The following is part of Greenberg Traurig’s ongoing series analyzing cross-border data transfers in light of the new Standard Contractual Clauses, approved by the European Commission in June 2021.

Visual Summary
Transfers from EEA Controller to non-EEA Processor: Controller A (EEA)→ Processor Z (non-EEA) → Controller A (EEA)
  • 1st Transfer: SCC Module 2. Initial cross-border transfer from EEA to a non-EEA country utilizes the SCC Module 2 designed for transfers

The following is part of Greenberg Traurig’s ongoing series analyzing cross-border data transfers in light of the new Standard Contractual Clauses, approved by the European Commission in June 2021.

Visual Summary
Transfers from EEA Controller to non-EEA Processor: Controller A (EEA) → Processor Z (US) → Controller A (EEA)
  • 1st Transfer: SCC Module 2.  Initial cross-border transfer from EEA to United States utilizes SCC Module 2 designed for transfers from a

The following is part of Greenberg Traurig’s ongoing series analyzing cross-border data transfers in light of the new Standard Contractual Clauses approved by the European Commission in June 2021.

Visual Implications
Transfers from EEA Controller to EEA Processor: Controller (EEA)→ Processor (EEA) → Affiliated Processor (US)
  • Background. Company Z-1 and Company Z-2 are corporate affiliates under common ownership or control, but are separate legal entities. Data is being directly

The following is part of Greenberg Traurig’s ongoing series analyzing cross-border data transfers in light of the new Standard Contractual Clauses approved by the European Commission in June 2021.

Visual Implications
Controller (EEA) Processor (EEA) → Employee of Processor (non-EEA)
  • Background. Company Z is a European legal entity that does not have a legal presence in Country Q. Company Z has an employee

Consent plays a role in almost all modern privacy statutes. In some privacy statutes, like the GDPR, it can function as one of many lawful purposes to process data. In other privacy statutes, like the VCDPA and the CPA, it is mandated for certain types of data processing (e.g., sensitive category data processing).  How consent

The following is part of Greenberg Traurig’s ongoing series analyzing cross-border data transfers in light of the new Standard Contractual Clauses approved by the European Commission in June 2021.

Visual Implications
  • 1st SCC Module 1. Initial cross-border transfer from the EEA to the US utilizes the SCC Module 1 designed for transfers from a

Modern privacy laws contain different definitions for the term “consent,” and different standards for when consent will, and will not, be effective.

In Europe, the right of an individual to withdraw consent for the processing of their personal data has become near axiomatic and is often referred to by Member State supervisory authorities. The right

With its adoption of an adequacy decision pursuant to Art. 45 General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) for the Republic of Korea on Dec. 17, 2021, the European Commission has declared that the country provides an adequate data protection level comparable with GDPR standards.

Click here to read the full GT Alert.

The following is part of Greenberg Traurig’s ongoing series analyzing cross-border data transfers in light of the new Standard Contractual Clauses approved by the European Commission in June 2021.

Controller (EEA)→ Controller (EEA)→ Branch Office (US)
  • Background. Company B is a European entity, that has a branch office in the United States (which is not a separate legal entity). While data

  • Background. Company B-1 and Company B-2 are corporate affiliates who are under common ownership or control but are separate legal entities. Company B-2 is the processor of Company B-1. While data is being directly sent from Company A in Europe to Company B-2, Company B-2 is not acting as the processor of Company A;