Does Argentina Law 25.326 (Personal Data Protection Law) cover AICPA Privacy Management Framework (PMF)?

69% of AICPA Privacy Management Framework (PMF) you already have

Argentina Law 25.326 (Personal Data Protection Law) already covers about 69% of AICPA Privacy Management Framework (PMF), leaving 8 of 26 controls as genuinely new work.

Already covered 0 Likely covered 18 New work 8

No control in Argentina Law 25.326 (Personal Data Protection Law) maps directly to one in AICPA Privacy Management Framework (PMF). Everything counted as covered is covered because both map to the same third standard, which is what a crosswalk is, but it is an inference rather than a lookup.

What is genuinely new work

Nothing in Argentina Law 25.326 (Personal Data Protection Law) reaches these. This is the list to scope.

PMF-A.1

Individual Access Rights

PMF-A.2

Access Request Process

PMF-AN.1

Privacy Notice

PMF-AN.3

Privacy Agreements

PMF-D.1

Third-Party Disclosure Controls

PMF-M.2

Privacy Policies and Procedures

PMF-ME.1

Privacy Program Monitoring

PMF-URD.3

Secure Disposal

Show the 18 you already have

PMF-AN.2

Purpose Specification

PMF-CC.1

Lawful and Fair Collection

PMF-CC.2

Collection Limitation

PMF-CC.3

Consent Mechanisms

PMF-D.2

Third-Party Agreements

PMF-D.3

Onward Transfer Accountability

PMF-DI.1

Data Accuracy

PMF-DI.2

Data Quality Processes

PMF-M.1

Privacy Program Governance

PMF-M.3

Privacy Risk Assessment

PMF-M.4

Privacy Incident Management

PMF-ME.2

Complaint Handling

PMF-ME.3

Enforcement and Remediation

PMF-SP.1

Information Security Program

PMF-SP.2

Security Safeguards

PMF-SP.3

Security Testing and Monitoring

PMF-URD.1

Use Limitation

PMF-URD.2

Retention Periods

How this is calculated

Already covered means a mapping runs from a control in Argentina Law 25.326 (Personal Data Protection Law) to that control. Likely covered means no direct mapping exists but both frameworks map to the same control in a third standard. New work means neither. We keep those separate rather than adding them into one friendlier number, because blending them would present a two-hop inference as a verified fact.

Coverage is not symmetric. Run it the other way and you will get a different number; both are correct.

From 332,959 cross-framework control mappings across 723 frameworks, 531 of them verified against their source documents. It does not tell you that you are compliant: a mapped control means the two standards ask for the same thing, not that you have done it.

Try another pair · Today's edition