CASPs operating globally face CARF requirements across multiple jurisdictions. Effective coordination is essential for efficient compliance while managing varying requirements, timelines, and local adaptations.
Jurisdiction Mapping
For each jurisdiction, document:
- Implementation status and effective dates
- Registration requirements
- Specific variations from OECD model
- Reporting deadlines
- Submission channels and formats
As of 2026, 76 jurisdictions have committed to implementing CARF. Track implementation status carefully as dates and requirements vary significantly.
Requirement Tracking
Maintain a matrix of requirements:
- Data elements required per jurisdiction
- TIN validation rules
- XML schema versions
- Penalty frameworks
Data Management
Design for multi-jurisdiction needs:
- Superset data collection: Collect all potentially required data upfront
- Jurisdiction tagging: Associate users with reporting jurisdictions
- Filtered report generation: Generate jurisdiction-specific reports
- Centralized master data: Single source of truth for user information
Reporting Coordination
- Consolidated reporting calendar
- Dependency management between jurisdictions
- Resource allocation across jurisdictions
- Progress tracking and escalation
When jurisdictions have overlapping deadlines, plan resource allocation carefully. Missing one deadline while meeting another still results in penalties.
Technology Approach
- Configurable jurisdiction rules
- Multi-format output generation
- Jurisdiction-specific validation
- Centralized vs distributed architecture
Conclusion
Multi-jurisdiction reporting requires careful planning and flexible systems. Invest in infrastructure that scales across requirements and can adapt as new jurisdictions implement CARF.
Automate CARF Compliance
Self-certification, TIN validation, transaction reporting, and XML generation for 76 jurisdictions.