On April 29, 2022, China’s National Information Security Standardization Technical Committee (commonly referred to as “TC260”) released a draft Technical Guideline on Personal Information Cross-Border Transfer Certifications (Cert Guideline). While the Cert Guideline is still in draft form and thus subject to change, it provides some clarification regarding the certification process for cross-border transfers of

The term “sale” is defined slightly differently between and among modern U.S. data privacy statutes with some statutes defining the term as including exchanges of personal information in return for valuable consideration, and others defining the terms as including only exchanges of personal information in return for monetary consideration. As the following chart indicates, state

The term “Transfer Impact Assessment” or “TIA” is relatively new to the world of data privacy. Indeed, according to one widely used legal database the term was not referenced within any academic journals or secondary sources until 2021.[1] The term has come to refer to a written analysis, conducted by a controller or 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 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

Summary

  • Cross border transfers in the United States don’t need a SCC. Company A is not required under U.S. law or the GDPR to

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 Summary
Overview of situation.  Company A in the EEA retains Company Z-1 in the US to process personal data.  Company Z-1 intends to

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 Summary
  • 1st Transfer: SCC Module 2. Initial cross-border transfer from EEA to Country Q utilizes the SCC Module 2 designed for transfers from

Gretchen A. Ramos is quoted in a Cybersecurity Law Report article titled “Navigating Post-Schrems II International Data Transfer Waters: Challenges and TIAs.” The article discusses the challenges companies may face as they complete transfer impact assessments (TIAs) and update their standard contractual clauses (SCCs).

Click here to read the full article. (subscription required)

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) →Processor X (US) →Controller A (EEA)
  • 1st Transfer: SCC Module 2. Initial cross-border transfer from EEA to United States utilizes the SCC Module 2 designed for transfers from