The Brexit doesn't matter. Not to the authorities in Great Britain nor to the European ones. Had it mattered and stood any chance of being successful, the leaders in Brussels would have made at least a tactical break in their march towards the merging of nations into a utopian conglomerate, in which citizens are turned into simple numbers and asked to pay their taxes without asking questions. The Committee for Economic and Monetary Affairs has recently approved the introduction of the unified fiscal identification number for citizens and companies in the EU. "The adequate identification of taxpayers is essential for the efficient exchange of information between the tax administrations", the EU document states.  American analyst Martin Armstrong writes on his blog that "through this measure, the EU is preparing the groundwork for the move to electronic money".  Before reaching this "ideal", the far nearer effect will be that of the introduction of a unified European tax, as well as the centralization of the taxation of companies. In the case of the fiscal regime applied to companies, the European "ideal" is represented by the prohibition to lower the profit tax rate below 15%, which is in fact the prohibition to increase the competitiveness by lowering the tax burden.    In Armstrong's opinion, "this hidden maneuver represents a step towards the taking over of the states' taxation power and the creation of a unified taxation framework in Europe". In this way, the fiscal competition, one of the factors that have contributed to the development of the continent in the past, will be eliminated. European countries, especially the developing ones, will be denied any opportunity to compete with developed countries and will be sentenced to the status of economic colonies, which are only good for the plundering of their natural resources and credit-based consumption.  Thus, "the single identification code represents a direct attack on sovereignty, in an attempt to create a centralized taxation at the level of the EU", according to the European blogs that reproduced the information.  In the British press, as well as in the continental one, an assiduous search is needed to find this information. I have been unsuccessful so far, and the eur-lex.europa.eu website was not accessible.

In a country with a history of almost 160 years of petroleum industry where petroleum operations have been carried out during various political and legal regimes, without being a controversial topic, neither by legal nor by social nature, the access to the petroleum blocks, in general and, in particular, to the land necessary to access the underground resources, have generated in the last years a new challenge for this industry’s operators. In addition to the technical and financial risks related to the oil and gas exploration industry, the more recent problem regarding the access to the petroleum blocks has raised the risk of projects with respect to the uncertainty of the commencement and development of the petroleum operations according to a pre-set schedule, as well as the concessionaires commitments to the Romanian state while incurring additional costs generated by the law suits to access the petroleum blocks, as opposed to relying on the customary ways of amicable direct negotiation.  In a context where, although expressly permitted by the Law no. 238/2004, petroleum law (named as follows “Petroleum Law”), the access of the titleholders of petroleum agreements (“Petroleum Agreements”) on the private property land with the scope to conduct petroleum operations, is almost impossible in the absence of an agreement with the land owner, recently the judicial practice has started to express opinions in favor of the titleholders. Therefore, the article 7 from the Petroleum Law establishes a legal servitude right over the petroleum perimeters, other than those declared of public utility, necessary for the exploration and exploitation operations as well as for any related field activities necessary in the process of exploration and exploitation, whereas the exercise of the servitude right is made against the payment of an annual rent.  Even though the legislator established this legal servitude right, frequently, in the last 3-4 years in practice and in the context of public space debates related to the insufficient or incorrectly understanding over the exploitation of shale gas, the landowners denied access to the titleholders on the blocks intending to conduct petroleum operations, claiming that the exercise of the servitude right of the titleholders represents an expropriation of the landowner.

Local realities as well as the fiscal contributions to the state budget from this industry reflect a significant decrease of the petroleum activities. There has been a decrease of activity right from the start of the exploration phase even for the very early and necessary works before the actual drilling exploration works, such as, temporary works, without negative environmental impact as the acquisition of seismic data through geophysical prospecting.

The energy industry in Romania is feeling the profound transformations that new technologies bring to each sector. Changes in approach at state level is forcing updating the business models, just as realities on the ground – domination of the consumer / purchaser and the new market conditions – must be translated quickly into trade policies, competitive practices and regulatory framework. In this context, the Energy Strategy of Romania will be completed on September 15 and will include concerns of all stakeholders, stressed senior government officials attending the second edition of the Energy Strategy Summit, the last big public meeting between Romania energy companies, experts, analysts and decision makers from Government and regulating institutions.

Organized by Wing Media Energy Consulting, through energynomics.ro platform, on May 31 at Snagov Palace near Bucharest, Energy Strategy Summit 2016 brought together over 150 participants and, among the spakers, over 20 representatives of top companies and authorities with responsibilities in the energy industry.

Innovative towers are transforming skylines worldwide, shifting the focus from record breaking spires to imaginative solutions that embrace sustainability and economic conditions. The race to scrape the skies has taken a refreshing turn, and congratulations are in order for Bosco Verticale in Milan by Stefano Boeri Architetti, recipient of the 2015 Best Tall Building Worldwide. Four regional winners representing the America’s, Asia & Australasia, Europe, and Middle East & Africa were selected in July from a pool of 123 entries by The Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat (CTBUH). The not-for-profit organisation is the world's leading resource for skyscraper design, with a prestigious panel of expert judges. SOM scooped the regional prize for the America’s with the crystalline form of One World Trade Center in New York City. The environmentally conscious design for CapitaGreen by Toyo Ito & Associates in Singapore’s business district won the Asia & Australasia category, and the undulating façade of Burj Mohammed Bin Rashid Tower by Foster + Partners claimed the Middle East & Africa category.  Bosco Verticale, the European victor was announced as overall winner at the 14th annual CTBUH International Best Building Awards Symposium. Chicago, the birthplace of the skyscraper played host to the awards ceremony and dinner, celebrated on 12 November in Mies van der Rohe’s iconic S.R. Crown Hall, at the Illinois Institute of Technology. Bosco Verticale, which translates as ‘Vertical Forest,’ was considered ‘ground-breaking’ by the judges for the viability of incorporating a multi-storey intensive living façade. The two residential towers are screened by trees and vegetation, inspiring interaction with the surrounding environment, while creating a protective micro-climate. With not a spire in sight, this year's winner is living proof that vertical forests are not such a tall order after all.

Delegates from Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Czech Republic, Germany, Italy, Montenegro, Netherlands, Spain, Romania and the United Kingdom descended on Barcelona on the 26th of May for the 2nd edition of the Euromat Gaming Summit.  The international audience were treated to insights from some of Europe's leading operators as well as a panel discussion with regulators from Spain, Italy, Belgium and the European Commission. Commenting on the event, Eduardo Antoja, President of Euromat said: "My main conclusion from today's panel discussions is that land-based gaming continues to be the bigger segment of the gaming industry, representing almost 70% of players' expenditure. It will continue to be the first choice for many years provided that regulation keeps pace with technological, social and economic reality. Today Euromat confirmed that it's not just a great representative body for our industry, it's a think tank for our sector". Euromat confirmed that the next edition of the Euromat Gaming Summit will take place in Berlin, Germany in 2017.

Investing in “value” companies, those considered to be cheap according to various valuation measures, has historically been more lucrative than investing in “growth” companies, those on higher valuations thanks to their solid earnings potential.  Yet the period since the crisis has bucked the trend.  “Value investing has consistently and considerably outperformed over the last hundred years,” according to Thomas Becket, chief investment officer at Psigma Investment Management. “There have been periods of long underperformance, such as in the 1930s, 1980s and more recently since 2007, but ultimately the results of buying cheap, unloved shares has gone on to be very successful.”  The chart available, showing returns from value and growth companies since 1928, illustrates the point. By driving down the income from safe assets, such as cash and government bonds, the policy has made the shares of those companies that offer dependable returns very attractive.  Mr Becket said these companies have lost the “valuation anchor” provided by income from government debt, and investors have been willing to pay unsustainably high prices for them. In the current climate utilities, telecoms, healthcare and those companies producing consumer staples are considered “defensive”, while companies exposed to the ups and downs of economic growth, such as miners, banks, car manufacturers and airlines, are regarded as “cyclical” and are undervalued by investors.

China must act to sort out its private debt which anyone who has spent any significant time there knows is out of control and is a huge threat. This isn't something that could just cause some issues or even a recession, this can implode the entire nation.  Nobody knows just how bad it is, but some anecdotal evidence is shocking. I lived and worked there in the mid 2000's. None of the people I worked with had ever had access before to debt / credit. It just didn't exist. Then, all of a sudden, they had lots of it available. But no understanding of how to manage it. As a result, most of the people I knew had credit card debts with black banks many times their annual salary and when payments were due, would just get another card to make the payments with. They were not at all worried by this. Many now had 20+ credit cards.  It is the same with housing. Have a look at the average costs for buying an apartment in Beijing and you see, that by any other world standard, they should be totally out of reach to all but the very rich. But, there not. People instead are taking mortgages which they have zero hope of paying back. Now, slot in a slowing economy and people losing jobs. Not a good mix...Interesting points. However, from my experience in Beijing most people save obsessively, and put down hefty deposits on apartments, something like 30%. I believe you can't get anywhere near a 90% mortgage in China.  My old landlord (not rich) and his wife used to save scrupulously as private tour guides, they bought their two vehicles (needed for work) cash, and paid down a big deposit on an apartment on the outskirts of the city (cheaper) somewhere in the region of about £1-200,000. Not convenient as so far out, in the city centre it would be much more expensive. I think it tends to be the young and trendy with the credit cards, and their parents might help bail them out.