Understanding Local Regulations

Over the last year, nearly every FMCG executive I’ve spoken to whether sitting in Chicago, Paris, or São Paulo has echoed the same challenge: “We need to get closer to the consumer, faster.” Global brand, local nuance the future of FMCG growth depends on how well your leadership understands the street, not just the spreadsheet. It’s no longer enough to run a global playbook and hope for local resonance. Why? Because the center of gravity in FMCG has shifted. 84% of FMCG companies are now increasing local decision autonomy in key growth markets. (Bain FMCG Operating Model Report, 2023) → That means your CMO can’t be the only one with a finger on the pulse. → Your regional GM can’t just execute HQ strategy. → And your global leaders can’t lead with assumptions they need cultural fluency and operational humility. In other words: local-for-local is not just a supply chain shift. It’s a leadership shift. The most successful candidates weren’t those who had rotated through five global hubs. They were the ones who could… → Read the cultural nuances of consumer behavior in that specific region → Navigate the regulatory quirks that could derail a product launch → Influence global teams while building trust with local retailers → Speak the language literally and commercially They understood the street not just the spreadsheet. And they had the rare ability to connect what’s happening on the ground with what needs to be shifted at the center. These are the leaders FMCG needs now. → Strategists who don’t just adapt to the market, they anticipate it. → Operators who don’t wait for HQ they build and test in-market. → Connectors who know when to push back and when to align. Because in today’s world, speed and relevance win. And that doesn’t come from waiting for global sign-off. It comes from empowering the right local leaders. Here’s where I see many companies trip up: They treat “local” as junior. As operational. As reactive. The truth? Your next competitive edge may be a GM in Manila, a Marketing Director in Lagos, or a Commercial Lead in Warsaw who’s trusted enough to build strategy from the ground up. That’s what global FMCG companies are starting to understand and what we’re helping them solve for in every executive search we run. Not just global leaders who can work across regions…but local leaders who can lead across functions, cultures, and expectations while driving growth with urgency and empathy. This is the new face of global FMCG. Not centralized, but coordinated. Not rigid, but responsive. Not top-down, but built from the middle out. #ExecutiveSearch #FMCGLeadership #GlobalGrowth #ConsumerGoods #TalentStrategy #LeadershipHiring

Buying Land in Maharashtra? Your Legal Due Diligence Checklist Whether you're a developer, investor, or homebuyer, purchasing land in Maharashtra involves more than a title check. Local laws, tribal protections, environmental clearances, and special authority regulations all play a crucial role. Here’s your broad legal checklist, tailored for land deals in Maharashtra: ✅ 1. Title & Ownership Verification • Verify 30–60 years of chain of title: sale deeds, partition, wills, court orders. • Check 7/12 Extract (Satbara Utara). • Confirm mutation records (Ferfar) for updated ownership. • Obtain a Search Report from a local advocate. • Check for mortgages or litigation history. 🗺️ 2. Zoning & Land Use • Check land zoning via Development Plan (DP) or Regional Plan (RP). • Land could be residential, commercial, industrial, CRZ, green zone, or forest. • Agricultural land can only be bought by agriculturists (Sec 63 of the Tenancy Act). • Obtain NA Order if change of land use is intended. 🧾 3. Revenue & Tax Compliance • Confirm payment of property tax, non-agricultural tax, and ensure no revenue dues. • Identify land classification: Occupant Class I or II, etc. • Check for tenancies, encroachments, and pending mutation. 📏 4. Land Ceiling & ULC Compliance • Confirm exemption or clearance under the repealed Urban Land Ceiling Act. • For rural holdings, check compliance under Maharashtra Agricultural Land Ceiling Act. ⚠️ 5. Reservation & Acquisition Risk • Check if the land is reserved in the DP (for roads, gardens, schools, etc.). • Verify if any acquisition notices or lapses exist under the MRTP Act. • Ensure it’s not falling under any infrastructure corridor or planning realignment. 🏛️ 6. Tribal & Scheduled Area Restrictions If the land is in a Scheduled Area, the Panchayats (Extension to the Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996 applies. • Gram Sabha consent is mandatory. • Land belonging to Scheduled Tribes cannot be sold to non-tribals without permission. 🌿 7. Environmental & CRZ Compliance • For coastal, forest, or ecologically sensitive areas, check: • CRZ rules, Forest NOC, and Environmental Clearance. • If near national parks or hills, confirm with MoEFCC norms. 🧱 8. Special Authorities & Maharashtra-Specific Nuances • CIDCO, MIDC, MHADA, PMRDA plots need specific permissions and policies. • For MMRDA or airport zones, verify planning overlays and AAI clearances. • Industrial lands may need zoning confirmation, effluent NOC, and conversion approvals. Land Has a History—Read It Before You Own It: Due diligence in Maharashtra goes beyond paper—walk the land, speak to neighbors, visit the Talathi and cross-check maps. What appears clean on record may still hide informal possession disputes or issues. Following a checklist could save you years of litigation or loss. #MaharashtraLandLaw #LegalDueDiligence #TitleVerification #RealEstateLaw #LandAcquisition #PlanningCompliance #EnvironmentalClearance #PropertyLawIndia

How do consumers pay in Latin America? Here's a breakdown of the latest 2024 stats: 1️⃣ 𝗖𝗿𝗲𝗱𝗶𝘁 𝗖𝗮𝗿𝗱𝘀: The king of digital payments, processing a massive USD 𝟮𝟲𝟲𝗕 in 2024 🤯 Visa, Mastercard, and American Express lead the charge across all markets, showing their continued dominance. But don't overlook regional powerhouses like Brazil's Cartão Elo and Hipercard Administradora de Cartões de Crédito Ltda. and Argentina's Cabal Argentina making significant inroads in their local markets. 2️⃣ 𝗣𝗜𝗫 by Banco Central do Brasil: The Brazilian payment revolution that's processing USD 𝟭𝟯𝟵𝗕 ❗️ This instant payment system has become so embedded in Brazilian daily life that it's not just a payment method anymore – it's a way of life. With over a billion transactions per month, PIX has transformed how Brazilians move money, proving that when convenience meets innovation, magic happens. 3️⃣ 𝗗𝗲𝗯𝗶𝘁 𝗖𝗮𝗿𝗱𝘀: A USD 𝟳𝟬𝗕 force in the region, with Visa and Mastercard leading the way. This reflects Latin America's perfect balance between digital convenience and direct bank account control. Watch how Chile's RedCompra by Transbank is enhancing these capabilities with local features tailored to their market's unique needs. 4️⃣ 𝗗𝗶𝗴𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗹 𝗪𝗮𝗹𝗹𝗲𝘁𝘀: Surging to USD 𝟲𝟯𝗕, we're seeing an explosion of innovation. Mercado Pago continues its regional dominance, while Nubank revolutionizes Brazil with over 90 million customers across the region. Country champions like Mexico's baz súperapp and Spin, Colombia's Nequi and Daviplata by Banco Davivienda, Argentina's MODO, Ualá and Naranja X, and Peru's Yape and Plin by Grupo Intercorp are transforming how millions manage their money. These aren't just payment tools – they're full financial ecosystems. 5️⃣ 𝗖𝗮𝘀𝗵 𝗩𝗼𝘂𝗰𝗵𝗲𝗿𝘀: At USD 𝟰𝟰𝗕, these payment methods prove cash is far from dead in LatAm. OXXO in Mexico, Boleto Bancário in Brazil, PagoEfectivo, A Paysafe experience in Peru, and Efecty in Colombia aren't just surviving – they're thriving by bridging the digital divide for millions of unbanked and underbanked consumers. 6️⃣ 𝗕𝗮𝗻𝗸 𝗧𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗳𝗲𝗿𝘀: Processing USD 𝟯𝟮𝗕, traditional banking isn't standing still. Each country has its own robust system: SPEI by Banco de México, PSE by ACH Colombia Oficial in Colombia, and Khipu in Chile are examples of how legacy institutions are adapting to the digital age. I highly recommend reading the complete source piece by Tony Cueva Bravo (and follow him for more great payments insights👌): https://lnkd.in/dNP8UNhy Find this helpful? [ 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗼𝘀𝘁 ] Anything to add about this subject? [𝗶𝗻𝘃𝗶𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁] Nice story, Marcel. Next! [ 𝗹𝗶𝗸𝗲 ]

The Council and Parliament have reached a trilogue deal to delay the #EUDR by 12 months. The new application date is 30 December 2026, with an extra six-month extension for small and micro operators. Additional elements: ➡️ The Commission is tasked with a simplification review (by 30 April 2026). Objective: assess the EUDR’s impact and administrative burden. If needed, the review is accompanied by a new legislative proposal. This introduces additional uncertainty as no one knows how much the rules may change. ➡️ Only the operator who first places the product on the market will be responsible for submitting the due-diligence statement. ➡️ Simplified one-time declaration for micro and small primary operators. They will submit such a simplified declaration and receive an identifier for traceability. 👉 Once again, policymakers delay without compelling evidence that a delay is necessary. Many companies have taken the opposite position, asking the EU to stick to the application date for the sake of certainty and investment stability. 👉 The Commission now faces an awkward task: conducting a simplification review of a regulation that has not yet been implemented. As we saw with the #CSDDD, this "simplification-before-implementation" approach lacks the data to make sound judgements. 📅 Council and Parliament now need to formally adopt this deal before it enters into force by the end of the year. The Parliament vote is on 16 Dec.

Dear IT Auditors,   When scoping IT audits, it’s easy to get lost in system details: Active Directory, databases, cloud platforms, backups… the list never ends. But here’s a secret I’ve learned for some time now: ➡️ Annex A of ISO 27001 is the best starting point for any IT audit. Why? Because Annex A outlines 93 controls (in the 2022 version) that cover the entire landscape of IT risks. Whether or not your organization is formally ISO-certified, these controls act as a roadmap.   Here’s how I use it in practice: 1️⃣ Access Control (A.5.15) – Helps me frame questions around onboarding, offboarding, role-based access, MFA, and privilege reviews. 2️⃣ Ensures I’m not just checking user lists but also looking for the principle of least privilege in action. 3️⃣ Operations Security (A.8) – Guides reviews of backup procedures, change management, patching, and logging. – Forces me to ask: “What happens if this fails?” not just “Is it documented?” 4️⃣ Supplier Relationships (A.5.19 – A.5.23) – Reminds me to consider vendor access, third-party risk, and SLA enforcement. – Because a weak vendor can be the weakest link. 5️⃣ Communications and System Acquisition (A.5.10, A.8.31, etc.) – Frames my review of system development, secure coding, and testing environments. – Encourages me to connect IT audit work with broader cyber hygiene practices. 6️⃣ Incident Management & Business Continuity (A.5.24 – A.5.30) – Pushes me to test whether incident response and disaster recovery are more than “documents on a shelf.” – Keeps resilience in scope, not just compliance.   Here’s the key insight: Annex A isn’t just for ISO auditors. It’s a common language that bridges IT, business, and compliance. If you’re auditing cloud services, fintech platforms, ERP systems, or even ITGCs for financial reporting, starting with Annex A ensures your audit scope is comprehensive, risk-based, and globally aligned. So next time you’re planning an IT audit, don’t reinvent the wheel. Open Annex A. Use it as your cheat sheet.   Because the best auditors don’t just look at systems, they look at systems through the lens of standards. (A wise man once told me this)   #ISO27001 #AnnexA #ITAudit #CyberCompliance #InternalAudit #GRC #RiskManagement #CyberSecurityStandards #AuditorTips

I am shocked by something we keep hearing from New York Cannabis operators. Even with a looming OCM deadline, the industry still is not clear on the regulations for New York, particularly regarding BioTrack. We were at MJBiz last week. There, we had a conversation with Adrian Adams, EdD, a New York cannabis Processing Licensee* who thought commercial BioTrack (BioTrackTHC) was required in New York. On Monday, I spoke to Derek Frank, another operator with the same impression. These are not isolated incidents; we’ve been hearing this for quite a while now. So - here's the clarity. 1. BioTrack has several products, which include the (1) Government Traceability Product and the (2) Commercial Softwares (This includes Cannabis Cultivation software, Manufacturing, Dispensary POS, etc.) 2. The New York State Office of Cannabis Management has a contract with BioTrack for ONLY the Government product 3. Operators are required to have a system that can INTEGRATE with the Government product. 4. Operators are NOT required to use any BioTrack Commercial products (“BioTrackTHC”). 5. The Government API is provided FOR FREE to New York operators. They do not need to pay for this software. (They may need to pay for tag costs). 6. The New York BioTrack API is based on the Florida BioTrack API. 7. The companies that are Approved Integrators with BioTrack for the Florida API are Alleaves, BioTrack, Canix, Sweed POS, Dutchie, Silverleaf by Velosio, Flourish Software, and Salve 8. By January 17, 2025, all licensees must notify the OCM of their chosen inventory tracking system vendor that is capable of integrating with the BioTrack New York API. 9. Here is the link where you submit your system of choice to the OCM: https://lnkd.in/gYpwUecV For something as critical as Seed-to-Sale and POS, in a burgeoning, fast-growing cannabis market, there should not be so much confusion about what is and isn’t required. We need more transparency to support a thriving cannabis industry. #newyorkcannabis - what are you hearing? Tag someone who might need clarity on New York cannabis regulations. References: a. https://lnkd.in/gVVJRcgg b. https://lnkd.in/gAfhVKWx c. https://lnkd.in/gPF6WKTE d. https://lnkd.in/gWcUZVqJ e. https://lnkd.in/gTg7bdVm f. https://lnkd.in/gTP_GZgU g. https://lnkd.in/g_E-4JGE * The previous version of this post improperly referred to Adrian Adams, EdD as a Cannabis consultant, rather than a New York cannabis processing licensee.

This morning, Meta announced a landmark settlement with 47 states, the District of Columbia, and U.S. Territories where they will pay up to $18 billion over the next 10 years to abate damages allegedly caused by their products, and make agreed platform changes to protect young people. I’m pleased to see a meaningful financial settlement, but I’m much more interested in the product changes Meta has agreed to make: limits on teen use, overnight restrictions, fewer notifications, stronger age assurance, new parental controls, and the ability to choose a chronological feed. Meta has consistently disputed claims that its product design contributes to harms to children. Now, after years of litigation and with a federal trial already underway, it has agreed to legally enforceable restrictions on many of those design choices. Meta is accepting a two-hour default daily limit for teens, nighttime restrictions, limits on notifications during school and sleeping hours, controls over autoplay and algorithmic feeds, stronger age-assurance requirements, and independent auditing of its compliance. These are concrete interventions, and it should not have taken this much to get here. I was surprised to see Meta Chief Legal Officer C.J. Mahoney saying in the company’s announcement that “this framework will only work if all our peers join us” and that “we need an industry-wide solution.” I agree with him; kids deserve meaningful protections regardless of which platform they happen to be using, and I hope this becomes an industry-wide floor. But it is remarkable to hear that argument coming from Meta. This is a company that has categorically denied the allegations against it, disputed claims about the harms associated with its products, fought efforts to hold it legally responsible, and repeatedly argued that its existing safety efforts were substantial. Now, with a major trial underway and billions of dollars at stake, Meta is not only accepting significant restrictions on its products, it is calling on the rest of the industry to follow them. If Meta believes these measures are necessary enough to become an industry standard, then the obvious question is why children had to wait until attorneys general took the company to federal court to get them. Meta spent years insisting that the people raising these concerns were wrong, that its products were safe, and that it could be trusted to police itself. Today, it agreed to change those products and declared that the rest of the industry should do the same. Read my full statement:

As many of you know, last week, HUD released HSG Notice 2024-09 Revised Compliance Date: Implementation of Sections 102 and 104 of the Housing Opportunity Through Modernization Act of 2016 (HOTMA) extending the HOTMA compliance deadline from January 1, 2025 to July 1, 2025. RBD has received many inquiries as to what that really means for HUD MFH programs. At this point, the following is our interpretation of instruction provided by HUD. Property Tenant Selection Plans and property EIV Policies must be updated to include HOTMA provisions. However, owner/agents are not to implement those policies until new site software is available. If you have not updated EIV policies or TSP policies, check out our FASTForms Page and our HOTMA Resource Page to see the options available from RBD. HUD has clarified that owner/agents can receive Management & Occupancy Review (MOR) findings if they have made no attempt to update their TSP or EIV Policy. However, if an owner/agent has updated policies, and a Reviewer feels that the change is not complete or compliant, the Reviewer should issue observations related to the policy edits (not findings). Once owner/agents have updated the TSP and the EIV policy, owner/agents are not required to address any other HOTMA changes until new HOTMA compliant site software is available and implemented. Many owner/agents have asked why software vendors have not released HOTMA compliant software. To provide a little more insight, owner/agents and other industry stakeholders should understand that, until HUD provides additional information and new forms, software vendors are in a kind of “holding pattern." That’s not to say that the software vendors have done nothing. HUD provided information about proposed requirements for TRACS 2.0.3.A from 2018 through most of 2023, but HOTMA requirements still need to be added or modified. Once that is done, vendors can complete programming, start testing and develop plans for site implementation.  Current HUD guidance specifically states that, aside from the TSP and EIV Policy updates, owner/agents may wait to implement all HOTMA changes until site software is available. But what if you want to implement some of the HOTMA changes now? If an owner/agent wishes to implement any HOTMA changes before site software is released, the tenant file must be documented to show which changes have been implemented and, if appropriate, what the TTP would have been if the changed had not been implemented. Failure to document the tenant file when HOTMA changes have been implemented can result in MOR findings. To assist, we have developed a new free Note to File which is designed to get you started as you create a standard form to attach to certifications in the tenant file. Questions related to HOTMA’s effect on HUD’s MFH programs should be directed to MFH_HOTMA@hud.gov #hudmultifamily #HOTMA #HUDcompliance #RossBusinessDevelopment

There is a strong momentum in development of National Agroecology Strategies (NAS) in Africa! In a new brief, the Policy and Advocacy Team at Biovision Foundation has detailed developments in Eastern and Southern Africa, and key lessons learned. This is not desk research. Farmer and civil society organizations and government representatives have a Community of Practice among those working on national strategies and have just completed a second 13 nation peer-to-peer exchange in Dakar, Senegal, bringing together both organic and agroecological movements. In a coming brief, we will summarize these latest lessons learned, also on the issues actors zoomed in on in Dakar: finance mechanisms, implementation pathways and advocacy strategies for domestic and external funding. The 4-pager on current status (see link in comments) covers Kenya and Tanzania, that are 1-2 years into implementation, and gives a status for Ethiopia, Malawi, Uganda, South Africa, Zambia and Zimbabwe that are finalizing or now initiating or doing stakeholder consultations for their own strategies. For each country there are also key features such as: ➡️ Priority focus areas in each country (e.g. smallholder farmer knowledge, access to bio-inputs, market development) ➡️ Degree of government engagement and alignment with national goals ➡️ Where local governments are mobilized in scaling agroecology And there is a graphic (see below) showing the 4 objectives covering the food value chain, and 4 cross-cutting objectives found in most national strategies, despite their many differences. Finally, a one-pager summarizes some lessons already learned about some of the tougher challenges, for example: ✅  Resource mobilization ✅  Creating political will and government engagement ✅  Positioning agroecology as a pillar of policies for food security, climate and biodiversity ✅  Ensuring investments in frontline farmer-led and civil society organisations that are needed catalysts and implementers of national strategies. ✅  Building in cross cutting measures for social equity and inclusiveness. ✅  Securing strong interventions for both production and market development ✅  Making each policy measure truly actionable and impactful. Policy is a key piece for food systems change through agroecology. It's not easy. But stakeholders across Africa are getting traction and are inspiring actors worldwide! #agroecology #organic #organicfarming