(1)

Annex IV to Regulation (EC) No 661/2009 lists the UNECE regulations annexed to the ‘Revised 1958 Agreement’ (3) which apply on a compulsory basis. This list should be updated to reflect the application at EU level of new requirements in the respective UNECE regulations.

(2)

In accordance with Article 13(14) of Regulation (EC) No 661/2009, the Appendix to its Annex IV lists the repealed Directives under which type-approvals granted before 1 November 2012 should continue to be valid unless new requirements become applicable. As new requirements become applicable at EU level with the update of Annex IV, it is also necessary to update the Appendix to Annex IV to the regulation.

(3)

Since the new requirements of UNECE Regulations No 107 and 118 will require manufacturers to adapt their vehicles, sufficient time should be provided for the application of those requirements.

(4)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Technical Committee — Motor Vehicles,

(1)

Entry 6 of Annex XVII to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 prohibits the manufacture, placing on the market and use of asbestos fibres, and of articles and mixtures containing these fibres added intentionally.

(2)

Member States could exempt the placing on the market and use of diaphragms containing chrysotile fibres for existing electrolysis installations. This included the possibility to exempt the placing on the market of chrysotile fibres for use in the manufacture or maintenance of such diaphragms and the use of chrysotile fibres for these purposes.

(3)

Out of five electrolysis installations in relation to which Member States reported (2) in 2011 that they had granted exemptions, only two, in Sweden and Germany, remain in operation.

(4)

On 18 January 2013, pursuant to the obligation in paragraph 1 of entry 6, the European Commission requested the European Chemicals Agency (‘the Agency’) to prepare an Annex XV dossier in accordance with Article 69(1) of REACH with a view to prohibiting the placing on the market and use of diaphragms containing chrysotile. On 17 January 2014, the Agency finalised the Annex XV dossier, which proposed to amend the existing restriction by limiting the duration of the exemptions granted by Member States for the placing on the market and use of diaphragms containing chrysotile and of chrysotile fibres used exclusively in their maintenance to 31 December 2025 and enabling Member States to impose a reporting requirement to allow better monitoring and enforcement.

(5)

The dossier was subsequently put out to public consultation and submitted for examination by the Committee for Risk Assessment (hereinafter ‘RAC’) and the Committee for Socio-Economic Analysis (hereinafter ‘SEAC’).

(6)

On 26 November 2014 RAC adopted an opinion concluding that there is no worker exposure to chrysotile in one plant and that in the other exposure is minimised by risk management measures which are effective in controlling potential risks from the use of chrysotile to a risk level of low concern. The opinion further concluded that there is no release of chrysotile to the environment and therefore the health and environment benefits of immediate closure of the two plants would be negligible. Furthermore, due to process and technology specific considerations in one of the plants, no suitable alternative was available.

(7)

In order to further the objective of phasing out the use of chrysotile in the EU and to improve the clarity and transparency of the existing exemption, RAC agreed with the proposed amendment set out in the Annex XV dossier. The opinion also concluded that action on a Union-wide basis is necessary.

(8)

On 9 March 2015, SEAC adopted an opinion noting that in one plant the existing asbestos containing cells would be dismantled by 2025 and that in the other, the operator claimed that ongoing production level testing using chrysotile-free diaphragms in its current installation would lead to full substitution at the latest by 2025. SEAC also concluded that immediate closure of this plant would result in costs in terms of lost value added and jobs and took note of the commitment of the operator of the latter plant to cease all imports of chrysotile by the end of 2017. Given the overall objective of phasing out the use of chrysotile in the EU and in order to improve the clarity and transparency of the existing exemption, SEAC advised that the duration of the exemptions granted by Member States for the placing on the market of diaphragms and fibres should be limited to the end of 2017 and concluded that the proposed amendment of the existing restriction, as modified by SEAC, is the most appropriate Union wide measure.

(9)

Commission Implementing Decision 2013/732/EU (3), establishing the best available techniques (BAT) conclusions under Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (4) on industrial emissions (IED), stipulates that the use of asbestos diaphragms is not considered BAT and accordingly permit conditions for chlor-alkali installations operated in the Union must be updated by 12 December 2017 so that those installations do no longer use asbestos diaphragms from that date. However, unlike for mercury cells which are not considered BAT under any circumstances, Member States may determine that, in specific and exceptional circumstances, asbestos diaphragms may be used in a particular installation for a well-defined longer period and under conditions consistent with the environmental objectives of the IED, provided that the conditions and duration of such use are specified in a legally binding way.

(10)

Since the adoption of the SEAC opinion, the operator of the plant in which full substitution is envisaged by 2025 has entered into a binding agreement with the authorities of the Member State concerned with a view to guaranteeing the gradual substitution of diaphragms containing chrysotile by a non-asbestos alternative material from 2014 on and achieving full substitution at the latest by 30 June 2025. Therefore it is appropriate that the duration of the exemption granted by Member States to permit the use of diaphragms containing chrysotile and of chrysotile fibres used exclusively in their maintenance is limited to 30 June 2025 at the latest.

(11)

Moreover, although under the binding agreement the operator undertook to stop importing chrysotile fibres and diaphragms containing chrysotile by the end of 2017, it subsequently confirmed that imports have already ceased as it has acquired sufficient chrysotile fibres to manage the transition to an alternative material. Therefore it is appropriate to terminate the possibility that allows Member States to permit the placing on the market of diaphragms containing chrysotile and of chrysotile fibres exclusively for their maintenance.

(12)

A report indicating the amount of chrysotile used in diaphragms in the installations benefiting from exemptions should be transmitted to the Commission. Union legislation on the protection of workers' health and safety already provides that employers must reduce workers' exposure to chrysotile fibres to a minimum and in any case below an established limit value. Member States may set more stringent limit values for such fibres in air and may require their regular measurement/monitoring. The results of any such measurement/monitoring should be included in the report.

(13)

The Forum for Exchange of Information on Enforcement was consulted and its recommendations were taken into account.

(14)

Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 should therefore be amended accordingly.

(15)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee established under Article 133 of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006,

(1)

Article 3(1) of Commission Regulation (EU) No 255/2010 (2) requires that the planning, coordination and execution of air traffic flow management (ATFM) measures by the parties, or agents acting on their behalf, involved in ATFM processes referred to in Article 1(3) shall comply with the ICAO provisions specified in the Annex. That Annex refers to definitions and various provisions laid down in Annex 11 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation (the Chicago Convention), and more specifically to its 13th edition dated July 2001, which incorporates Amendment No 47. Since the adoption of Regulation (EU) No 255/2010, the ICAO has amended a number of definitions and provisions of Annex 11 to the Chicago Convention, most recently incorporating Amendment No 49.

(2)

The Annex to Regulation (EU) No 255/2010 also refers to provisions laid down in the ICAO Regional Supplementary Procedures (Doc 7030), and more specifically to its 5th edition dated 2007. However, the 5th edition of Doc 7030 is in fact dated 2008 and the reference to the edition date 2007 needs to be corrected.

(3)

The references in Regulation (EU) No 255/2010 to Annex 11 to the Chicago Convention and to ICAO Doc 7030 should therefore be corrected and updated in order to enable the Member States to meet their international legal obligations and ensure consistency with the ICAO's international regulatory framework.

(4)

Regulation (EU) No 255/2010 should therefore be amended accordingly.

(5)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Single Sky Committee, established by Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 549/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (3),

(1)

Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 provides for the authorisation of additives for use in animal nutrition and for the grounds and procedures for granting such authorisation.

(2)

In accordance with Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 an application was submitted for the authorisation of ammonium chloride. That application was accompanied by the particulars and documents required under Article 7(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003.

(3)

That application concerns the authorisation of ammonium chloride as a feed additive for ruminants, cats and dogs to be classified in the additive category ‘zootechnical additives’.

(4)

The additive was already authorised for use in lambs for fattening by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 832/2012 (2).

(5)

The European Food Safety Authority (‘the Authority’) concluded in its opinion of 4 December 2015 (3) that, under the proposed conditions of use, the preparation of ammonium chloride is presumed not to have an adverse effect on animal health, human health or the environment and that its use can reduce the pH value in the urine. The Authority does not consider that there is a need for specific requirements of post-market monitoring. It also verified the report on the method of analysis of the feed additive in feed submitted by the Reference Laboratory set up by Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003.

(6)

The assessment of ammonium chloride shows that the conditions for authorisation, as provided for in Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003, are satisfied. Accordingly, the use of that preparation should be authorised as specified in the Annex to this Regulation.

(7)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed,

(1)

Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in Annex XVI, Part A thereto.

(2)

The standard import value is calculated each working day, in accordance with Article 136(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011, taking into account variable daily data. Therefore this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union,

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 2535/2001 (2) opened annual tariff quotas for imports of products of the milk and milk products sector.

(2)

The quantities covered by the applications for import licences lodged from 1 June 2016 to 10 June 2016 for the subperiod from 1 July 2016 to 31 December 2016 are, for some quotas, less than those available. The quantities for which applications have not been lodged should therefore be determined and these should be added to the quantity fixed for the following quota subperiod.

(3)

In order to ensure the efficient management of the measure, this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union,

(1)

Under Article 47(1) of Directive 2006/43/EC, the competent authorities of Member States may allow the transfer of audit working papers or other documents held by statutory auditors or audit firms approved by them and of inspection or investigation reports relating to the audits in question to the competent authorities of a third country only if those authorities meet requirements that have been declared adequate by the Commission and there are reciprocal working arrangements between them and the competent authorities of the Member States concerned. It therefore needs to be determined whether the competent authorities of certain third countries meet requirements which are adequate for the purpose of having audit working papers or other documents held by statutory auditors or audit firms and inspection or investigation reports transferred to them.

(2)

A decision on adequacy under Article 47(3) of Directive 2006/43/EC does not address other specific requirements for the transfer of audit working papers and other documents held by statutory auditors or audit firms and of inspection or investigation reports, such as the agreement on reciprocal working arrangements between the competent authorities set out in Article 47(1)(d) of that Directive, or the requirements for the transfer of personal data set out in Article 47(1)(e) of that Directive.

(3)

For the purposes of this Decision, the competent authorities of certain territories which are designated by law and are in charge of the regulation and/or oversight of statutory auditors and audit firms or of specific aspects thereof in those territories should be treated as competent authorities of third countries.

(4)

A transfer of audit working papers or other documents held by statutory auditors or audit firms and of inspection or investigation reports to the competent authority of a third country or territory reflects the substantial public interest in carrying out independent public oversight. Accordingly, the competent authorities of Member States should, in the framework of the working arrangements referred to in Article 47(2) of Directive 2006/43/EC, ensure that the competent authority of the third country or territory concerned uses any documents transferred to it in accordance with Article 47(1) of that Directive only to exercise its functions of public oversight, external quality assurance and investigations of auditors and audit firms.

(5)

The transfer of audit working papers or other documents held by statutory auditors or audit firms to the competent authority of a third country or territory includes the granting of access to or transmission of such papers to such an authority by the statutory auditor or audit firm holding the paper upon prior agreement of the competent authority of the Member State concerned or by that authority itself.

(6)

When inspections or investigations are carried out, statutory auditors and audit firms are not allowed to grant access to or to transmit their audit working papers or other documents to the competent authorities of third countries or territories under any other conditions than those set out in Article 47 of Directive 2006/43/EC and in this Decision.

(7)

Without prejudice to Article 47(4) of Directive 2006/43/EC, Member States should ensure that, for the purposes of public oversight, quality assurance and investigations of statutory auditors and audit firms, contacts between the statutory auditors or audit firms approved by them and the competent authority of the third country or territory concerned take place via the competent authorities of the Member State concerned.

(8)

Member States should ensure that the working arrangements required by Directive 2006/43/EC to transfer audit working papers or other documents held by statutory auditors or audit firms and of inspection or investigation reports between their competent authorities and the competent authorities of a third country or territory which are subject to this Decision are agreed on the basis of reciprocity, and include protection of any professional secrets and sensitive commercial information contained in such papers relating to the entities audited, including their industrial and intellectual property, or to the statutory auditors and audit firms that audited those entities.

(9)

Where a transfer of audit working papers or other documents held by statutory auditors or audit firms and of inspection or investigation reports to the competent authorities of a third country or territory concerned involves the disclosure of personal data, such a disclosure is lawful only if it also complies with the requirements for international data transfers laid down in Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (2). Article 47(1)(e) of Directive 2006/43/EC therefore requires Member States to ensure that the transfer of personal data between their competent authorities and the competent authority of the third country or territory concerned complies with Chapter IV of Directive 95/46/EC. Member States should ensure that there are appropriate safeguards for the protection of personal data transferred, if necessary through binding agreements, and that the competent authority of a third country or territory will not further disclose personal data contained in the documents transferred without the prior agreement of the competent authorities of the Member States concerned.

(10)

The adequacy of requirements that the competent authority of a third country or territory is subject to is assessed in light of the regulatory cooperation requirements set out in Article 36 of Directive 2006/43/EC or essentially equivalent functional results. In particular, adequacy should be assessed having regard to the competences exercised by the competent authority of the third country or territory concerned, the applicable safeguards against breaches of professional secrecy and confidentiality rules, and the conditions laid down in the laws and regulations of the third country or territory concerned under which those competent authorities may cooperate with the competent authorities of Member States.

(11)

Persons employed or formerly employed by the competent authorities of third countries or territories that receive audit working papers or other documents in accordance with Article 47(1) of Directive 2006/43/EC should be subject to obligations of professional secrecy.

(12)

Statutory auditors and audit firms approved by a Member State that audit companies which have issued securities in Brazil, Dubai International Financial Centre, Guernsey, Indonesia, the Isle of Man, Jersey, Malaysia, South Africa, South Korea, Taiwan or Thailand, or which form part of a group issuing statutory consolidated accounts in one of those third countries or territories, are regulated under the domestic laws of the respective third country or territory. It should therefore be decided whether the competent authorities of those third countries and territories meet requirements which can be considered adequate having regard to the regulatory cooperation requirements set out in Article 36 of Directive 2006/43/EC or essentially equivalent in their function.

(13)

Adequacy assessments for the purposes of Article 47 of Directive 2006/43/EC have been carried out with respect to the competent authorities of Brazil, Dubai International Financial Centre, Guernsey, Indonesia, the Isle of Man, Jersey, Malaysia, South Africa, South Korea, Taiwan and Thailand. Decisions on the adequacy of those authorities should be based on those assessments.

(14)

The Comissão de Valores Mobiliários of Brazil has competence in public oversight, external quality assurance and investigations of auditors and audit firms. It implements adequate safeguards prohibiting and sanctioning disclosure by its current or former employees of confidential information to any third person or authority. Under the laws and regulations of Brazil, it may transfer to the competent authorities of the Member States documents equivalent to those referred to in Article 47(1) of Directive 2006/43/EC. On that basis, the Comissão de Valores Mobiliários of Brazil meets requirements which should be declared adequate for the purposes of Article 47(1)(c) of Directive 2006/43/EC.

(15)

The Dubai Financial Service Authority of Dubai International Financial Centre has competence in public oversight, external quality assurance and investigations of auditors and audit firms. It implements adequate safeguards prohibiting and sanctioning disclosure by its current or former employees of confidential information to any third person or authority. Under the laws and regulations of Dubai and of Dubai International Financial Centre, the Dubai Financial Service Authority may transfer to the competent authorities of the Member States documents equivalent to those referred to in Article 47(1) of Directive 2006/43/EC. On that basis, the Dubai Financial Service Authority of Dubai International Financial Centre meets requirements which should be declared adequate for the purposes of Article 47(1)(c) of Directive 2006/43/EC.

(16)

The Registrar of Companies of Guernsey has competence in public oversight, external quality assurance and investigations of auditors and audit firms. It implements adequate safeguards prohibiting and sanctioning disclosure by its current or former employees of confidential information to any third person or authority. Under the laws and regulations of Guernsey, it may transfer to the competent authorities of the Member States documents equivalent to those referred to in Article 47(1) of Directive 2006/43/EC. On that basis, the Registrar of Companies of Guernsey meets requirements which should be declared adequate for the purposes of Article 47(1)(c) of Directive 2006/43/EC.

(17)

The Finance Professions Supervisory Centre of Indonesia has competence in public oversight, external quality assurance and investigations of auditors and audit firms. The Finance Professions Supervisory Centre of Indonesia carries out its duties together with or in parallel to the Financial Services Authority, but is the national regulator of the audit profession in Indonesia. Therefore, the Finance Professions Supervisory Centre of Indonesia is the competent authority for the purposes of Article 47(1)(c) of Directive 2006/43/EC. It implements adequate safeguards prohibiting and sanctioning disclosure by its current or former employees of confidential information to any third person or authority. A conclusion that the Finance Professions Supervisory Centre of Indonesia may transfer to the competent authorities of the Member States documents equivalent to those referred to in Article 47(1) of Directive 2006/43/EC can presently be based on the interpretation of laws and regulations of Indonesia. The regulatory cooperation between the Finance Professions Supervisory Centre of Indonesia and the competent authorities of the Member States should therefore be subject to close monitoring and review by the Commission. On that basis, the Finance Professions Supervisory Centre of Indonesia meets requirements which should be declared adequate for the purposes of Article 47(1)(c) of Directive 2006/43/EC for a limited period of time.

(18)

The Financial Supervision Commission of the Isle of Man has competence in public oversight, external quality assurance and investigations of auditors and audit firms. It implements adequate safeguards prohibiting and sanctioning disclosure by its current or former employees of confidential information to any third person or authority. Under the laws and regulations of the Isle of Man, it may transfer to the competent authorities of the Member States documents equivalent to those referred to in Article 47(1) of Directive 2006/43/EC. On that basis, the Financial Supervision Commission of the Isle of Man meets requirements which should be declared adequate for the purposes of Article 47(1)(c) of Directive 2006/43/EC.

(19)

The Jersey Financial Services Commission has competence in public oversight, external quality assurance and investigations of auditors and audit firms. It implements adequate safeguards prohibiting and sanctioning disclosure by its current or former employees of confidential information to any third person or authority. Under the laws and regulations of Jersey, it may transfer to the competent authorities of the Member States documents equivalent to those referred to in Article 47(1) of Directive 2006/43/EC. On that basis, the Jersey Financial Services Commission meets requirements which should be declared adequate for the purposes of Article 47(1)(c) of Directive 2006/43/EC.

(20)

The Audit Oversight Board of Malaysia has competence in public oversight, external quality assurance and investigations of auditors and audit firms, including matters of cooperation with relevant foreign authorities on exchange and transfer of information for audit oversight purposes, and this Decision should only cover these competences. The Audit Oversight Board carries out its duties on behalf of the Securities Commission of Malaysia, but operates independently of it. Therefore, the Audit Oversight Board of Malaysia is the competent authority for the purposes of Article 47(1)(c) of Directive 2006/43/EC. It implements adequate safeguards prohibiting and sanctioning disclosure by its current or former employees of confidential information to any third person or authority. Under the laws and regulations of Malaysia, it may transfer to the competent authorities of the Member States documents equivalent to those referred to in Article 47(1) of Directive 2006/43/EC. On that basis, the Audit Oversight Board of Malaysia meets requirements which should be declared adequate for the purposes of Article 47(1)(c) of Directive 2006/43/EC.

(21)

The Independent Regulatory Board for Auditors of South Africa has competence in public oversight, external quality assurance and investigations of auditors and audit firms. It implements adequate safeguards prohibiting and sanctioning disclosure by its current or former employees of confidential information to any third person or authority. Under the laws and regulations of South Africa, it may transfer to the competent authorities of the Member States documents equivalent to those referred to in Article 47(1) of Directive 2006/43/EC. Documents obtained in the performance of inspections and inspection reports may however only be shared with the consent of the auditor or audit firm registered with the Independent Regulatory Board for Auditors of South Africa. That requirement may present difficulties in implementing the regulatory cooperation requirements set out in Article 47 of Directive 2006/43/EC. Therefore, the regulatory cooperation between the Independent Regulatory Board for Auditors of South Africa and the competent authorities of the Member States should be subject to close monitoring and review by the Commission to assess whether the consent requirement presents an obstacle to information exchange in practice. On that basis, the requirements met by the Independent Regulatory Board for Auditors of South Africa should be declared adequate for the purposes of Article 47(1)(c) of Directive 2006/43/EC for a limited period of time.

(22)

The Financial Services Commission of South Korea and the Financial Supervisory Service of South Korea within the Financial Services Commission have competence in public oversight, external quality assurance and investigations of auditors and audit firms. The Financial Services Commission has overall policy responsibility for audit matters, while the Financial Supervisory Service has responsibility for the conduct of inspections and investigations for the Financial Services Commission. This Decision should cover the Financial Supervisory Service within the Financial Services Commission and the competences of the Financial Services Commission for audit oversight. The Financial Services Commission and the Financial Supervisory Service implement adequate safeguards prohibiting and sanctioning disclosure by their current or former employees of confidential information to any third person or authority. Under the laws and regulations of South Korea, they may transfer to the competent authorities of the Member States documents equivalent to those referred to in Article 47(1) of Directive 2006/43/EC. On that basis, the Financial Services Commission of South Korea and the Financial Supervisory Service of South Korea meet requirements which should be declared adequate for the purposes of Article 47(1)(c) of Directive 2006/43/EC.

(23)

The Financial Supervisory Commission of Taiwan has competence in public oversight, external quality assurance and investigations of auditors and audit firms. It implements adequate safeguards prohibiting and sanctioning disclosure by its current or former employees of confidential information to any third person or authority. Under the laws and regulations of Taiwan, it may transfer to the competent authorities of the Member States documents equivalent to those referred to in Article 47(1) of Directive 2006/43/EC. On that basis, the Financial Supervisory Commission of Taiwan meets requirements which should be declared adequate for the purposes of Article 47(1)(c) of Directive 2006/43/EC.

(24)

The Securities and Exchange Commission of Thailand has competence in public oversight, external quality assurance and investigations of auditors and audit firms. It implements adequate safeguards prohibiting and sanctioning disclosure by its current or former employees of confidential information to any third person or authority. Under the laws and regulations of Thailand, it may transfer to the competent authorities of the Member States documents equivalent to those referred to in Article 47(1) of Directive 2006/43/EC. On that basis, the Securities and Exchange Commission of Thailand meets requirements which should be declared adequate for the purposes of Article 47(1)(c) of Directive 2006/43/EC.

(25)

This Decision does not affect the cooperation arrangements referred to in Article 25(4) of Directive 2004/109/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (3).

(26)

This Decision aims to facilitate effective cooperation between the competent authorities of the Member States and those of Brazil, Dubai International Financial Centre, Guernsey, Indonesia, the Isle of Man, Jersey, Malaysia, South Africa, South Korea, Taiwan and Thailand. Its purpose is to allow those authorities to exercise their functions of public oversight, external quality assurance and investigations and, at the same time, to protect the rights of the parties concerned. Member States are under the obligation to communicate to the Commission the reciprocal working arrangements concluded with those authorities to allow the Commission to assess whether cooperation is in accordance with Article 47 of Directive 2006/43/EC.

(27)

The ultimate objective of cooperation on audit oversight with Brazil, Dubai International Financial Centre, Guernsey, Indonesia, the Isle of Man, Jersey, Malaysia, South Africa, South Korea, Taiwan and Thailand is to reach mutual reliance on each other's oversight systems. In that way, transfers of audit working papers or other documents held by statutory auditors or audit firms and of inspection or investigation reports should become the exception. Mutual reliance would be based on the equivalence of auditor oversight systems of the Union and of the third country or territory concerned.

(28)

The Commission will monitor developments in the supervisory and regulatory framework of the third countries and territories concerned on a regular basis. This Decision will be reviewed as appropriate in light of the supervisory and regulatory changes in the Union and in the third countries and territories concerned, taking into account available sources of relevant information. In particular, the Commission, assisted by the CEAOB as referred to in Article 30(7)(c) and Article 30(12) of Regulation (EU) No 537/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council (4), can reassess adequacy at any time, in particular where there has been a change in the relevant law or facts. That reassessment could lead to the withdrawal of its declaration of adequacy.

(29)

The European Data Protection Supervisor delivered an opinion on 17 December 2015.

(30)

The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee established by Article 48(1) of Directive 2006/43/EC,

(1)

the Comissão de Valores Mobiliários of Brazil;

(2)

the Dubai Financial Service Authority of Dubai International Financial Centre;

(3)

the Registrar of Companies of Guernsey;

(4)

the Finance Professions Supervisory Centre of Indonesia;

(5)

the Financial Supervision Commission of the Isle of Man;

(6)

the Jersey Financial Services Commission;

(7)

the Audit Oversight Board of Malaysia;

(8)

the Independent Regulatory Board for Auditors of South Africa;

(9)

the Financial Services Commission of South Korea and the Financial Supervisory Service of South Korea;

(10)

the Financial Supervisory Commission of Taiwan;

(11)

the Securities and Exchange Commission of Thailand.