Jurisdiction variants on transparency reports

The producer's Transparency reports — Article 19 / S.I. 567/2021 obligation derives from EU Directive 2019/790, but each EU member state transposed it into national law separately. The legal citation that appears on a transparency report is driven by the recipient's country of residence, not the producer's.

The seven currently-covered jurisdictions

Why this matters

A Dutch writer with a profit-participation deal at an Irish producer is entitled to a transparency report framed under Dutch law — not Irish law — even though the producer is Irish and the contract may have an Irish governing-law clause. The Directive's protection is recipient-side.

What changes in the report

• The cover-page legal-basis citation
• The reporting frequency reference (where the local transposition differs)
• The dispute-forum reference
• The local Article 20 best-seller adjustment citation
• Local language for technical concepts (mode of exploitation / net profits / etc.)

The underlying financial numbers don't change — the framing does.

In Togra

Producer sets the residency on each profit-participant on the participant editor; Togra picks the right jurisdiction variant automatically when generating the transparency report. The recipient's /r.php?t=<token> view renders the report under the correct legal framing.

Adding a new jurisdiction

The variant catalogue is data-driven. Adding (say) Belgium or Portugal is a config addition, not a code change.