Yes — absolutely. And frankly, they should have been first in line.

If anyone in Europe needs Enterprise Wallets (EUBWs) early, it’s the Chambers of Commerce. Here’s why, straight and sharp:

🔥 1. Chambers are major credential issuers

They issue:

Right now they’re doing this through:

That’s unsustainable in the world of DIIP + agentic workflows.

Issuers must have wallets.

Otherwise the whole ecosystem becomes asymmetric and slows down.

🔥 2. Chambers themselves must appear in trust registries

EUBWs give them:

Without an EUBW, they risk becoming “grey issuers” with weaker interoperability.

🔥 3. Chambers must issue semantically-aligned CoO credentials

For that they need:

If exporters have EUBWs but Chambers don’t, you get:

a digital handshake where one party has hands and the other doesn’t.

The flow only works if both sides hold wallets.

🔥 4. AI-agent era makes it non-optional

Within 2–3 years:

Those agents must:

• authenticate

• delegate

• sign

• issue

• verify

Chambers cannot run AI-agents safely without EUBWs.

A Chamber AI-agent without a wallet is an untrusted bot.

🔥 5. Chambers are perfect early “ecosystem multipliers”

Once Chambers adopt EUBWs, they automatically:

Chambers have the distribution power to drag SMEs into the trust infrastructure
fast.

They’re strategically critical.

🔥 6. Reality check: many Chambers still don’t get it

A few Nordic ones have woken up.

Some German IHKs are exploring it.

ICC DSI knows it’s coming.

But overall:

They haven’t internalised that DIIP + EUBW makes their current systems obsolete.

Not tomorrow.

Yesterday.

🚀 Bottom line

Yes — Chambers of Commerce should absolutely have EUBWs.

Not just “nice to have.”

Mandatory for remaining relevant in the trust infrastructure era.

Give them a wallet and they become:

• issuers

• verifiers

• business-identity hubs

• AI-agent control towers

• trade-onboarding engines

Without it, they’re stuck stamping PDFs in a world that’s already moved on.