Rating: On Track
The British Virgin Islands’ implementation of the AEOI Standard is on track with respect to exchanging the information effectively in practice, including in relation to sorting, preparing and validating the information (SR 2.4), most of the requirements in relation to correctly transmitting the information in a timely manner (SRs 2.5 and 2.7) and providing corrections, amendments or additions to the information (SR 2.9). However, some issues were found with respect to exchanging information in a timely manner with all exchange partners (SR 2.6). The requirements in relation to the receipt of the information (SR 2.8) have not been assessed as the British Virgin Islands exchanges information non-reciprocally, so does not receive information. The British Virgin Islands is encouraged to continue its implementation process accordingly, to ensure its ongoing effectiveness.
SR 2.4 Jurisdictions should sort, prepare and validate the information in accordance with the CRS XML Schema and the associated requirements in the CRS XML Schema User Guide and the File Error and Correction-related validations in the Status Message User Guide (i.e. the 50000 and 80000 range).
Findings:
Four (or 6%) of the British Virgin Islands’ exchange partners reported rejecting more than 25% of the files received, of which one reported rejecting more than 50% of files received, due to the technical requirements not being met. This is a relatively high amount when compared to other jurisdictions, although it has reduced over time. It was noted that the British Virgin Islands is taking action to successfully address all of the issues.
Based on these findings it was concluded that, overall, the British Virgin Islands is meeting expectations in relation to sorting, preparing and validating the information. It was also noted that there is room for improvement with respect to the processes to sorting, preparing and validating the information. The British Virgin Islands is therefore encouraged to continue its implementation process accordingly, including in relation to the areas highlighted.
Recommendations:
The British Virgin Islands should continue to engage with its exchange partners to ensure the issues raised are addressed.
The British Virgin Islands should review its systems and procedures to sort, prepare and validate the information to ensure they meet the requirements of the AEOI Standard.
SR 2.5 Jurisdictions should agree and use, with each exchange partner, transmission methods that meet appropriate minimum standards to ensure the confidentiality and integrity of the data throughout the transmission, including its encryption to a minimum secure standard.
Findings:
In order to put in place an agreed transmission method that meets appropriate minimum standards in confidentiality, integrity of the data and encryption for use with each of its exchange partners, the British Virgin Islands linked to the CTS.
Based on these findings it was concluded that the British Virgin Islands is fully meeting expectations in relation to agreeing and using appropriate transmission methods with each of its partners. The British Virgin Islands is encouraged to continue to ensure the ongoing effectiveness of its implementation.
Recommendations:
No recommendations made.
SR 2.6 Jurisdictions should carry out all exchanges annually within nine months of the end of the calendar year to which the information relates.
Findings:
Five exchange partners highlighted delays in the sending of information by the British Virgin Islands (representing 7% of its partners). This represents a very high proportion of exchange partners and has not improved over time. It was noted that the British Virgin Islands successfully addressed most of the issues and is working to send the corresponding information to the remaining partner.
Based on these findings it was concluded that, overall, the British Virgin Islands is meeting expectations in relation to exchanging the information in a timely manner. It was also noted that there is room for improvement with respect to sending information in a timely manner. The British Virgin Islands is encouraged to continue to ensure the ongoing effectiveness of its implementation, including in relation to the area highlighted.
Recommendations:
The British Virgin Islands should ensure it sends information to all of its exchange partners in a timely manner.
SR 2.7 Jurisdictions should send the information in accordance with the agreed transmission methods and encryption standards.
Findings:
Feedback from the British Virgin Islands exchange partners did not raise any concerns with respect to the British Virgin Islands use of the agreed transmission methods and therefore with the British Virgin Islands’ implementation of this requirement.
Based on these findings it was concluded that the British Virgin Islands is fully meeting expectations in relation to sending the information in accordance with the agreed transmission methods and encryption standards. The British Virgin Islands is encouraged to continue to ensure the ongoing effectiveness of its implementation.
Recommendations:
No recommendations made.
SR 2.8 Jurisdictions should have the systems in place to receive information and, once it has been received, should send a status message to the sending jurisdictions in accordance with the CRS Status Message XML Schema and the related User Guide.
It should be noted that, as the British Virgin Islands exchanges information on a non-reciprocal basis and does not therefore receive information, it is not required to have in place procedures to notify its exchange partners. SR 2.8 has therefore not been assessed in this case.
Findings:
Not applicable.
Recommendations:
Not applicable.
SR 2.9 Jurisdictions should respond to a notification from an exchange partner as referred to in Section 4 of the Model CAA (which may include Status Messages) in accordance with the timelines set out in the Commentary to Section 4 of the Model CAA. In all other cases, jurisdictions should send corrected, amended or additional information received from a Reporting Financial Institution as soon as possible after it has been received.
Findings:
The British Virgin Islands appears ready to respond to notifications and to provide corrected, amended or additional information in a timely manner and no such concerns were raised by the British Virgin Islands’ exchange partners and therefore with respect to the British Virgin Islands’ implementation of these requirements.
Based on these findings it was concluded that the British Virgin Islands appears to be meeting expectations in relation to responding to notifications from exchange partners and the sending of corrected, amended or additional information. The British Virgin Islands is encouraged to continue to ensure the ongoing effectiveness of its implementation.
Recommendations:
No recommendations made.