German MEP Jan Philipp Albrecht and activist Max Schrems criticised the new ruling, as they said the Commission could take a “tour of Luxembourg” (where the European Court of Justice is located).  Vera Jourova, a Member of the European Commission responsible for consumer protection, said she was convinced that an agreement could be reached by the end of February.  Many Europeans have called for a mechanism for individual European citizens to file complaints about the use of their data, as well as a transparency system to ensure that the data of European citizens does not fall into the hands of the US secret services.  The Article 29 group acted on this request and stated that it would not be a further delay, until March 2016, to decide on the consequences of the Commission`s new proposal.  The European Commission`s Director of Fundamental Rights, Paul Nemitz, explained at a conference in Brussels in January how the Commission would decide on the adequacy of data protection.  The Economist predicts that it will be more difficult for the Court of Justice to make it more risky once the Commission has adopted a strengthened “adequacy decision”.  Data protection advocate Joe McNamee summed up the situation by pointing out that the Commission had announced agreements prematurely and had thus lost its right to negotiate.  At the same time, the first legal disputes began in Germany: in February 2016, the Hamburg Data Protection Authority was preparing the dispute of three companies that relied on Safe Harbour as a legal basis for their transatlantic data transfers, and two other companies were investigated.  On the other hand, a reaction was immediate.
 Landowners are not required, at the expiry of the SHA contract, to maintain improved habitat conditions above their original value. At the end of the SHA, landowners may, before entering a SHA, cancel conservation measures that increase species populations on their land at the basic level and bring the number of species and habitat back to its state. ShaD can be extended as long as the landowner and USFWS agree each other; However, if the landowner does not renew the contract, the landowner is no longer protected from ASE regulatory sanctions or possible land use restrictions. Figure 1 shows an example of SHA using hectares of significant habitat to determine the landowner`s fundamental liability. That is why tax officers had to check a long list of requirements to determine the category of their expenses, and the process was confusing. To avoid confusion, the IRS has implemented a secure port accounting method for eligible retailers and restaurants. Safe Harbor 401 (k) plans have simple and alternative methods to meet non-discrimination requirements. These retirement accounts created by the Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996 were established in response to the fact that many companies did not implement 401 (k) plans for their employees because the non-discrimination policy was too difficult to understand. These 401 (k) plans provide the employer with a safe haven from compliance issues by providing them with a simplified product. Learn more about a Safe Harbor Agreement that provides suitable habitat for species listed as grey grey and northern owls in Northern California. Safe Harbor`s goal was to provide a unique set of data protection requirements for data transfer across the borders of countries that have joined the Safe Harbor collective.