This rebound has occurred despite higher flight costs and longer journey times. With direct connections between Russia and the EU still suspended, travellers have adapted by routing through third countries such as Turkey, Serbia or the United Arab Emirates to reach Schengen destinations. Although these indirect routes are typically more expensive, low-cost airlines have adjusted to the rerouting and continue to offer relatively competitive fares, for example, on connections from Moscow to Paris via transit hubs like Istanbul.  At the same time, visa procedures have become costlier. Higher Schengen application fees meant Russian residents spent €48,527,520 on applications in 2024, of which €3,590,800 was effectively lost on rejected cases. Yet demand has remained resilient. Tourism representatives attribute this to improved economic conditions and rising disposable incomes, while industry insiders note that visa issuance stabilised in 2024, with many EU and associated countries still granting visas to Russian travellers.

Demand remains driven by sustained interest in classic European destinations, as reflected in booking data.  In early 2025, hotel reservations from Russia for the spring–summer season rose by around 33% year-on-year in Italy, 65% in Spain and 45% in France.  In 2024, Italy recorded the highest number of visa applications from Russian residents, followed by France, Spain, Greece and Hungary.  By contrast, EU states bordering Russia, including Finland and Poland, issued only limited numbers of visas, reflecting stricter security considerations.

The EU has steadily tightened visa rules for Russians as part of its security response.  In September 2022, the EU fully suspended its 2011 visa facilitation agreement with Russia.  This raised visa fees from €35 to €80 and introduced additional paperwork and longer processing times.  In the same period, the European Commission issued guidelines asking member-state consulates to “deprioritise non-essential travel” by Russians, meaning tourist and leisure visas are given very low priority. Consulates were told they could take up to 45 days, instead of 15, to decide on Russian visa applications and request additional documents for scrutiny.

On 7 November 2025, the Commission went further by issuing implementing rules to ban routine multiple-entry Schengen visas for Russian citizens.  Under the new rules, almost all Russian applicants must get only single-entry visas, forcing them to apply for each visit afresh.  Only a few “low risk” categories, such as close family of EU residents and professional transport workers, are exempt under certain conditions.  Notably, the Commission decision is officially advisory, and in practice, many EU embassies had already been issuing few multi-entry visas for Russians.  Industry experts argue the measure will have minimal impact on tourist flows, since consulates were already granting only one-time visas in most cases.

Most recently, in January 2026, the European Commission adopted a first-ever EU Visa Strategy, explicitly linking visa policy to security and foreign policy objectives.  The strategy proposes concrete measures to leverage visa policy to promote the EU’s strategic interests and bolster its security framework. This includes potential targeted restrictive visa measures to suspend, refuse, or restrict visa applications in response to hostile actions by third countries, such as Russia, that undermine EU security, as part of a future legislative proposal to revise the Visa Code.  In an increasingly volatile geopolitical environment, this would allow the EU to better respond to cases of hybrid attacks, information manipulation and interference, the politically motivated instrumentalisation of migrants, the weaponisation of migration, and open acts of aggression.  It would enhance the Union’s strategic autonomy and coherence, aligning visa policy more closely with the objectives of the EU’s common foreign and security policy.  In short, the strategy gives Brussels greater flexibility to tighten visa access for Russians at short notice, potentially making tourist flows more conditional and less predictable.

In conclusion, Russians have resumed seeking EU holidays when they can afford them, while the EU is tightening its visa system in response to security concerns. However, so far, the effect on tourist numbers seems limited.  The restriction on multi-entry visas is unlikely to affect tourist flows, as visa-issuing officials have issued virtually none for the past two years.  Observers note that most Russian tourists flying into Europe in 2024 did so with freshly issued short-term visas.   In short, demand rather than policy remains the main driver of travel.  Russian tourism to Europe is likely to persist, but under a tighter and more conditional visa regime increasingly shaped by geopolitics.

The post Russian tourism to Europe and the new EU Visa strategy first appeared on The Malta Business Weekly.

The ruling significantly raises the stakes for Malta’s gambling sector. It opens the door for hundreds of similar claims in Austria and Germany and reinforces the principle that local gambling laws, rather than Maltese law, will often govern disputes over player losses.  While the judgment does not directly address Malta’s legislative response to such claims, it adds pressure to an already contested legal framework.

The Malta Gaming Authority (MGA) is currently reviewing the implications of the case.  It described the decision as “definitely impactful” but “neither groundbreaking nor unexpected”, as Austrian courts have applied similar reasoning for years.  According to the MGA, while the judgment confirms that cross-border, non-contractual damages actions against directors are admissible under the Rome II Regulation, it does not eliminate legal defences.

One such defence is Malta’s Bill 55, formally Article 56A of the Gaming Act, enacted in June 2023. The provision instructs Maltese courts not to recognise or enforce foreign judgments that would undermine a Maltese gambling licence. The law was justified as a measure to protect Malta’s vital gaming industry from “potentially costly legal claims abroad”.  In practice, it has been invoked to argue that enforcing Austrian and German refund judgments would conflict with Malta’s public policy and its interpretation of EU internal market freedoms.  The MGA maintains that Article 56A merely reaffirms existing EU law principles, particularly the ordre public exception in the Brussels I Recast Regulation, and does not impose a blanket ban on enforcement.

Maltese courts have already relied on this reasoning to refuse enforcement of Austrian rulings. On the same day the CJEU delivered its Wunner judgment, Malta’s civil court rejected an Austrian order requiring Betway to repay more than €83,000 to an Austrian player.  The court found that recognising the judgment would violate Malta’s public policy by effectively penalising conduct that is lawful under Maltese law and permitted under EU internal market rules.  This, it said, met the high threshold required to invoke the public policy exception under the Brussels I Recast Regulation.

Notably, the court did not rely solely on Article 56A to justify its refusal.  Instead, it examined the broader legal context, reinforcing the reasoning behind the decision.  This suggests a deliberate effort to strengthen the legal foundations of Bill 55 in anticipation of further challenges.

These developments come as especially Austrian and German courts continue to see a surge in claims from players seeking to recover losses in Malta.  Against this backdrop, Malta’s legislative response has drawn the attention of the European Commission. On 18 June 2025, the Commission launched an infringement procedure (INFR(2025)2100) against Malta for failing to comply with Regulation (EU) 1215/2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments. Brussels argues that Bill 55 obliges Maltese courts to systematically refuse recognition of other EU judgments against local licence-holders, thereby shielding the online gaming sector from cross-border litigation.

The Commission warned that Malta is applying the public policy exception far beyond the “exceptional cases” envisaged under EU law, undermining mutual trust in the EU judicial system. The infringement procedure is now pending and could ultimately lead to a case before the CJEU.

Further pressure may come from a related development at EU level. In October 2025, Advocate General Emiliou delivered his opinion in Case C-198/24 (TQ v Mr Green Limited), focusing on the European Account Preservation Order (EAPO) Regulation.  While the case did not directly address the legality of Bill 55, the Advocate General suggested that EU consumers could use the EAPO mechanism to secure asset-freezing orders against Maltese firms that refuse to pay gambling-related debts.

Importantly, he indicated that national barriers to enforcement, such as Malta’s refusal to recognise foreign judgments under Article 56A, may be relevant when assessing the risk that a debtor could evade payment.  This could justify the freezing of assets held by Maltese gambling companies elsewhere in the EU, effectively allowing claimants to bypass Bill 55 by targeting non-Malta-based accounts.

Taken together, these developments suggest that the legal walls around Bill 55 may be closing in. While neither the Wunner ruling nor the Advocate General’s opinion constitutes a direct EU challenge to Malta’s law, both highlight the growing tension between Malta’s regulatory model and the EU’s cross-border justice framework. The European Commission’s infringement procedure will be decisive in determining whether Article 56A can withstand scrutiny or must be amended or repealed.

The post Walls closing in on Bill 55 first appeared on The Malta Business Weekly.

Affordability in Malta is also argued to be reflected in very high home‐ownership rates. For example, among Maltese households in which all members are under 35, approximately 91% owned or co-owned their home in 2023, up from approximately 81% in 2014. The Central Bank’s Household Finance survey confirms that, even in the lower-income quintiles, home ownership remains above 60%. This may reflect cultural norms, such as a strong preference for ownership, as well as policy support, such as favourable lending, grants, and tax rules. Malta has implemented several schemes to support first-time buyers, such as the notional equity method, and has allocated free government land to contractors such as Malita to build affordable units. In 2024, Malita secured a €22 million agreement with the European Investment Bank to expand social housing.

By contrast, larger markets in the EU, such as France and Germany, show different housing and affordability patterns. Malta’s homeownership rate vastly exceeds both France’s of approximately 61% and Germany’s of approximately 47%. Notably, Germany is unique in Europe for its majority-rental model, with 53% of Germans renting. Across the EU, residential property has become much less affordable since 2010. From 2010 to 2025, average sales prices in the EU jumped approximately 55%, and rents approximately 27%, far outpacing the 20% growth in incomes. While in Malta, housing remains more affordable than the EU average, markets such as Sweden, the Netherlands, and Ireland have price-to-income ratios well above 120. Thus, governments are responding on multiple fronts to try to sweeten the pill of buying or renting.

France faces tight markets, especially in big cities. The share of social and public housing in France is among the highest in Europe, accounting for approximately 17% of all dwellings, owing to an extensive public housing sector and longstanding subsidies. France has implemented income-based aids and interest-free loans for first-time buyers in high-demand areas, alongside tax breaks for rental investment and purchases. Rents in tight zones are partially regulated through a rent-cap mechanism. Yet despite extensive social housing and subsidies, including rental and homebuyer assistance, urban rents continue to rise faster than incomes in many areas. In 2024, France’s price-to-income ratio of 107 indicates modest pressure. Critics note that steadily rising construction costs, long planning delays, and recent cuts in some subsidies continue to strain affordability in France.

Germany’s recent price boom has begun to strain households despite stringent rent laws, pushing more young people towards renting or co-living. As a predominantly renter nation, Germany has strong tenant protections and rent controls in place, which have historically kept living costs in check. Nationwide, the federal government has promised new tax incentives to spur construction of rental housing from 2024. However, challenges remain, as cities like Berlin, experimented with strict rent caps, though courts nullified the local law, highlighting legal limits of top-down controls. Germany generally follows a policy that combines social housing investment with welfare support for low-income tenants, rather than the homeowner-focused tools seen in Malta. A previous “Baukindergeld” subsidy for families with children to boost homebuying was allowed to lapse in 2021, and no direct equivalent has been reintroduced.

Overall, affordability pressures are broad in Europe. The contrast with France and Germany illustrates how different institutional legacies, including rental norms and welfare systems, shape both housing outcomes and the tools chosen to address them. Despite divergent approaches, the persistent challenge of demand driven by population growth, urbanisation, or tourism continues to outpace new construction. The current situation suggests that states must further subsidise new builds, as without such support, first-time buyers face difficulties maintaining social lives due to high rents, loan repayments, and rising living costs. As Europe debates an “Affordable Housing Plan” for 2026, it remains clear that no single solution fits all contexts. In Malta’s case, strong incomes and deeply entrenched homeownership have so far softened the impact of rising prices. However, policy must remain vigilant as lower incomes or higher interest rates would quickly render the market unaffordable.

Dr Lina Klesper is an international legal assistant at PKF Malta

The post An island of stability in Europe’s affordable housing crisis first appeared on The Malta Business Weekly.

Tourism has been a star performer, fuelling jobs and investment across the economy. In 2024, Portugal hosted 31.6 million visitors, of whom about 19.4 million were international visitors. International visitor-spending jumped to €31.8 billion, marking an all-time high and exceeding pre-pandemic levels. In 2025, the sector is forecast to account for 21.5% of GDP and support 1.2 million jobs, representing nearly 25% of total employment. There is also strong optimism for 2026, with forecasts pointing to a 12% increase in visitors and tourism revenues.

Portugal’s tech and startup scene is thriving as a new growth engine for the country. More than 5,000 startups now operate nationwide, marking an 8% increase in 2025. They raised roughly €886 million in venture funding in 2024, about 55% more than in 2023. These were often large financing rounds, for example, a domestic EV-charging firm raised approximately €100 million. More than half of these startups generate significant revenue abroad, giving the sector an export orientation. Collectively, they contribute around 1% of GDP and employ about 28,000 people with salaries typically well above the national average. For Portugal, this underscores a shift toward a high-value economy. The government’s support for startup visas, tax incentives, and near-universal high-speed internet has helped power this innovation boom.

Moreover, international companies are taking notice. In global surveys, Portugal ranks among Europe’s most attractive countries for new investment projects. In 2024, Portugal attracted roughly €13.2 billion in foreign direct investment, marking about 19% more than in 2023. High-profile projects include US semiconductor packager Amkor expanding its Portuguese plant, auto-supplier Bosch boosting its output, and a Renault-Geely partnership building a new engine factory to produce electric motors for hybrid vehicles. These deals are expected to create over 1,000 skilled jobs. Portugal has also gained international confidence, with its credit rating upgraded to “A” by Fitch and Moody’s, marking the first time in over a decade that the two main agencies have placed Portugal on the “A” scale.

Green energy and infrastructure build-out are high on Portugal’s agenda to reinforce growth in the short- and long-term. In 2024, staggering 71% of its electricity came from renewables such as wind, solar and hydro. The government has set one of Europe’s most ambitious renewable energy targets, aiming for 93% by 2030. Major projects are underway, such as Portugal’s largest onshore wind farm, the 274 MW Tâmega wind complex being constructed by Iberdrola, and a 100 MW green-hydrogen electrolyser, with installations completed at Sines refinery in January. On the transport side, a €2.4 billion tender was relaunched in early 2026 for a key section of the Porto-Lisbon high-speed rail line, which will cut travel times and ease congestion. Upgrades to ports, especially Sines, and highways are also in progress, improving logistics nationwide.

Portugal’s manufacturing and agri-exporters are also gaining momentum. Exports of goods grew in 2023-2024, driven by industry diversification and are expected to increase by 5.1% in nominal terms in 2026, after sluggish growth in 2025. Leading sectors such as cars, auto parts, and machinery have increased shipments to near-shoring EU markets, and traditional exports are at new highs. For example, Portugal’s footwear industry, a major export, saw shipments rise in early 2025 despite global competition. Wine, olive oil and tech exports remain strong in established markets, including Germany, France, and the US, and are gaining ground in emerging ones. This export momentum, together with booming tourism, provides Portugal with a strong foundation for growth.

Behind these trends lie prudent policies. Portugal has run small fiscal surpluses since 2023 and cut its debt ratio from over 130% of GDP during the pandemic to around 90% today. Prudent budgets and low inflation have kept borrowing costs down. Recent measures aim to sustain momentum, such as the 2025 budget, which introduced a decade-long tax break for young professionals, including a 100% income tax exemption in their first year, to curb emigration. Other reforms, such as R&D tax credits, startup visas, and streamlined regulations, further aim to improve Portugal’s business environment.

Portugal’s growth is expected to be about 2.3% in 2026, well above the eurozone average, amid low inflation and rising household incomes. One analysis even ranked Portugal as the world’s top-performing advanced economy in 2025. However, clear challenges remain, including ensuring a sufficient housing supply to meet tourist and expat demand and efficiently deploying EU recovery funds. But the overall trajectory is clear – with diversified growth and consistent policy, Portugal has emerged as a southern European success story.

Dr Lina Klesper is an international legal assistant at PKF Malta

The post Portugal’s economic resurrection first appeared on The Malta Business Weekly.

It appears that the economy has been severely affected by intense competition from China, as industries that were traditionally ‘Made in Germany’, such as cars, robots, and high-quality household appliances, are increasingly being taken over by Chinese firms. Due to $230 billion in Chinese government subsidies for its car industry, China has claimed the tightly held title of the largest car exporter, with Germany only in fourth place, behind Japan and Mexico.

Since last year, German companies have also been burdened by US tariffs. Declining exports, especially to the USA, and a sluggish economy are prompting worries about structural decline, especially as industrial production has declined for the fourth year in a row, leaving many small and medium-sized enterprises disappointed and frustrated.

Germany is also losing momentum in climate protection, as greenhouse gas emissions fell less sharply in 2025 than in previous years despite the expansion of solar energy. CO2 emissions particularly increased in transport and buildings. A warning sign is that Germany’s economic downturn in energy-intensive industries led to lower CO2 emissions. This raises concerns as these are not sustainable, structural reductions in emissions. For the German economy, there is an urgent need for investment in modernisation and climate-neutral production.

The German economy is not picking up momentum, and the profound changes in industry continue to affect the labour market. The number of unemployed has been rising steadily for over three years, reaching 6.2 per cent in December. The latest figures show no sign of improvement at the beginning of the year. Last year, job cuts mainly affected those employed in traditional industrial sectors, particularly the automotive industry, with major car brands and their suppliers’ cutting jobs, resulting in around 140,000 job losses in the industry. Hopes are now high that investment programmes in infrastructure and defence will create jobs in industry and construction in 2026.

In 2025, the number of insolvent companies in Germany reached its highest level in more than ten years. Over the course of the year, 23,900 companies filed for insolvency, with micro-enterprises accounting for the largest share of corporate insolvencies. Heavy indebtedness, difficulties in obtaining new loans and structural burdens such as energy prices and regulation are especially putting small and medium-sized enterprises under enormous pressure. Concerns remain that the ongoing economic downturn, high costs, and bureaucracy will continue to drive insolvencies.

Despite these challenges, start-ups seem to boom in the shadow of the crisis. Last year, more start-ups were founded in Germany than ever before, marking a record 3,568 new start-ups in 2025. The number of start-ups was 29 per cent higher than in the previous year, and the trend is expected to continue in the current year. With more than a quarter of the start-ups founded using AI as an important part of their business model, AI is considered the key driver of this unprecedented start-up boom. For Germany, this offers a glimmer of hope for its reputation as an attractive business location for entrepreneurs and companies of the future.

Overall, it seems that the German business model, which is based on a strong industry and its exports, is currently facing increasing pressure, particularly due to US tariffs and Chinese competition. Chancellor Merz is preparing the coalition for a difficult year in 2026. He warns that the economic situation must be given top priority, acknowledging that it is very critical in some sectors. Solving the problem of high labour and energy costs, as well as bureaucratic and tax burdens, is on the agenda, with the aim of strengthening trust in politics and social cohesion.

However, the ruling parties remain divided on fiscal policy. While the CDU/CSU could envisage faster tax cuts for companies than stated in the coalition agreement, the SPD is sceptical. Social Democrats argue that flat-rate tax reductions do little to stimulate the economy and instead resemble a scattergun approach to subsidies, favouring targeted measures, such as higher inheritance taxes.

Time will tell whether Chancellor Merz’s political and economic agenda will deliver a turnaround this year. With five state elections scheduled for 2026, Germany’s political balance could shift significantly, as polls show the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) gaining ground while governing parties lose support. What is already clear, however, is that renewed growth is likely to come at a cost: higher public debt through government investment, alongside an economically liberal reform course that prioritises competitiveness while placing pressure on the welfare state.

The post Watch Germany’s fragile economy first appeared on The Malta Business Weekly.

This new 15% corporate tax for large groups has quickly made headlines, as it mirrors the OECD’s Pillar Two global minimum tax rules, which require multinationals with more than €750 million in revenues to pay an effective tax rate (ETR) of at least 15% in each jurisdiction. Pillar Two establishes that if a country’s local tax is below 15%, excess profits must be “topped up” first by a domestic top-up tax (the so‑called Qualified Domestic Minimum Top‑Up Tax, or QDMTT), then by the parent country under an Income Inclusion Rule (IIR), and finally by other group members under an Under‑Taxed Profits Rule (UTPR).

Malta is bound by the EU’s Pillar Two Directive (2022/2523) but had originally postponed implementation. A legal notice (LN 32/2024) transposed the Directive in February 2024, but the government opted for the EU’s six-year derogation, as Malta has fewer than 12 in-scope multinational parent entities. In practical terms, Malta delayed adoption until at least 2029. As a result, until now, Maltese subsidiaries in very large groups (with consolidated revenues of more than €750m) paid only Malta’s usual corporate tax, which is often as little as 5% effective after generous refunds, and any shortfall to 15% would have been collected by the parent’s country of residence.

Officially, the government calls the new tax a domestic simplification measure. The Prime Minister’s office clarified that it is separate from the EU’s global minimum tax directive and is not formally a QDMTT under Pillar Two. Instead, the stated goal is to simplify the full‑imputation system of refunds and reduce administrative burdens. The government assures that revenue will remain stable or increase despite changing the refund system. In practice, by effectively converting the refund formula for these large companies, Malta ensures these firms pay at least 15% locally.

Abela noted that there are only around 10 such companies in Malta that fall under the new rule, which constitutes a small pool. However, the change is expected to generate new and substantial income. The Cabinet chose this route so that the extra 10% tax (to reach 15%) stays in Malta, rather than being collected abroad by the parent country. To observers, this appears to effectively reverse the earlier pledge to delay Pillar Two by postponing the implementation of the EU directive.

While the government denies that the new measure is introducing the global minimum 15% corporate tax and thus reversing its decision to defer implementation, Malta is set to collect substantial new revenue. The country is heavily reliant on revenue from a few large taxpayers, which could make this shift significant. About 80% of Malta’s corporate tax comes from large multinationals and high-net-worth individuals. Taxing those approximately 10 in‑scope firms at 15% can be expected to raise tens of millions extra. The government has remarked that the increased tax revenue can be reinvested in Malta´s social programmes and infrastructure.

Taking a broader perspective, the 15% global minimum corporate tax under Pillar Two, though intended to curb the “race to the bottom” and recover lost revenues, has faced strong criticism for being blunt and uneven.  Especially Small Island states and countries labelled tax havens fear the loss of their competitive edge, warning they must now rely on infrastructure or skills rather than tax incentives. More generally, critics argue that the 15% threshold is too low to tackle aggressive tax planning, adds complexity, and entrenches existing privileges, which could risk entrenching global disparities rather than resolving them. In this context, many states, particularly developing economies, have called for a fairer UN-led framework such as the UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation, which is currently being negotiated.

All in all, Malta’s decision to charge 15% on its largest multinational subsidiaries seems to be a pragmatic response to the shifting global tax landscape. It ensures that Malta keeps tax revenue that otherwise might flow abroad, potentially boosting the budget from a handful of big payers. Yet it also signals Malta’s diminishing role as an ultra-low-tax refuge, aligning the island with EU norms and more generally with international standards on corporate taxation. Malta’s experience ostensibly shifting from deferral to adoption highlights how even small states must navigate these new rules carefully, weighing revenue gains against concerns about investment and fairness in the global tax order. Local firms and investors will be watching how Malta´s October Budget will reflect this change, especially also with regard to speculated corporate tax relief for SMEs.

The post Malta’s shift to a 15% minimum tax first appeared on The Malta Business Weekly.

Between the 15th and 18th centuries, Malta was on the frontline of Mediterranean corsair warfare, both defending against Ottoman pirates and sending its own privateers to capture Ottoman merchant ships. Thus, Malta’s story is heavily entwined with the “golden age” of corsairing.  Pirates and corsairs operating under nominal Ottoman suzerainty regularly struck at Maltese coasts.  Indeed, in 1551, famed corsair Turgut Reis enslaved the entire population of Gozo (5,000–6,000 people) and shipped them to Ottoman Tripolitania.

Against this backdrop, the Knights of St John, who ruled Malta from 1530 to 1798, became Mediterranean privateers.  The Order issued letters of marque so that its galleys and knight-owned ships could legally attack Muslim and Ottoman shipping.   It is worth noting that at the time, the Knights styled themselves “corsairs” or privateers rather than mere pirates, with attacks justified as part of Christendom’s perpetual war with Islam.

Corsairing formed a pivotal part of the Maltese Islands’ economy during this time. Each year, the Knights dispatched two large caravans of galleys to hunt down Ottoman merchantmen, targeting the convoys between Alexandria and Istanbul, which was the superhighway of Eastern Mediterranean trade. Contemporary records show that between 1654 and 1694, Maltese corsairs captured 338 prize ships (about eight per year on average) laden with grain, textiles, spices and other goods. The Knights of Malta are said to have had a near 100% success rate, and according to one historian, were the only force on the high seas that Muslim ships feared. Over centuries, the spoils of these raids swelled the Order’s wealth and staffed its galleys with galley slaves. In fact, by the early 17th century, thousands of slaves were kept in Malta to power the oars.

To guard against enemy raids, the Knights built a chain of six watchtowers along Malta’s shores. St Thomas Tower in Marsaskala, completed in 1614, is the largest of the six bastioned towers. The tower had a clear view of St Thomas Bay and Marsascala Creek, which were known landing spots for corsairs. For hundreds of years, Maltese fishing hamlets and farmhouses, including inland settlements like Żejtun, lived in fear of sudden Ottoman landings, so these defences were vital.

Today, Malta is leveraging its dramatic past for cultural tourism. Malta’s first dedicated pirate and corsair museum, housed in the restored St Thomas Tower, tells the stories of Malta´s turbulent history via interactive exhibits, immersive displays and rare artefacts. The tower’s role itself is also on display, including the retaking of the tower by the Maltese Militia during the French blockade of 1798. Since its inauguration in August, modern visitors can see how this monument, long derelict and once even a pizzeria, has been given new life through EU funds and clever reuse.

Seen from a broader perspective, the transformation of St Thomas Tower into an immersive museum demonstrates how Malta is turning its history into an asset. The project is part of a broader strategy to diversify the island’s tourism beyond the traditional “sun-and-sea” model, positioning cultural heritage at the centre of long-term sustainability. By restoring the 17th-century fort into a high-quality attraction, the government is not only preserving history but also creating new economic opportunities for the local community. The state-of-the-art museum is the result of an extensive conservation effort, which included accessibility upgrades and eco-friendly installations such as rainwater harvesting reservoirs, LED lighting, and smart climate control systems, showing that heritage preservation and environmental responsibility can go hand in hand. As Tourism Minister Ian Borg stressed, the tower’s revival provides “another unique year-round experience… supporting local economic development, as well as the continued diversification of our tourism product… towards long-term resilience.”

In summary, the clash of pirates and corsairs is no longer just a chapter in history books for Malta but a live exhibit in Marsaskala. By celebrating this legacy through the new museum, Malta both honours its past and boosts its tourist appeal. In blending heritage with hospitality, Malta demonstrates not only an ability to preserve its unique identity but also a talent for turning challenges into opportunities. Just as the island once stood firm against relentless raids from the Mediterranean, it now navigates the currents of global tourism with the same spirit of adaptability and resilience.

Dr Lina Klesper is International Legal Assistant at PKF Malta

The post From corsairs to cultural tourism: Malta’s new corsair and piracy museum first appeared on The Malta Business Weekly.

Yet many national grids are already stretched thin. Additionally, the clean energy transition is electrifying transport, heating, and other sectors, tightening supply further.  The result is a worsening global power crunch that is forcing tech giants to rethink how and where they source energy.

A recent Economist article reports that Big Tech is deploying a mix of strategies to cope with AI’s exploding energy needs.  This includes shifting data centres to new geographies as prime locations hit capacity, leasing from “neo cloud” providers that repurpose facilities such as old crypto mines, striking long-term deals for renewable and hydro power, and increasingly building on-site generation to reduce grid dependence. Companies are also experimenting with grid-flexibility agreements while using batteries or backup generators to ease peak loads, in exchange for faster grid access, while also looking abroad to energy-rich regions like the Gulf states and Spain.  Alongside these moves, hyperscalers are investing in cutting-edge sources from geothermal to hydrogen fuel cells.  Moreover, companies are considering relocating to cooler or remote areas like the Nordics or even underwater to reduce cooling needs and spread demand, as Microsoft has tested in Project Natick.

Massive renewable investments are also already underway. Microsoft, Google, and Amazon have committed to matching their energy use with clean sources like solar and wind.  Google, for instance, has announced multiple power purchase agreements (PPAs) across North America and Europe to ensure 24/7 carbon-free electricity.  However, despite great green energy efforts, the pace of energy demand from AI and cloud computing is outstripping the rollout of new renewable capacity.

This is where the conversation turns to nuclear energy, which seems to be one of the most closely watched bets of Big Tech.  After decades of controversy, nuclear power is once again being viewed as a serious, scalable option with the potential for a full-blown comeback.  While it has long divided public opinion, plagued by safety concerns, high capital costs, and lengthy construction timelines, especially in regions like Europe, recent technological advances are shifting the narrative. A new wave of Generation IV nuclear reactors, featuring smaller, safer, and more flexible designs, promises lower waste, passive safety systems, and better integration with modern energy grids.  These small modular reactors (SMRs) are now catching the eye of technology giants seeking reliable, low-carbon baseload power to fuel their data-hungry operations.

Among the early movers, Google has struck a deal with Kairos Power, a startup developing SMRs, to supply nuclear power from 2030. Amazon has invested in X-energy, another SMR startup, and previously sought to partner with Talen Energy to develop a nuclear-powered data centre, which regulators, however, ultimately blocked over concerns about local electricity bills.  Microsoft has signed agreements to restart dormant nuclear plants, while Meta has committed to long-term nuclear supply contracts, signalling a broader industry shift toward atomic energy as a reliable, low-carbon power source.

Thus, it also does not come as a surprise that U.S. President Donald Trump’s recently published “AI Action Plan” places nuclear energy squarely at the heart of the country´s strategy to meet the surging electricity demands of AI.  Framing the U.S. power grid as both the lifeblood of the modern economy and a pillar of national security, the plan calls for preventing the premature closure of existing generation facilities and prioritising the rapid interconnection of “reliable, dispatchable power sources”, explicitly naming advanced nuclear fission and even nuclear fusion alongside enhanced geothermal.  This signals a political push not only to preserve legacy nuclear capacity but to accelerate deployment of next-generation designs, aligning with Big Tech’s interest in Generation IV reactors and SMRs as low-carbon, high-output solutions.

However, while Generation IV nuclear is technically promising, it is not yet scalable in the short term as SMRs are unlikely to make a meaningful dent before the mid-2030s at best.  The success of nuclear ventures ultimately depends on whether governments can accelerate demonstration projects, secure fuel supply chains, and streamline regulation without compromising safety.

To conclude, the moves of Big Tech and the U.S. approach reflect a broader recognition that nuclear, which has long been sidelined in energy debates, may be essential to securing the stable, large-scale power supply that the AI era demands.  Time will tell whether technologies and innovations can scale in step with demand, or whether the AI revolution will stall under its own energy weight.

Dr Lina Klesper is an International Legal Assistant at PKF Malta

The post Big tech’s energy crunch: Is nuclear energy making a comeback? first appeared on The Malta Business Weekly.

Last year was the hottest ever recorded. Climate-fuelled disasters, like the Valencia floods and the Los Angeles wildfires, are becoming more frequent and severe.  In the EU, the agricultural sector is particularly facing climate change challenges, with losses projected to reach €40 billion per year by 2050.  A recent report by the European Commission and the European Investment Bank (EIB), titled Insurance and Risk Management Tools for Agriculture in the EU, reveals that extreme weather events cause an estimated €28 billion in average yearly losses to the EU agricultural sector, with farmers shouldering approximately 70–80% of the damages.  As only 20-30% of losses are insured, the report calls for closing that insurance protection gap by scaling up financial mechanisms, including cat bonds. In this context, the role of parametric insurance in supporting EU agricultural resilience is particularly in focus.

In contrast to indemnity cat bonds, which are paid out based on actual losses incurred by the insurer or reinsurer, parametric bonds pay out based on predefined, measurable parameters, such as wind speed during a hurricane, the magnitude of an earthquake, rainfall levels, or drought levels, and do not require proof of actual loss. This enables fast disbursement and is particularly suitable in regions with limited insurance infrastructure or slow claims processing.

While cat bonds offer a vital financial safety net, they are inherently reactive tools that help communities and insurers recover after disasters; however, they do not prevent those disasters from occurring in the first place. This reveals a critical gap: Cat bonds are effective in managing risk, but they fall short of driving real climate preparedness or adaptation on their own. Critics warn that an overreliance on financial risk transfer, like cat bonds, could lead to complacency. If insurers and governments feel shielded from financial losses, they may be less incentivised to invest in mitigation or adaptation strategies such as emissions reductions, resilient infrastructure, or early warning systems.  In this light, cat bonds could unintentionally reinforce the status quo rather than encourage forward-looking climate action.

To prevent this, we must rethink how we talk about disasters themselves. There is no such thing as a “natural disaster”, only natural hazards.  Whether a hazard becomes a disaster depends on human decisions: how exposed, vulnerable, or resilient a community is.  As the UN Human Rights Council has affirmed, disasters result from a failure to reduce vulnerability and enhance resilience.  This framing shifts the conversation from response to responsibility, underlining the urgent need for proactive investment in risk reduction and adaptation.

Globally, there is a $360 billion annual gap in financing for climate adaptation, which undermines the ability of countries and communities, especially in vulnerable regions, to prepare for the future. Cat bonds, if properly designed, can help fill this gap.

One example is parametric cat bonds linked to climate adaptation goals or green rebuilding, which are innovative instruments that could be structured so that payouts are not only triggered by extreme weather conditions but are also tied to how the funds are used, for example, rebuilding infrastructure to be more resilient, restoring ecosystems, or supporting rapid disaster response. Because parametric bonds disburse funds quickly, they can enable governments or communities to “build back better” in real time, accelerating recovery while fostering long-term resilience.

In the EU, for instance, where agriculture is both economically vital and acutely exposed to climate volatility, such innovative financial instruments can be vital for safeguarding livelihoods and food security. Imagine a parametric cat bond for agriculture in Southern Europe.  If soil moisture levels fall below a set threshold for more than 30 days during the growing season, the bond could trigger an immediate payout.  Those funds wouldn’t just rebuild damaged crops, but they could also support the rollout of water-saving irrigation systems, the distribution of drought-resilient seeds, and training for regenerative farming techniques.  In this way, the bond becomes a tool not just for recovery, but for adaptation.

As climate shocks grow more frequent and severe, cat bonds must evolve beyond risk transfer to actively reduce vulnerability.  In the EU agricultural sector, particularly, these instruments can play a vital role in strengthening resilience.  When designed to support rapid recovery and incentivise long-term adaptation, such as resilient infrastructure or sustainable farming practices, cat bonds become more than a financial buffer; they become tools for building a more prepared, adaptive, and climate-resilient future.

The post Catastrophe bonds: Financial relief and a (missed) opportunity for climate adaptation first appeared on The Malta Business Weekly.

Launched in 2014 and amended in 2020, Malta’s Individual Investor Programme (IIP) allowed foreign nationals to acquire citizenship in exchange for a substantial financial contribution, starting at €600,000, alongside real estate investment, a donation to a local NGO, and a minimum one-year residency period without however continuous or substantive physical presence in Malta. In practice, critics argued the programme offered fast-track citizenship with minimal physical or cultural ties to Malta. The scheme was viewed not only as legally problematic but also as ethically questionable and a potential security risk. While similar schemes once existed in Cyprus and Bulgaria, Malta became the last EU member state to continue selling direct access to EU citizenship.  Cyprus abolished its scheme in 2020 following allegations of abuse, while Bulgaria discontinued its programme in 2022 after facing sustained criticism from the European Commission. Against this backdrop, the European Commission intensified its scrutiny and initiated legal action against Malta in 2022.  Now, the CJEU ultimately ruled that Malta’s golden passport scheme violated EU law. The court found that selling citizenship as a commercial transaction undermines the principle of sincere cooperation between member states and erodes the mutual trust underpinning EU citizenship, a status meant to reflect genuine integration, not economic privilege.

As an immediate reaction, Malta´s government is moving to bring its citizenship law in line with the judgment.  Only two months after the ruling, a bill was presented in Parliament for its first reading, marking the first step in the process towards compliance with the CJEU judgement.  The details of the proposed amendments have not yet been disclosed, leaving it unclear whether the scheme will be abolished entirely or revised to align with the principles outlined in the judgment. Key reforms that can be expected include stronger residence requirements and “genuine link” prerequisites, more rigorous due‑diligence and vetting, as well as safeguards to prevent purely transactional acquisitions.

Moreover, no retroactive revocation is to be expected, meaning that Individuals who secured passports before the judgment remain citizens of Malta and the EU, though their status may face heightened scrutiny.  Additionally, citizenship applications submitted before the ruling may still be processed under the previous framework.  As the Maltese government reviews the legal implications of the ruling, it is hoped that the release of more details soon will provide greater legal certainty.

With golden passports now effectively off the table for Malta, this development also marks the end of cash-for-citizenship schemes in the EU.  As a result, predictions suggest that wealthy applicants will now turn to golden visa programmes or other non-EU options, such as the U.S. EB-5 or Caribbean schemes.  For Malta, this could translate into a boost in demand for its residency-by-investment golden visa scheme, the Malta Permanent Residence Programme (MPRP).

The MPRP grants permanent residency in Malta to third-country nationals in exchange for a combination of government contributions, property investment or rental, and proof of sufficient financial resources.  While it does not offer citizenship, it allows successful applicants and their families to live in Malta indefinitely and enjoy visa-free travel across the Schengen Area for up to 90 days within any 180-day period. Importantly, the programme does not require physical residence or integration in Malta, making it particularly attractive to high-net-worth individuals seeking flexibility and EU access without relocation.  The scheme has drawn strong interest from nationals of China, Turkey, the Middle East and South Africa, many of whom are seeking a stable legal foothold in Europe for lifestyle, education, or strategic mobility purposes.

However, as the golden passport case also raised questions about the legality of similar investment-based residency schemes across the EU, it is expected that increased pressure and scrutiny could now be placed on golden visa schemes, reflecting the shifting EU policy landscape in general. In 2022, the European Parliament called for a phasing out of all golden visa and passport schemes. Portugal, Ireland, the Netherlands, and other countries have already suspended or revised their Golden Visa schemes.  Thus, Malta’s MPRP may soon attract greater regulatory scrutiny, especially if it becomes a de facto backdoor to EU access.

As Malta turns the page on its golden passport era, the country and the EU at large face a pivotal moment in defining the value and integrity of citizenship and residency.  While the MPRP may benefit from increased interest in the short term, its long-term viability could depend on how well it withstands both legal and political scrutiny.

The post Golden Visas rising as Golden Passports fall? first appeared on The Malta Business Weekly.