In our previous publication on the Capital Requirements (Implementation) Act 2026 (Implementatiewet kapitaalvereisten 2026, the Implementation Act (Dutch only)), we discussed the key features of the new branch regime for non-EU banks introduced under the Capital Requirements Directive VI (Directive (EU) 2024/1619, CRD 6). With 11 July 2026 fast approaching, an important turning point is drawing near: agreements relating to ‘Core Banking Services’ concluded after 11 July 2026 will no longer be protected by the transitional law. This means that non-EU banks entering into new agreements with Dutch companies after that date for the provision of Core Banking Services – namely taking deposits, granting loans or issuing guarantees – will immediately fall within the scope of the new branch regime, including the associated establishment and authorisation requirements. For further information on this topic, please refer to our previous publication. For companies in the Netherlands, this means that the contracting party, the financing structure and the timing of any new credit documentation will once again become relevant when assessing the applicability of CRD 6.
The July 2026 edition has been edited by Joaquín Muñoz with contributions from the Regulatory & Public Affairs team and Bird & Bird colleagues from across our One Firm network.
In this edition, we share timely insights on Spain’s CNMC consultation on number suballocation criteria and its draft AI governance law, China’s landmark commercial approval of the world’s first invasive brain-computer interface, Sweden’s implementation of the CER Directive, and the EDPS’s new checklist on human intervention in automated decisionmaking. We also examine the EU and UK’s proposed framework for Mobile Satellite Services, the ICO’s recommendations on AI-powered cyber threats, and the NCSC and DSIT’s Cyber Shield initiative for national AI cyber defence.
The Spanish Ministry of Economy, Trade and Business has published its Annual Report on Foreign Direct Investments (“FDI”) in Spain in 2025. The figures reflected in the report confirm a system that is maturing rapidly, with more filings, greater international integration, and an increasingly confident regulatory posture, all while maintaining a fundamentally open approach to foreign capital.
The House of Representatives is out of session this week as the Senate looks for a path forward on Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Section 702, a critical intelligence collection authority that enables the Intelligence Community to collect, analyze, and share foreign intelligence information about national security threats, which expired on June 12th.
Read more
On 2 June 2026, the United States Trade Representative (hereinafter “USTR”) published an official notice communicating the outcome of 60 trade investigations initiated pursuant to Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. All 60 investigated economies — including the European Union and the United Kingdom — were found to have failed to prohibit or effectively enforce a ban on the importation of goods produced with forced labour. In light of such findings, the USTR has proposed the imposition of new tariffs:
The United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) will not be renewed at this time, per statements from the Trump administration. The agreement’s built-in six-year review process and potential ten-year path toward expiration will soon commence.
The June 2026 edition has been edited by Valerian Jenny with contributions from the Regulatory & Public Affairs team and Bird & Bird colleagues from across our One Firm network
In this edition, we share insights into the provisional agreement on the AI Digital Omnibus, Europe’s proposed Industrial Accelerator Act, the Dutch government’s draft AI Act implementing legislation, the CNMC alias registry intended to prevent fraud and the UK’s revised telecoms security guidance.
Last week, the European Commission launched a long-awaited consultation on the functioning of the EU regulatory framework for crypto-assets under the Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) Regulation. Aimed at gathering views from industry stakeholders, policymakers, consultants, and investors, the consultation marks a first step toward a potential recalibration of the MiCA framework, commonly referred to in the industry as MiCA 2.0.
The rapid pace of AI development is pushing regulators worldwide into unfamiliar territory. For organisations operating across borders, this is creating an increasingly complex compliance landscape, one in which rules differ markedly between jurisdictions and continue to evolve at speed.
To help organisations keep pace, we have updated our AI Regulatory Tracker with insights across 22 jurisdictions. It provides a clear, up-to-date overview of enacted legislation, forthcoming proposals, regulatory guidance, and enforcement trends. Below are some of the most significant recent developments.
