The EU-U.S. Trade and Technology Council meeting Sept. 29, in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, will go on as planned despite threats from the EU to cancel over issues with a U.S.-U.K. submarine contract with Australia, Politico reports. The European Commission announced talks were back on Thursday night. “Strategic alliances are about shaping common approaches and also overcoming difficulties,” European Commission Executive Vice-President Valdis Dombrovskis said. Editor’s note: IAPP Staff Writer Joe Duball reported on how a break in talks would impact a potential EU-U.S. data flow agreement.
Full Story

Mixed messaging around progress toward EU-US data transfer solution

• Politico reports the future of EU-U.S. data transfers is unclear based on different messaging from the parties involved. While U.S. officials continue speaking positively about finding a data transfer solution, EU officials are on record as saying a deal is not close and is far from certain to be closed by year's end. U.S. national security laws and agencies' ability to access personal data remain the biggest sticking point from the EU perspective.
• Former European Commission Vice President Viviane Reding said during a webinar the status of EU-U.S. data flows "is at breaking point" and "basic joint rules are absolutely essential," Law Society Gazette reports.
• In an op-ed for The Hill, Information Technology and Innovation Foundation President Robert Atkinson discusses the EU-U.S. Trade and Technology Council and its importance to finding a solution to the data flows dilemma.
• The U.S. Congressional Research Service released a report on the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield and trans-Atlantic data flows. The report includes options for Congress to facilitate EU-U.S. data flows and a potential enhanced Privacy Shield, including considering whether comprehensive national privacy legislation — potentially aligning with the EU General Data Protection Regulation — would “provide some level of certainty to EU businesses and individuals” and “provide sufficient safeguards and guarantees” for U.S. adequacy.