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 Description and Implications
Transfers from a European Data Subject: Data Subject→Controller (US)→Processor (US)
  • The EDPB has taken the position that a data subject “cannot be considered a controller or processor,”1 and, as a result,

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 Description and Implications
Transfers from a European Data Subject: Data Subject→Controller (US)→Controller (non-EEA)
  • The EDPB has taken the position that a data subject “cannot be considered a controller or processor,”1 and, as a result,

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 Description and Implications
Transfers from a European Data Subject: Data Subject→Controller (US)→Controller (US)
  • The EDPB has taken the position that a data subject “cannot be considered a controller or processor,”[1] and, as a result,

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 Description and Implications
Transfers from a US Controller to EEA processors (Renvois) Controller (US)  Processor (US)  Sub-processor (EEA)  Controller (US)
  • Cross border transfers in the United States don’t need an SCC. Company A is not required under U.S. law or the GDPR

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 of 2021.

Visual

Implications

  • Initial cross-border transfer from the EEA to the US utilizes the SCC Module 1 designed for transfers from a controller to another non-EEA

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

  • 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;

  • Background. Company B-1 and Company B-2 are corporate affiliates who are under common ownership or control but are separate legal entities. While data is being directly sent from Controller A in Europe to Controller B-2 in the United States, Controller A has contracted only with Controller B-1 in Europe. Solid line indicates the data

Visual Implications
  • 1st SCC Module 1. Initial cross-border transfer from Company A to Company B utilizes the SCC Module 1 designed for transfers from a controller to a non-EEA Controller.
  • 2nd SCC Module 2. Pursuant to Section 8.7 of the 1st SCC, all subsequent onward transfers to non-adequate jurisdictions must also utilize the

Visual Implications
  • 1st SCC Module 1. Initial cross-border transfer from Company A to Company B utilizes the SCC Module 1 designed for transfers from a controller to a non-EEA Controller (1st SCC).
  • 2nd SCC Module 2. Pursuant to Section 8.7 of the 1st SCC, all subsequent onward transfers to non-adequate jurisdictions must also