still, being aware of the mass adoption and growing popularity of crypto assets among its residents, the administration has prevented itself from taking knee-jerk reactions like announcing investments in cryptocurrencies as “illegal.”

Within the context of Law 4514/2018 MiFID II, Law 4021/2011 EMD II, and Law 4537, PSD II, cryptocurrencies may be classified as financial instruments, electronic money, or funds if the relevant definitions conform with the transactions. However, there is no official guidance from the HCMC (Hellenic Capital Markets Commission) or the BoG (Bank of Greece) discerning the official classification of crypto assets.

The post Greece may impose 15% tax on crypto-related capital gains, says report appeared first on International Finance.