EU List of Non-Cooperative Jurisdictions: Panama, Viet Nam Exit Annex I

On 9 October 2026, EU finance ministers approved Council conclusions (Council document 13854/26) revising the EU list of non-cooperative jurisdictions for tax purposes. Panama and Viet Nam left Annex I, the list itself, and moved to Annex II pending an in-depth review of their exchange-of-information frameworks by the Global Forum. Nobody was added, so Annex I falls from ten jurisdictions to eight. Belize left Annex II, which now holds ten.

Each check that uses the list reads it on its own reference date. Public country-by-country reporting fixes it on 1 March of the financial year. DAC6 hallmark C.1(b)(ii) looks at it when an arrangement becomes reportable, on a date national rules set. AIFMD II third-country conditions and national defensive measures follow national timetables. Some checks pick up the delisting as soon as national rules adopt the new version; public country-by-country reports pick it up only in a later year.

Related reading: DAC6 Mandatory Disclosure Rules

EU list of non-cooperative jurisdictions: who moved on 9 October 2026

The conclusions approve the Code of Conduct Group’s report (doc. 13306/26) and, with it, the revised Annex I. Annex II records commitments made by jurisdictions the Council treats as cooperative. Against the conclusions of 17 February 2026 (doc. 5869/26), these entries changed:

Anguilla stayed in Annex I, and its listing now rests on two grounds: the missing exchange-of-information rating, previously covered by a commitment with a 24 July 2026 deadline, is now a reason in its own right. The Commission says Anguilla did not address the issues with its exchange-of-information framework. Vanuatu’s listing narrowed to the substance ground only. Panama’s foreign-source income exemption item, cited in February, appears nowhere in the October annexes.

Annex I now lists American Samoa, Anguilla, Guam, Palau, the Russian Federation, the Turks and Caicos Islands, the US Virgin Islands and Vanuatu. Annex II lists the British Virgin Islands, Brunei Darussalam, Eswatini, Greenland, Jordan, Montenegro, Morocco, Panama, Türkiye and Viet Nam.

Dates in the October conclusions:

• 22 December 2026: Brunei Darussalam’s extended deadline to finalise its foreign-source income exemption reform, including foreign-source capital gains, retroactive to 1 January 2026.
• 15 February 2027: the British Virgin Islands’ deadline to request and be granted an in-depth Global Forum review.
• Autumn 2027: the BEPS Action 13 peer review report in which Viet Nam committed to have its country-by-country reporting fixes reflected.

Public country-by-country reporting reads the list as it stood on 1 March

Directive (EU) 2021/2101 inserted Articles 48a to 48h, a new Chapter 10a, into the Accounting Directive (2013/34/EU). Article 48b(1) applies to qualifying ultimate parent undertakings governed by a Member State’s law whose consolidated revenue (as defined in Article 48a(2)) exceeds EUR 750 million in each of the last two consecutive financial years. Article 48b also addresses certain standalone undertakings, while Article 48b(4) and (5) establish separate conditions for qualifying medium-sized and large subsidiaries and branches of non-EU undertakings. The applicable entity category and any statutory exemptions should therefore be checked before determining the reporting obligation. Article 48g requires application at the latest from the first financial year starting on or after 22 June 2024, and Article 48d(1) requires publication within 12 months of the balance sheet date.

Article 48c(5) sets the jurisdiction split. The provision requires information to be presented separately for each EU Member State and for each tax jurisdiction listed in Annex I on 1 March of the financial year being reported. A jurisdiction listed in Annex II must be reported separately where it appears in that annex on both 1 March of the reporting financial year and 1 March of the preceding financial year. Information for other tax jurisdictions is presented on an aggregated basis, subject to the Directive’s other applicable presentation requirements. The omission option Member States may allow under Article 48c(6) can never be used for the Annex I and Annex II lines.

Annex II still drives template rows. For a calendar-year 2026 report, the 1 March 2026 list is the February 2026 version, so all ten of its Annex I jurisdictions get separate lines, Panama and Viet Nam included. On the Annex II side, comparing the February 2025 and February 2026 annexes, the jurisdictions present on both dates are Belize, the British Virgin Islands, Brunei Darussalam, Eswatini and Türkiye. Belize’s October removal leaves it on a 2026 report.

For 2027 the answer depends on the list as it stands on 1 March 2027, and the Commission’s evolution chart shows a February revision in each of 2024, 2025 and 2026. One consequence of the two-date test, on one reading: if Panama and Viet Nam are still in Annex II on 1 March 2027, they do not qualify for a separate Annex II line in a 2027 report, because on 1 March 2026 they sat in Annex I. The Article has no rule carrying a jurisdiction across that move.

DAC6 hallmark C.1(b)(ii) turns on the date of the reporting trigger

Hallmark C.1 in Annex IV of the DAC, inserted by Directive (EU) 2018/822, covers deductible cross-border payments between associated enterprises. Limb (b)(ii) applies where the recipient’s jurisdiction of residence is included in a list of third-country jurisdictions assessed by Member States collectively, or within the framework of the OECD, as non-cooperative. Part I of Annex IV applies the main benefit test to limbs (b)(i), (c) and (d). Limb (b)(ii) is not subject to the main benefit test. However, the arrangement must still satisfy the conditions of hallmark C.1, including a deductible cross-border payment between associated enterprises, and the applicable DAC6 reporting conditions.

Which revision of the list applies on a given day is left to national law and guidance. Luxembourg’s Administration des contributions directes, for example, reads the hallmark against the list (Annex I) published in the Official Journal, or a list established by the OECD, and applies whichever list exists on the date of the event that triggers the reporting obligation; the FAQ states that no such OECD list existed when it was published (DAC6 FAQ, question 11.3.3).

Under that reading, an arrangement with a Panamanian or Vietnamese recipient whose trigger fell before the delisting keeps its C.1(b)(ii) analysis. One triggered afterwards no longer meets C.1(b)(ii) through the EU list, and the other C.1 limbs still need checking. Where national guidance keys to Official Journal publication, the operative date is the publication of the October conclusions, which can fall after 9 October.

AIFMD II third-country conditions read Annex I only

Directive (EU) 2024/927 (AIFMD II) added a tax-list condition to the AIFMD third-country articles. Articles 35, 36, 37, 40 and 42 now require that the relevant third country is not mentioned in Annex I to the Council conclusions, and Member States had to apply the amendments from 16 April 2026, subject to the exceptions in Article 3. Where a non-EU AIFM’s third country is added to Annex I after authorisation, the second subparagraph of Article 37(7) requires the manager to rectify the situation within an appropriate period of no longer than two years. Under Article 66(3) of the AIFMD (Directive 2011/61/EU), which AIFMD II did not amend, Articles 35 and 37 to 41 apply only in accordance with a Commission delegated act under Article 67(6) and from the date it specifies; Articles 36 and 42 set the conditions for marketing under national regimes.

Panama’s removal from Annex I eliminates the EU tax-list objection under the relevant AIFMD third-country conditions, subject to the applicable national implementation and assessment date. It does not establish eligibility by itself: the remaining conditions, including applicable tax-information exchange arrangements and the separate high-risk third-country test (the third country must not be identified as a high-risk third country under Article 9(2) of Directive (EU) 2015/849), must still be satisfied (recital 45 of AIFMD II; Ireland’s transposing S.I. No. 181 of 2026 sets the two tests side by side). Annex II status has no effect on the tax condition.

The two lists come from different processes: the tax list from an intergovernmental Council process run through the Code of Conduct Group, the anti-money laundering list from a Commission delegated act within the framework described in our EU AML package guide. A third-country checklist rebuilt for AIFMD II, alongside the AIFMD II Annex IV reporting changes, needs them as separate fields.

National defensive measures follow national timetables

The Code of Conduct Group’s Guidance on defensive measures in the tax area towards non-cooperative jurisdictions, agreed on 14 November 2019 and set out in Annex 4 to Council document 14114/19, asks every Member State to apply at least one of four legislative measures to listed jurisdictions from 1 January 2021 at the latest:

• denial of deductions for costs and payments, such as interest, royalties and service fees, treated as directed to listed jurisdictions;
• CFC rules that bring income of entities or permanent establishments in listed jurisdictions into the taxpayer’s base, applied more strictly than for other jurisdictions;
• higher or targeted withholding tax on payments treated as received in listed jurisdictions;
• limits on participation exemptions for profits received from listed jurisdictions.

Reversal of the burden of proof and special documentation requirements may reinforce them. Paragraph 25 says that on listing or delisting, Member States should apply the measures accordingly as soon as possible, depending on the measure and their rules on enacting laws. Paragraph 14 adds that removal from the EU list does not prevent defensive measures against a jurisdiction that stays on a national list, and paragraph 7 preserves national lists with a broader scope.

For withholding and deductibility checks on payments to Panama or Viet Nam, the open question after 9 October is which Member State’s list governs each payment flow, and from which date.

Frequently Asked Questions

Our financial year runs from 1 July to 30 June. Which 1 March counts for public country-by-country reporting?

Article 48c(5) refers to 1 March of the financial year for which the report is drawn up. Read literally, for a year from 1 July 2026 to 30 June 2027 this is 1 March 2027, with 1 March 2026 as the preceding-year date for the Annex II test. The October revision would govern that report only if the Council has not revised the list again before 1 March 2027.

Does an Annex II jurisdiction such as the British Virgin Islands trigger hallmark C.1(b)(ii)?

Under the Luxembourg reading above, the hallmark refers to Annex I, so Annex II status alone does not meet limb (b)(ii). A deductible payment to an associated enterprise there can still meet another C.1 limb, three of which carry the main benefit test.

Related Articles

• DAC6 Mandatory Disclosure Rules: the cross-border arrangement reporting regime and its hallmarks.
• EU Tax Simplification Package 2026: What the DAC Recast Means for DAC6, DAC7 and CESOP Reporting: the proposed DAC recast.
• AIFMD II Annex IV Reporting Changes: AIFMD II amendments to Annex IV supervisory reporting.
• The EU AML Package: The Countdown to 10 July 2027: the AMLR, AMLD6 and AMLA timetable.

Key Takeaways

• Calendar-year 2026 public country-by-country rows come from the 17 February 2026 annexes: ten Annex I lines plus Belize, the British Virgin Islands, Brunei Darussalam, Eswatini and Türkiye.
• Anguilla and the Turks and Caicos Islands remain in Annex I, so they still fail the AIFMD II tax-list condition.
• Re-test deductibility and withholding on Panama and Viet Nam flows Member State by Member State.
• Keep the EU tax list and the Article 9(2) high-risk third-country list as separate checklist fields.
• Record the Official Journal reference for the 9 October conclusions once it appears, where national DAC6 or defensive-measure rules key to publication.

Sources and References

• Council conclusions of 9 October 2026, doc. 13854/26: Council document 13854/26 (PDF)
• Council conclusions of 17 February 2026, doc. 5869/26: Council document 5869/26 (PDF)
• Council conclusions of 18 February 2025, doc. 6322/25: Council document 6322/25 (PDF)
• European Commission, DG TAXUD news, 9 October 2026: Commission news item
• European Commission, EU list evolution chart, 9 October 2026: EU List Evolution (PDF)
• European Commission, Common EU list of third country jurisdictions for tax purposes: Commission list page
• Directive (EU) 2021/2101 (public country-by-country reporting), Articles 48b, 48c, 48d and 48g: EUR-Lex
• Council Directive (EU) 2018/822 (DAC6), Annex IV hallmark C.1: EUR-Lex
• Directive (EU) 2024/927 (AIFMD II), Articles 35, 36, 37, 40 and 42 as amended, recital 45 and Article 3: EUR-Lex
• Directive 2011/61/EU (AIFMD), Articles 66(3), 67(6) and 68: EUR-Lex
• Directive (EU) 2015/849 (anti-money laundering), Article 9(2) (high-risk third countries): EUR-Lex
• Code of Conduct Group (Business Taxation), Report to the Council, doc. 14114/19, Annex 4 (defensive measures guidance): Council document 14114/19 (PDF)
• Administration des contributions directes (Luxembourg), DAC6 FAQ, question 11.3.3: ACD DAC6 FAQ (PDF, French)
• Ireland, S.I. No. 181 of 2026 (AIFMD II transposition): Irish Statute Book (PDF)

Before 1 March 2027: one reference date per check

The artifact to produce now is a register with one row per check: the provision, the reference date it uses, and the list version that date points to. For public country-by-country reporting the date is 1 March of the financial year; for DAC6 and AIFMD II it comes from national rules; for defensive measures, from each Member State’s enactment. Refresh the register when the Council next revises the list, and before 1 March 2027.

Disclaimer: The information on RegReportingDesk.com is for educational and informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal, regulatory, tax, or compliance advice. Always consult your compliance officer, legal counsel, or the relevant supervisory authority for guidance specific to your institution.