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

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

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

The impetus to conduct a Data Transfer Impact Assessment (TIA) comes from three legal authorities: (1) the European Court of Justice’s recommendation in Schrems II that the parties to a transfer verify on a case-by-case basis whether the “law of the third country of destination ensures adequate protection . . . of personal data transferred

  • 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

Companies are allowed to transfer personal data outside the European Economic Area (EEA) if they are (1) transferring data to an entity that is within a country that has been recognized by the European Commission as ensuring an adequate level of protection or (2) they have put in place a European Commission-approved mechanism (a “safeguard”)