adequacy-assessment

Assessing Third-Country Adequacy

Overview

GDPR Article 45 provides that the European Commission may determine that a third country, a territory, or one or more specified sectors within a third country, or an international organisation ensures an adequate level of protection for personal data. Where such an adequacy decision exists, transfers of personal data to the covered country, territory, or sector may take place without any specific authorisation or additional safeguard requirement. This skill guides the assessment of existing adequacy decisions and the handling of partial adequacy coverage.

Current EC Adequacy Decisions

As of March 2026, the European Commission has adopted adequacy decisions for the following countries and territories:

Country/Territory	Decision Reference	Date Adopted	Scope	Periodic Review
Andorra	Decision 2010/625/EU	19 October 2010	Full country	Ongoing monitoring
Argentina	Decision 2003/490/EC	30 June 2003	Full country	Ongoing monitoring
Canada	Decision 2002/2/EC	20 December 2001	Commercial organisations subject to PIPEDA only	Ongoing monitoring
Faroe Islands	Decision 2010/146/EU	5 March 2010	Full territory	Ongoing monitoring
Guernsey	Decision 2003/821/EC	21 November 2003	Full territory	Ongoing monitoring
Israel	Decision 2011/61/EU	31 January 2011	Full country	Ongoing monitoring
Isle of Man	Decision 2004/411/EC	28 April 2004	Full territory	Ongoing monitoring
Japan	Decision (EU) 2019/419	23 January 2019	Commercial sector subject to APPI supplementary rules	Biennial review; first review completed January 2021; second review 2023
Jersey	Decision 2008/393/EC	8 May 2008	Full territory	Ongoing monitoring
New Zealand	Decision 2013/65/EU	19 December 2012	Full country	Ongoing monitoring
South Korea	Decision (EU) 2022/254	17 December 2021 (effective 2022)	Commercial and public sector subject to PIPA	Biennial review
Switzerland	Decision 2000/518/EC	26 July 2000	Full country	Ongoing monitoring; assessed under revised FADP effective 1 September 2023
United Kingdom	Decision (EU) 2021/1772	28 June 2021	Full country	Sunset clause: expires 27 June 2025 unless renewed; renewal assessment underway
Uruguay	Decision 2012/484/EU	21 August 2012	Full country	Ongoing monitoring
United States (DPF)	Decision (EU) 2023/1795	10 July 2023	Self-certified organisations under the EU-US DPF only	Annual review; first review October 2024

Adequacy Assessment Criteria (Art. 45(2))

When the Commission assesses the adequacy of the level of protection in a third country, it considers:

(a) Rule of Law and Human Rights

• Respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms
• General and sectoral legislation, including public security, defence, national security, and criminal law
• Access by public authorities to personal data
• Effective and enforceable data subject rights

(b) Independent Supervisory Authority

• Existence and effective functioning of one or more independent supervisory authorities with responsibility for ensuring and enforcing data protection rules
• Adequate enforcement powers including the power to investigate, intervene, and impose corrective measures
• Independence from government interference

(c) International Commitments

• International commitments the third country has entered into, including multilateral and bilateral agreements relating to the protection of personal data
• Binding and enforceable obligations arising from such commitments

Partial Adequacy Handling

Several adequacy decisions cover only specific sectors or types of organisations within a country. Proper handling of partial adequacy is essential.

Canada — PIPEDA Partial Adequacy

Scope: Only transfers to Canadian organisations subject to the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) are covered by the adequacy decision. Provincial private-sector privacy laws that have been declared substantially similar to PIPEDA by the Governor in Council also fall within scope (e.g., Alberta PIPA, British Columbia PIPA, Quebec Act respecting the protection of personal information in the private sector).

Not covered:

• Canadian public sector organisations (federal and provincial government agencies)
• Organisations operating under provincial health information legislation
• Organisations not subject to PIPEDA or substantially similar legislation

Verification: Before relying on the Canada adequacy decision, confirm that the specific Canadian recipient is subject to PIPEDA or a substantially similar provincial law.

Japan — APPI Supplementary Rules

Scope: The adequacy decision covers commercial sector entities subject to Japan's Act on the Protection of Personal Information (APPI) and the supplementary rules adopted by the Personal Information Protection Commission (PPC) of Japan specifically for the purpose of the EU adequacy finding.

Supplementary rules:

1. Treatment of sensitive data: Japanese operators receiving data from the EU must treat all data received as "requiring special care" regardless of its category under APPI
2. Retention limitation: Data must be deleted when no longer necessary for the purpose of use
3. Onward transfers: Transfers outside Japan require either the data subject's consent or assurance that the recipient country provides equivalent protection
4. Anonymously processed information: Restrictions on the use of anonymised data equivalent to GDPR standards

Verification: Confirm the Japanese recipient is subject to APPI and has implemented the supplementary rules.

United States — DPF Self-Certification

Scope: Only transfers to US organisations that have actively self-certified to the DPF with the Department of Commerce and are subject to FTC or DoT jurisdiction.

Not covered:

• US government agencies
• Non-certified US organisations
• Organisations subject to regulators other than FTC/DoT (e.g., national banks, telecommunications carriers, insurance companies regulated by state insurance commissioners)

Verification: Check dataprivacyframework.gov for active certification status before each transfer.

South Korea — PIPA Coverage

Scope: Covers both commercial and public sector organisations subject to the Personal Information Protection Act (PIPA), as amended in 2023.

Not covered: Processing by intelligence and national security agencies exempt from PIPA.

Adequacy Decision Monitoring

Periodic Review Obligations

Under Art. 45(3), the Commission must periodically review adequacy decisions at least every four years. Some decisions include more frequent review commitments:

Decision	Review Frequency	Last Review	Next Review Due
Japan	Biennial	2023	2025
South Korea	Biennial	2024	2026
United States (DPF)	Annual	October 2024	October 2025
United Kingdom	Before sunset (June 2025)	Ongoing	June 2025
Legacy decisions (Andorra, Argentina, etc.)	At least every 4 years	Various	Varies

Monitoring Actions for Organisations

1. Subscribe to Commission notifications: Monitor the EC's data protection page and the EDPB's news section for announcements regarding adequacy reviews.
2. Track legislative changes: Monitor data protection legislative developments in countries where the organisation relies on adequacy decisions.
3. UK adequacy sunset: The UK adequacy decision contains a sunset clause expiring 27 June 2025. If not renewed, organisations must transition UK transfers to SCCs or other mechanisms immediately.
4. DPF legal challenges: Monitor CJEU proceedings for any challenge to the DPF adequacy decision.
5. Maintain backup mechanisms: For transfers relying on adequacy decisions with upcoming reviews or known risks, maintain executed SCCs as a contingency.

Practical Verification Workflow

For each transfer relying on an adequacy decision:

1. Identify the adequacy decision: Confirm which decision covers the destination country or sector.
2. Verify scope coverage: Confirm the specific recipient falls within the scope of the adequacy decision (not a partial adequacy gap).
3. Verify the decision remains in force: Check the EC's list of adequacy decisions and any recent amendments, suspensions, or repeals.
4. Document in the transfer register: Record the adequacy decision reference, scope coverage verification, and next review date.
5. Set a monitoring reminder: Calendar the next periodic review date and any sunset clause deadlines.
6. Contingency planning: For decisions with known risks (UK sunset, DPF legal challenges), prepare backup SCCs.