Who Are We

The Danish Business Regulation Forum (DBRF) was established in 2019 as an independent entity under the Ministry for Industry, Business and Financial Affairs.

DBRF is responsible for advising the government on how existing national business regulation can be amended to be less burdensome for businesses. If implemented from EU law, the Forum has the mandate to recommend so-called neighbor checks in other EU member states, who might have implemented the EU legislation in a smarter and less burdensome way. Lastly, the Forum also has a mandate to receive, and give recommendations to, Ministries plans for implementation of business-related EU regulation.

In addition, a permanent workgroup within the Forum continuously produces recommendations for pro-active lobbying regarding EU-acts that are either scheduled or is still being negotiated. Moreover, the Forum can decide to adopt non-permanent working groups that are tasked with producing thematic recommendations on themes such as GDPR and Entrepreneurship.

DBRF issues recommendations to the government, which has committed itself to responding to the recommendations by a “comply or explain principle”. This means that Ministries who receive a recommendation, must either comply with the recommendation and implement it or publicly explain why it cannot comply. All recommendations and government responses are published on the DBRF website.

The National Regulatory Control Council (NKR) is a legally established, independent expert body that advises the federal government. It is located within the newly founded Ministry for Digital Affairs and State Modernization, which was established in 2025.

Before laws are enacted, it must be clear what costs they will impose on citizens, businesses, and government administration. The NKR is tasked with assessing government draft laws to determine whether the costs (according to the standard cost model) are presented in a methodologically sound and understandable way, whether there are more practical alternatives, and whether the ministries have considered digital implementation from the outset. In 2023, the NKR’s mandate was expanded to include a so-called Digital Check for this purpose. Furthermore, as part of Better Regulation, the NKR provides recommendations on how laws can be improved to reduce bureaucracy and make administration more digital. Its review always focuses not on the political goals of the law, but on whether the most bureaucratically and resource-efficient paths were chosen to achieve those goals.

The NKR’s statements are neither binding nor do they carry veto power. Important opinions are also published on NKR’s website.

The Norwegian Better Regulation Council’s mandate is to scrutinize Regulatory Impact Assessments (RIA) in proposals for new or amended legislation that affect the business sector. In doing so, the Council shall assess whether the Instructions for Official Studies are adhered to and whether impacts on business are sufficiently described. The Council is also tasked with assessing whether regulations proposed reach their intentions with the lowest possible costs for business.

The Council members normally have a term of office of four years with the option to prolong for a single term. The Council members are selected based on their expertise, professional integrity and extensive knowledge of the business community and the Norwegian regulatory process. They also have differing geographical affiliations. The Council holds meetings approximately once every month. The Council can also review cases between meetings.

The statements provided are advisory in nature, and it is at the discretion of Parliament whether to take them into consideration during the legislative process. In the case of secondary legislation, it is the responsibility of the relevant agencies to determine whether or not to follow the advice issued by the NBRC. NBRC’s website provides more information.

The Regulatory Impact Assessment Board (Komise RIA/RIAB) is a permanent working committee of the Czech Government’s Legislative Council. Its primary role is to review and evaluate the quality of regulatory impact assessments (RIA) accompanying draft legislation proposed by the Government.

The RIAB reviews legislative and non-legislative proposals that may have significant impacts on citizens, businesses, public administration, and the state budget. The Board considers both quantitative and qualitative aspects, such as costs and benefits, administrative burdens, competitiveness, and social implications. The RIAB focuses on assessing the potential economic, social, and environmental impacts of proposed regulations, ensuring that decision-makers are informed by comprehensive and evidence-based analyses.

While the RIAB’s opinions are not legally binding, Ministries are expected to address the Board’s feedback and revise proposals accordingly. In practice, advancing a legislative proposal without adequately considering RIAB’s recommendations can delay or hinder its progress through the legislative process. Beyond its evaluative function, RIAB may provide consultations to Ministries during the early stages of drafting legislation. It also determines whether a full RIA is required based on an initial impact overview. RIAB’s opinions are published on the website.

The Regulatory Policy Committee is the independent regulatory scrutiny body for the UK Government. The Committee assesses the quality of evidence and analysis used to inform government regulatory proposals above a business impact threshold. This independent advice and scrutiny helps ensure that ministerial policy decisions are based on accurate evidence and helps to produce better regulation.

Where the RPC assesses the impact of regulatory proposals (in the form of Options Assessments, Impact Assessments and Post Implementation Reviews), we provide advice in the form of opinions. These opinions serve to indicate whether central government departments have accurately estimated the costs or savings to businesses resulting from regulatory reforms, and whether these estimates can be validated. Additionally, the RPC evaluates whether government departments have clearly explained why regulation is preferable to non-regulatory or voluntary alternatives. A core principle of the government’s better regulation framework is not to assume regulation is the default solution, but instead to consider a range of meaningful alternatives. Finally, the RPC checks that the government has, where appropriate, taken steps to minimise regulatory burdens on small and micro businesses.

The Swedish Better Regulation Council is a special decision body tasked with scrutinizing impact assessments for regulatory proposals that will affect business. The Council assesses descriptions of 14 different aspects relevant for businesses, for example the purpose of the proposed legislation, alternative options, businesses directly and indirectly concerned, its effects on costs and competition, consistency with EU legislation and how evaluation could be conducted. The Council assesses each aspect – compliant or non-compliant – with quality requirements and also gives an overall assessment.

On request, the Council also scrutinizes impact assessments from the European Commission. This scrutiny aims to identify the need for a national, complementary impact assessment and what such an impact assessment should contain. All statements are published on the Council’s website. The statements are not binding.

The Romanian Regulatory Impact Assessment Council (CCEIAN) is an independent body of experts with proven experience in various policy areas. It provides impartial evaluations of the quality of evidence that accompanies legislative proposals, with a focus on those with significant economic, social, or environmental implications.

Proposals are discussed collectively within the Council, and decisions are made by majority vote. CCEIAN issues opinions that may be favourable, unfavourable, or favourable with comments. The Council contributes to the Annual Report on the Impact Assessment of Normative Acts, which provides an overview of the proposals reviewed, assesses the quality of the underlying analysis, and identifies trends in regulatory practice. This supports ongoing monitoring of how impact assessment tools are used and highlights opportunities for improving legislative drafting.

CCEIAN also plays a key role in advancing regulatory reform. It identifies priorities for improving the use of impact assessments across central government and may approve methodological tools to support ministries in conducting more robust assessments. By promoting evidence-based policymaking and supporting the institutionalisation of better regulatory practices, the Council helps ensure more transparent, effective, and accountable governance.