The peer reviews to assess the standard of exchange of information on request are carried out in two Phases. For Phase 1, where the legal and regulatory framework is examined, each of the ten essential elements of the Terms of Reference of the standard receives a determination, which can be: “The element is in place”, “The element is in place, but certain aspects of the legal implementation of the element need improvement”, or “The element is not in place”. For Phase 2, which look into the implementation of this framework in practice, each essential element is rated as “compliant”, “largely compliant, “partially compliant”, or “non-compliant”. In addition, a jurisdiction that has completed both Phase 1 and Phase 2 reviews is assigned an overall rating, assessing the general level of compliance with the standard.
The Global Forum completed its first round of peer reviews in 2016, and subsequently established a Fast-Track review procedure, which was a one time process to allow jurisdictions to quickly demonstrate the progress made in implementing the international standard on exchange of information on request (the EOIR standard). The Global Forum’s fast track process was conducted in the first half of 2016. It was a rigorous process and informed by peer input but did not involve an on-site visit and does not substitute a full peer review. All jurisdictions with an overall rating of “Partially Compliant” or “Non-Compliant” (or the jurisdictions with a deemed “Non-Compliant” rating, or without a Phase 2 rating because of being blocked from a Phase 2 review for a long time) during the first round of reviews were eligible to apply for a Fast-Track review under the procedure adopted by the Global Forum. It allowed a jurisdiction demonstrating sufficient progress to have a “provisional” overall rating assigned to be taken into account for preparation of lists of jurisdictions not complying with international standards of transparency and exchange of information. Jurisdictions which benefited from fast track will be reviewed early in the second round review process.
These fast track results mark the end of the first round of EOIR peer reviews. In this round, the Global Forum completed 268 peer reviews and assigned compliance ratings to 119 jurisdictions that have undergone both Phase 1 and Phase 2 reviews or the Fast-Track Review procedure.
A second round of peer reviews is now underway, and the first outcomes were published in August 2017.
|Overall Rating Following Peer Reviews against the standard of EOIR (as at July 2018)|
|Ratings based on First round of reviews||
Ratings based on Second round of reviews
China (People’s Republic of), Colombia, Finland, Iceland,
|Estonia, France, Guernsey, Ireland, Isle of Man, Italy, Jersey, Mauritius,
Monaco, New Zealand, Norway, San Marino
|Albania, Argentina, Aruba, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Barbados,
Belize, Botswana, Brazil, British Virgin Islands, Brunei Darussalam,
Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chile, Cook Islands, Cyprus,
Czech Republic, El Salvador, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia,
Gabon, Georgia, Gibraltar, Greece, Grenada, Hong Kong (China),
Israel, Kenya, Latvia, Lesotho, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Macao (China),
Malaysia, Malta, Mauritania, Montserrat, Morocco, Netherlands, Nigeria, Niue,
Pakistan, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Senegal, Singapore,
Slovak Republic, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia,
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Seychelles, Switzerland,
Turks and Caicos Islands, Uganda, United Kingdom, Uruguay
|Australia, The Bahamas, Belgium,
Bermuda, Canada, Cayman Islands,
Denmark, Germany, Hungary, India, Indonesia,
Jamaica, Japan, Philippines, Qatar, Unites States
|Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Costa Rica, Dominica,
Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Federated States of Micronesia, Lebanon, Nauru, Panama, Samoa, United Arab Emirates, Vanuatu
|Provisionally* Largely Compliant|
|Anguilla, Sint Maarten, Turkey||
Curaçao, Ghana, Kazakhstan
|Provisionally* Partially Compliant|
|Trinidad and Tobago**||
* These jurisdictions have been reviewed under the Fast-Track review procedure and assigned a provisional overall rating. These jurisdictions have been scheduled to undergo a full review under the strengthened 2016 Terms of Reference in the near future (see schechule of reviews).
** This jurisdiction applied for the Fast-Track review, but the progress it demonstrated was not sufficient to justify an upgrade of its rating beyond Non-Compliant.