Our operations involve the collection, use, retention, processing and transfer of data, including the personal data of our customers. Consequently, we are subject to complex and evolving U.S., U.K., European, Asian and other jurisdictions' laws, rules, regulations, orders and directives (referred to as "privacy laws"), where we offer our software and services. The regulatory framework for privacy issues worldwide is rapidly evolving and is likely to remain uncertain for the foreseeable future. Many federal, state and foreign government bodies and agencies have adopted or are considering adopting laws, rules and regulations regarding the collection, use, storage and disclosure of personal information and breach notification procedures. Our customers who are located all over the world can use our software and services to collect, process and store personal information. Interpretation of these laws, rules and regulations and their application to our software and professional services in the United States and foreign jurisdictions is ongoing and cannot be fully determined at this time.
Any failure, or perceived failure, by us to comply with any applicable privacy laws in one or more jurisdictions could result in proceedings or actions against us by governmental entities or others, including class action privacy litigation in certain jurisdictions, leading to significant fines, penalties, judgments and reputational damage to us, changes to our business practices and increased costs and complexity of compliance, any of which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
In the United States, these include rules and regulations promulgated under the authority of the Federal Trade Commission, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, the Gramm Leach Bliley Act and state laws relating to privacy and data security. Internationally, virtually every jurisdiction in which we operate has established its own data security and privacy legal framework with which we or our customers must comply, including but not limited to the United Kingdom and the EU.
The EU's data protection landscape could result in significant operational costs for internal compliance and risk to our business. The EU has adopted the General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR, and together with national legislation, regulations and guidelines of EU member states, contains numerous requirements with increased jurisdictional reach of the European Commission, more robust obligations on data processors and additional requirements for data protection compliance programs by companies. EU member states are tasked under the GDPR to enact, and have enacted, certain legislation that adds to or further interprets the GDPR requirements and potentially extends our obligations and potential liability for failing to meet such obligations. Among other requirements, the GDPR regulates transfers of personal data subject to the GDPR to the United States as well as other third countries that have not been found to provide adequate protection to such personal data. The GDPR provides greater control for data subjects (for example, the "right to be forgotten"), increased data portability for EU consumers, data breach notification requirements and increased fines. In particular, under the GDPR, fines of up to 20 million euros or 4% of the annual global revenue of the noncompliant company, whichever is greater, could be imposed for violations of certain of the GDPR's requirements. Such penalties are in addition to any civil litigation claims by customers and data subjects. The GDPR requirements apply not only to third-party transactions, but also to transfers of information between us and our subsidiaries, including employee information.
While we have taken steps to mitigate the impact on us with respect to transfers of data, the efficacy and longevity of these transfer mechanisms remains uncertain. The occurrence of unanticipated events and development of evolving technologies often rapidly drives the adoption of legislation or regulation affecting the use, collection or other processing of data and the manner in which we conduct our business.
The GDPR imposes strict rules on the transfer of personal data out of the EU to a "third country," including the United States. These obligations may be interpreted and applied in a manner that is inconsistent from one jurisdiction to another and may conflict with other requirements or our practices. The Court of Justice of the European Union, or CJEU, on July 16, 2020 invalidated the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield framework, which provided companies with a mechanism to comply with data protection requirements when transferring personal data from the EU to the United States, on the grounds that the Privacy Shield had failed to offer adequate protections to EU personal data transferred to the United States.
In addition, the CJEU imposed additional obligations on companies when relying on standard contractual clauses approved by the European Commission (a standard form of contract used as an adequate personal data transfer mechanism, and potential alternative to the Privacy Shield), making it clear that reliance on them alone may not necessarily be sufficient in all circumstances.
Use of the standard contractual clauses must now be assessed on a case-by-case basis taking into account the legal regime applicable in the destination country, in particular applicable surveillance laws and rights of individuals. The use of standard contractual clauses for the transfer of personal data specifically to the United States remains under review by a number of European data protection supervisory authorities, along with those of some other EU member states. German and Irish supervisory authorities have indicated, and enforced in recent rulings, that the standard contractual clauses alone provide inadequate protections for EU – U.S. data transfers. On August 10, 2020, the U.S. Department of Commerce and the European Commission announced new discussions to evaluate the potential for an enhanced EU – U.S. Privacy Shield framework to comply with the July 16, 2020 judgment of the CJEU.
Further, on June 7, 2021, the European Commission published new versions of the standard contractual clauses, or the "SCCs," for comment. This creates an additional compliance obligation on our business, as new contracts need to incorporate the new SCCs and existing contracts using the old SCCs need to be amended to incorporate the new SCCs within the 18-month time period designated by the European Commission. As of September 27, 2021, organizations must use the new SCCs when entering into new contracts. Furthermore, organizations were required to update existing contracts by December 27, 2022, to incorporate the new SCCs and take appropriate measures to comply with any requirements arising from such new SCCs.
On March 25, 2022, the European Commission and the United States announced that they have agreed in principle on a new Trans-Atlantic Data Privacy Framework, which must now be transcribed into legal text that will form the basis of a draft adequacy decision to be proposed by the European Commission.
The foregoing places additional onerous obligations on us, which has and will continue to result in increased costs and changes in business practices and policies to comply with these various obligations.
The Swiss Federal Data Protection and Information Commissioner also has stated that it no longer considers the Swiss-U.S. Privacy Shield adequate for the purposes of personal data transfers from Switzerland to the United States. The United Kingdom's decision to exit from the EU created a need for the U.K. to adopt its own data privacy laws and regulations, which have sometimes led to an absence of clearly applicable U.K. law where the U.K.'s timeline for creating laws and regulations lagged behind the EU. For example, in the U.K., the Data Protection Act contains provisions, including its own derogations, for how the GDPR is applied in the U.K. We have to comply with the GDPR and also the U.K.'s Data Protection Act. We may be required to take additional steps to legitimize any personal data transfers impacted by these or other developments and be subject to increasing costs of compliance and limitations on our customers and us. More generally, we may find it necessary or desirable to modify our data handling practices, and the CJEU decision or other legal challenges relating to cross-border data transfer may serve as a basis for our personal data handling practices, or those of our customers and vendors, to be challenged and may otherwise adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.
On June 28, 2021, the European Commission issued the U.K. with an "adequacy decision" to facilitate the continued free flow of personal data from EU member states to the U.K. However, this adequacy decision has a limited duration of four years in case there is a future divergence between EU and U.K. data protection laws. In the event that the U.K. maintains an equivalent standard at the end of the four-year period, it is open to the European Commission to renew its finding. In the event that the adequacy decision is not renewed after this time, the adjustments required to facilitate data transfers from EU member states to the U.K. may lead to additional costs as we try to ensure compliance with new privacy legislation and will increase our overall risk exposure.
We are also subject to evolving EU privacy laws on cookies and e-marketing. In the EU, regulators are increasingly focusing on compliance with requirements in the online behavioral advertising ecosystem, and an EU regulation known as ePrivacy Regulation will significantly increase fines for non-compliance once in effect. In the EU, informed consent, including a prohibition on pre-checked consents and a requirement to ensure separate consents for each cookie, is required for the placement of a cookie or similar technologies on a user's device and for direct electronic marketing. As regulators start to enforce the strict approach in recent guidance, this could lead to substantial costs, require significant system changes, limit the effectiveness of our marketing activities, divert the attention of our technology personnel, negatively impact our efforts to understand customers, adversely affect our margins, increase costs, and subject us to additional liabilities.
In August 2021, China passed its Personal Information Protection Law, or PIPL, which became effective in November 2021. PIPL provides a comprehensive set of rules for how business operators should collect, use, process, share and transfer personal data, and for companies that are certified as critical information infrastructure operators, require personal data to be stored on servers physically located in China. PIPL extends to data processing activities outside China if the purpose is to provide products or services to individuals located in China or to analyze or assess the behaviors of individuals located in China. PIPL includes monetary penalties for noncompliance, which include 5% of a company's previous year's revenues and the potential for a company's business license to be revoked. It is unclear how PIPL will be interpreted and applied and its impact on our operations. We may find it necessary or desirable to modify our data handling practices, create policies or procedures, enter into certain contractual agreements, adopt additional data transfer mechanisms, implement increased security measures, modify our operations, or take any other legal or business steps to comply with PIPL to the extent it is deemed to apply to any parts of our business or data processing.
In addition, domestic data privacy laws at the state and local level continue to evolve and could require us to modify our data processing practices and policies and expose us to further regulatory or operational burdens. For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act ("CCPA") took effect in January 2020 and was subsequently modified by the California Privacy Rights Act ("CPRA"), which took effect in January 2023. The CCPA imposes obligations on companies that process California residents' personal information, including an obligation to provide certain new disclosures to such residents and creates new consumer rights. The CCPA provides for civil penalties for violations, as well as a private right of action for certain data breaches that result in the loss of personal information. This private right of action may increase the likelihood of, and risks associated with, data breach litigation. The CPRA also created a new state agency vested with authority to implement and enforce the CCPA and the CPRA. Additionally, other states, including Colorado, Connecticut, Indiana, Iowa, Tennessee, Utah, Montana, Florida, Oregon, Texas and Virginia, have enacted privacy laws that have gone into effect or will go into effect in the coming years. While these new privacy laws may share similarities with each other, they differ in many ways and we must comply with each if our operations fall within their scopes. Similar laws have been proposed in other states and at the federal level. We expect that existing and any new legislation will continue to add additional complexity and potential legal risk, require additional investment of resources in compliance programs, impact strategies and the availability of previously useful data and could result in increased compliance costs or changes in business practices and policies.
Complying with these laws, regulations, amendments to or re-interpretations of existing laws and regulations and contractual or other obligations relating to data privacy, security, protection, transfer, localization and information security may require us to make changes to our products and services to enable us or our customers to meet new legal requirements, incur substantial operational costs, modify our data practices and policies and restrict our business operations. In addition to government regulation, privacy advocates and industry groups may propose new and different self-regulatory standards, and our customers may expect us to meet certain voluntary certification and other standards established by such third parties. Any actual or perceived failure by us to comply with these laws, regulations or other obligations or standards may lead to significant fines, penalties, regulatory investigations, lawsuits, significant costs for remediation, damage to our reputation or other liabilities. Additionally, because the interpretation and application of many data privacy, security and protection laws along with contractually imposed industry standards are uncertain, it is possible that these laws may be interpreted and applied in a manner that is inconsistent with our existing data management practices or the features of our products and services. If so, in addition to the possibility of fines, lawsuits, regulatory enforcement or orders, investigations, imprisonment of company employees and public censure, other claims and penalties, significant costs for remediation and damage to our reputation, we could be required to fundamentally change our business activities and practices or modify our services and product capabilities, any of which could require significant additional expense and have an adverse effect on our business, including impacting our ability to innovate, delaying our product development roadmap and adversely affecting our relationships with customers and our ability to effectively compete.
Furthermore, the costs of compliance with, and other burdens imposed by, the laws, regulations, rules, standards, contractual obligations, policies and other obligations related to privacy, data protection and security- that are applicable to the businesses of our customers may limit the use and adoption of, and reduce the overall demand for, our products and services. Privacy concerns, whether valid or not valid, may inhibit market adoption of our products and services, particularly in certain industries and foreign countries.