AI Act recitals

The recitals of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 set out the reasons for its articles. Official Journal text of 12 July 2024. Retrieved 30 October 2026.

Recital 1The purpose of this Regulation is to improve the functioning of the internal market by laying down a uniform legal framework in particular for the development, the placing on the market, the putting…
Recital 2This Regulation should be applied in accordance with the values of the Union enshrined as in the Charter, facilitating the protection of natural persons, undertakings, democracy, the rule of law and…
Recital 3AI systems can be easily deployed in a large variety of sectors of the economy and many parts of society, including across borders, and can easily circulate throughout the Union.
Recital 4AI is a fast evolving family of technologies that contributes to a wide array of economic, environmental and societal benefits across the entire spectrum of industries and social activities.
Recital 5At the same time, depending on the circumstances regarding its specific application, use, and level of technological development, AI may generate risks and cause harm to public interests and…
Recital 6Given the major impact that AI can have on society and the need to build trust, it is vital for AI and its regulatory framework to be developed in accordance with Union values as enshrined in…
Recital 7In order to ensure a consistent and high level of protection of public interests as regards health, safety and fundamental rights, common rules for high-risk AI systems should be established.
Recital 8A Union legal framework laying down harmonised rules on AI is therefore needed to foster the development, use and uptake of AI in the internal market that at the same time meets a high level of…
Recital 9Harmonised rules applicable to the placing on the market, the putting into service and the use of high-risk AI systems should be laid down consistently with Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 of the…
Recital 10The fundamental right to the protection of personal data is safeguarded in particular by Regulations (EU) 2016/679 (11) and (EU) 2018/1725 (12) of the European Parliament and of the Council and…
Recital 11This Regulation should be without prejudice to the provisions regarding the liability of providers of intermediary services as set out in Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 of the European Parliament and of…
Recital 12The notion of ‘AI system’ in this Regulation should be clearly defined and should be closely aligned with the work of international organisations working on AI to ensure legal certainty, facilitate…
Recital 13The notion of ‘deployer’ referred to in this Regulation should be interpreted as any natural or legal person, including a public authority, agency or other body, using an AI system under its…
Recital 14The notion of ‘biometric data’ used in this Regulation should be interpreted in light of the notion of biometric data as defined in Article 4, point (14) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, Article 3…
Recital 15The notion of ‘biometric identification’ referred to in this Regulation should be defined as the automated recognition of physical, physiological and behavioural human features such as the face, eye…
Recital 16The notion of ‘biometric categorisation’ referred to in this Regulation should be defined as assigning natural persons to specific categories on the basis of their biometric data.
Recital 17The notion of ‘remote biometric identification system’ referred to in this Regulation should be defined functionally, as an AI system intended for the identification of natural persons without their…
Recital 18The notion of ‘emotion recognition system’ referred to in this Regulation should be defined as an AI system for the purpose of identifying or inferring emotions or intentions of natural persons on…
Recital 19For the purposes of this Regulation the notion of ‘publicly accessible space’ should be understood as referring to any physical space that is accessible to an undetermined number of natural persons…
Recital 20In order to obtain the greatest benefits from AI systems while protecting fundamental rights, health and safety and to enable democratic control, AI literacy should equip providers, deployers and…
Recital 21In order to ensure a level playing field and an effective protection of rights and freedoms of individuals across the Union, the rules established by this Regulation should apply to providers of AI…
Recital 22In light of their digital nature, certain AI systems should fall within the scope of this Regulation even when they are not placed on the market, put into service, or used in the Union.
Recital 23This Regulation should also apply to Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies when acting as a provider or deployer of an AI system.
Recital 24If, and insofar as, AI systems are placed on the market, put into service, or used with or without modification of such systems for military, defence or national security purposes, those should be…
Recital 25This Regulation should support innovation, should respect freedom of science, and should not undermine research and development activity.
Recital 26In order to introduce a proportionate and effective set of binding rules for AI systems, a clearly defined risk-based approach should be followed.
Recital 27While the risk-based approach is the basis for a proportionate and effective set of binding rules, it is important to recall the 2019 Ethics guidelines for trustworthy AI developed by the…
Recital 28Aside from the many beneficial uses of AI, it can also be misused and provide novel and powerful tools for manipulative, exploitative and social control practices.
Recital 29AI-enabled manipulative techniques can be used to persuade persons to engage in unwanted behaviours, or to deceive them by nudging them into decisions in a way that subverts and impairs their…
Recital 30Biometric categorisation systems that are based on natural persons’ biometric data, such as an individual person’s face or fingerprint, to deduce or infer an individuals’ political opinions, trade…
Recital 31AI systems providing social scoring of natural persons by public or private actors may lead to discriminatory outcomes and the exclusion of certain groups.
Recital 32The use of AI systems for ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification of natural persons in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement is particularly intrusive to the rights and…
Recital 33The use of those systems for the purpose of law enforcement should therefore be prohibited, except in exhaustively listed and narrowly defined situations, where the use is strictly necessary to…
Recital 34In order to ensure that those systems are used in a responsible and proportionate manner, it is also important to establish that, in each of those exhaustively listed and narrowly defined…
Recital 35Each use of a ‘real-time’ remote biometric identification system in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement should be subject to an express and specific authorisation by a…
Recital 36In order to carry out their tasks in accordance with the requirements set out in this Regulation as well as in national rules, the relevant market surveillance authority and the national data…
Recital 37Furthermore, it is appropriate to provide, within the exhaustive framework set by this Regulation that such use in the territory of a Member State in accordance with this Regulation should only be…
Recital 38The use of AI systems for real-time remote biometric identification of natural persons in publicly accessible spaces for the purpose of law enforcement necessarily involves the processing of…
Recital 39Any processing of biometric data and other personal data involved in the use of AI systems for biometric identification, other than in connection to the use of real-time remote biometric…
Recital 40In accordance with Article 6a of Protocol No 21 on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice, as annexed to the TEU and to the TFEU…
Recital 41In accordance with Articles 2 and 2a of Protocol No 22 on the position of Denmark, annexed to the TEU and to the TFEU, Denmark is not bound by rules laid down in Article 5(1), first subparagraph…
Recital 42In line with the presumption of innocence, natural persons in the Union should always be judged on their actual behaviour.
Recital 43The placing on the market, the putting into service for that specific purpose, or the use of AI systems that create or expand facial recognition databases through the untargeted scraping of facial…
Recital 44There are serious concerns about the scientific basis of AI systems aiming to identify or infer emotions, particularly as expression of emotions vary considerably across cultures and situations, and…
Recital 45Practices that are prohibited by Union law, including data protection law, non-discrimination law, consumer protection law, and competition law, should not be affected by this Regulation.
Recital 46High-risk AI systems should only be placed on the Union market, put into service or used if they comply with certain mandatory requirements.
Recital 47AI systems could have an adverse impact on the health and safety of persons, in particular when such systems operate as safety components of products.
Recital 48The extent of the adverse impact caused by the AI system on the fundamental rights protected by the Charter is of particular relevance when classifying an AI system as high risk.
Recital 49As regards high-risk AI systems that are safety components of products or systems, or which are themselves products or systems falling within the scope of Regulation (EC) No 300/2008 of the European…
Recital 50As regards AI systems that are safety components of products, or which are themselves products, falling within the scope of certain Union harmonisation legislation listed in an annex to this…
Recital 51The classification of an AI system as high-risk pursuant to this Regulation should not necessarily mean that the product whose safety component is the AI system, or the AI system itself as a…
Recital 52As regards stand-alone AI systems, namely high-risk AI systems other than those that are safety components of products, or that are themselves products, it is appropriate to classify them as…
Recital 53It is also important to clarify that there may be specific cases in which AI systems referred to in pre-defined areas specified in this Regulation do not lead to a significant risk of harm to the…
Recital 54As biometric data constitutes a special category of personal data, it is appropriate to classify as high-risk several critical-use cases of biometric systems, insofar as their use is permitted under…
Recital 55As regards the management and operation of critical infrastructure, it is appropriate to classify as high-risk the AI systems intended to be used as safety components in the management and operation…
Recital 56The deployment of AI systems in education is important to promote high-quality digital education and training and to allow all learners and teachers to acquire and share the necessary digital skills…
Recital 57AI systems used in employment, workers management and access to self-employment, in particular for the recruitment and selection of persons, for making decisions affecting terms of the work-related…
Recital 58Another area in which the use of AI systems deserves special consideration is the access to and enjoyment of certain essential private and public services and benefits necessary for people to fully…
Recital 59Given their role and responsibility, actions by law enforcement authorities involving certain uses of AI systems are characterised by a significant degree of power imbalance and may lead to…
Recital 60AI systems used in migration, asylum and border control management affect persons who are often in particularly vulnerable position and who are dependent on the outcome of the actions of the…
Recital 61Certain AI systems intended for the administration of justice and democratic processes should be classified as high-risk, considering their potentially significant impact on democracy, the rule of…
Recital 62Without prejudice to the rules provided for in Regulation (EU) 2024/900 of the European Parliament and of the Council (34), and in order to address the risks of undue external interference with the…
Recital 63The fact that an AI system is classified as a high-risk AI system under this Regulation should not be interpreted as indicating that the use of the system is lawful under other acts of Union law or…
Recital 64To mitigate the risks from high-risk AI systems placed on the market or put into service and to ensure a high level of trustworthiness, certain mandatory requirements should apply to high-risk AI…
Recital 65The risk-management system should consist of a continuous, iterative process that is planned and run throughout the entire lifecycle of a high-risk AI system.
Recital 66Requirements should apply to high-risk AI systems as regards risk management, the quality and relevance of data sets used, technical documentation and record-keeping, transparency and the provision…
Recital 67High-quality data and access to high-quality data plays a vital role in providing structure and in ensuring the performance of many AI systems, especially when techniques involving the training of…
Recital 68For the development and assessment of high-risk AI systems, certain actors, such as providers, notified bodies and other relevant entities, such as European Digital Innovation Hubs, testing…
Recital 69The right to privacy and to protection of personal data must be guaranteed throughout the entire lifecycle of the AI system.
Recital 70In order to protect the right of others from the discrimination that might result from the bias in AI systems, the providers should, exceptionally, to the extent that it is strictly necessary for…
Recital 71Having comprehensible information on how high-risk AI systems have been developed and how they perform throughout their lifetime is essential to enable traceability of those systems, verify…
Recital 72To address concerns related to opacity and complexity of certain AI systems and help deployers to fulfil their obligations under this Regulation, transparency should be required for high-risk AI…
Recital 73High-risk AI systems should be designed and developed in such a way that natural persons can oversee their functioning, ensure that they are used as intended and that their impacts are addressed…
Recital 74High-risk AI systems should perform consistently throughout their lifecycle and meet an appropriate level of accuracy, robustness and cybersecurity, in light of their intended purpose and in…
Recital 75Technical robustness is a key requirement for high-risk AI systems.
Recital 76Cybersecurity plays a crucial role in ensuring that AI systems are resilient against attempts to alter their use, behaviour, performance or compromise their security properties by malicious third…
Recital 77Without prejudice to the requirements related to robustness and accuracy set out in this Regulation, high-risk AI systems which fall within the scope of a regulation of the European Parliament and…
Recital 78The conformity assessment procedure provided by this Regulation should apply in relation to the essential cybersecurity requirements of a product with digital elements covered by a regulation of the…
Recital 79It is appropriate that a specific natural or legal person, defined as the provider, takes responsibility for the placing on the market or the putting into service of a high-risk AI system…
Recital 80As signatories to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the Union and the Member States are legally obliged to protect persons with disabilities from…
Recital 81The provider should establish a sound quality management system, ensure the accomplishment of the required conformity assessment procedure, draw up the relevant documentation and establish a robust…
Recital 82To enable enforcement of this Regulation and create a level playing field for operators, and, taking into account the different forms of making available of digital products, it is important to…
Recital 83In light of the nature and complexity of the value chain for AI systems and in line with the New Legislative Framework, it is essential to ensure legal certainty and facilitate the compliance with…
Recital 84To ensure legal certainty, it is necessary to clarify that, under certain specific conditions, any distributor, importer, deployer or other third-party should be considered to be a provider of a…
Recital 85General-purpose AI systems may be used as high-risk AI systems by themselves or be components of other high-risk AI systems.
Recital 86Where, under the conditions laid down in this Regulation, the provider that initially placed the AI system on the market or put it into service should no longer be considered to be the provider for…
Recital 87In addition, where a high-risk AI system that is a safety component of a product which falls within the scope of Union harmonisation legislation based on the New Legislative Framework is not placed…
Recital 88Along the AI value chain multiple parties often supply AI systems, tools and services but also components or processes that are incorporated by the provider into the AI system with various…
Recital 89Third parties making accessible to the public tools, services, processes, or AI components other than general-purpose AI models, should not be mandated to comply with requirements targeting the…
Recital 90The Commission could develop and recommend voluntary model contractual terms between providers of high-risk AI systems and third parties that supply tools, services, components or processes that are…
Recital 91Given the nature of AI systems and the risks to safety and fundamental rights possibly associated with their use, including as regards the need to ensure proper monitoring of the performance of an…
Recital 92This Regulation is without prejudice to obligations for employers to inform or to inform and consult workers or their representatives under Union or national law and practice, including Directive…
Recital 93Whilst risks related to AI systems can result from the way such systems are designed, risks can as well stem from how such AI systems are used.
Recital 94Any processing of biometric data involved in the use of AI systems for biometric identification for the purpose of law enforcement needs to comply with Article 10 of Directive (EU) 2016/680, that…
Recital 95Without prejudice to applicable Union law, in particular Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Directive (EU) 2016/680, considering the intrusive nature of post-remote biometric identification systems, the…
Recital 96In order to efficiently ensure that fundamental rights are protected, deployers of high-risk AI systems that are bodies governed by public law, or private entities providing public services and…
Recital 97The notion of general-purpose AI models should be clearly defined and set apart from the notion of AI systems to enable legal certainty.
Recital 98Whereas the generality of a model could, inter alia, also be determined by a number of parameters, models with at least a billion of parameters and trained with a large amount of data using…
Recital 99Large generative AI models are a typical example for a general-purpose AI model, given that they allow for flexible generation of content, such as in the form of text, audio, images or video, that…
Recital 100When a general-purpose AI model is integrated into or forms part of an AI system, this system should be considered to be general-purpose AI system when, due to this integration, this system has the…
Recital 101Providers of general-purpose AI models have a particular role and responsibility along the AI value chain, as the models they provide may form the basis for a range of downstream systems, often…
Recital 102Software and data, including models, released under a free and open-source licence that allows them to be openly shared and where users can freely access, use, modify and redistribute them or…
Recital 103Free and open-source AI components covers the software and data, including models and general-purpose AI models, tools, services or processes of an AI system.
Recital 104The providers of general-purpose AI models that are released under a free and open-source licence, and whose parameters, including the weights, the information on the model architecture, and the…
Recital 105General-purpose AI models, in particular large generative AI models, capable of generating text, images, and other content, present unique innovation opportunities but also challenges to artists…
Recital 106Providers that place general-purpose AI models on the Union market should ensure compliance with the relevant obligations in this Regulation.
Recital 107In order to increase transparency on the data that is used in the pre-training and training of general-purpose AI models, including text and data protected by copyright law, it is adequate that…
Recital 108With regard to the obligations imposed on providers of general-purpose AI models to put in place a policy to comply with Union copyright law and make publicly available a summary of the content used…
Recital 109Compliance with the obligations applicable to the providers of general-purpose AI models should be commensurate and proportionate to the type of model provider, excluding the need for compliance for…
Recital 110General-purpose AI models could pose systemic risks which include, but are not limited to, any actual or reasonably foreseeable negative effects in relation to major accidents, disruptions of…
Recital 111It is appropriate to establish a methodology for the classification of general-purpose AI models as general-purpose AI model with systemic risks.
Recital 112It is also necessary to clarify a procedure for the classification of a general-purpose AI model with systemic risks.
Recital 113If the Commission becomes aware of the fact that a general-purpose AI model meets the requirements to classify as a general-purpose AI model with systemic risk, which previously had either not been…
Recital 114The providers of general-purpose AI models presenting systemic risks should be subject, in addition to the obligations provided for providers of general-purpose AI models, to obligations aimed at…
Recital 115Providers of general-purpose AI models with systemic risks should assess and mitigate possible systemic risks.
Recital 116The AI Office should encourage and facilitate the drawing up, review and adaptation of codes of practice, taking into account international approaches.
Recital 117The codes of practice should represent a central tool for the proper compliance with the obligations provided for under this Regulation for providers of general-purpose AI models.
Recital 118This Regulation regulates AI systems and AI models by imposing certain requirements and obligations for relevant market actors that are placing them on the market, putting into service or use in the…
Recital 119Considering the quick pace of innovation and the technological evolution of digital services in scope of different instruments of Union law in particular having in mind the usage and the perception…
Recital 120Furthermore, obligations placed on providers and deployers of certain AI systems in this Regulation to enable the detection and disclosure that the outputs of those systems are artificially…
Recital 121Standardisation should play a key role to provide technical solutions to providers to ensure compliance with this Regulation, in line with the state of the art, to promote innovation as well as…
Recital 122It is appropriate that, without prejudice to the use of harmonised standards and common specifications, providers of a high-risk AI system that has been trained and tested on data reflecting the…
Recital 123In order to ensure a high level of trustworthiness of high-risk AI systems, those systems should be subject to a conformity assessment prior to their placing on the market or putting into service.
Recital 124It is appropriate that, in order to minimise the burden on operators and avoid any possible duplication, for high-risk AI systems related to products which are covered by existing Union…
Recital 125Given the complexity of high-risk AI systems and the risks that are associated with them, it is important to develop an adequate conformity assessment procedure for high-risk AI systems involving…
Recital 126In order to carry out third-party conformity assessments when so required, notified bodies should be notified under this Regulation by the national competent authorities, provided that they comply…
Recital 127In line with Union commitments under the World Trade Organization Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade, it is adequate to facilitate the mutual recognition of conformity assessment results…
Recital 128In line with the commonly established notion of substantial modification for products regulated by Union harmonisation legislation, it is appropriate that whenever a change occurs which may affect…
Recital 129High-risk AI systems should bear the CE marking to indicate their conformity with this Regulation so that they can move freely within the internal market.
Recital 130Under certain conditions, rapid availability of innovative technologies may be crucial for health and safety of persons, the protection of the environment and climate change and for society as a…
Recital 131In order to facilitate the work of the Commission and the Member States in the AI field as well as to increase the transparency towards the public, providers of high-risk AI systems other than those…
Recital 132Certain AI systems intended to interact with natural persons or to generate content may pose specific risks of impersonation or deception irrespective of whether they qualify as high-risk or not.
Recital 133A variety of AI systems can generate large quantities of synthetic content that becomes increasingly hard for humans to distinguish from human-generated and authentic content.
Recital 134Further to the technical solutions employed by the providers of the AI system, deployers who use an AI system to generate or manipulate image, audio or video content that appreciably resembles…
Recital 135Without prejudice to the mandatory nature and full applicability of the transparency obligations, the Commission may also encourage and facilitate the drawing up of codes of practice at Union level…
Recital 136The obligations placed on providers and deployers of certain AI systems in this Regulation to enable the detection and disclosure that the outputs of those systems are artificially generated or…
Recital 137Compliance with the transparency obligations for the AI systems covered by this Regulation should not be interpreted as indicating that the use of the AI system or its output is lawful under this…
Recital 138AI is a rapidly developing family of technologies that requires regulatory oversight and a safe and controlled space for experimentation, while ensuring responsible innovation and integration of…
Recital 139The objectives of the AI regulatory sandboxes should be to foster AI innovation by establishing a controlled experimentation and testing environment in the development and pre-marketing phase with a…
Recital 140This Regulation should provide the legal basis for the providers and prospective providers in the AI regulatory sandbox to use personal data collected for other purposes for developing certain AI…
Recital 141In order to accelerate the process of development and the placing on the market of the high-risk AI systems listed in an annex to this Regulation, it is important that providers or prospective…
Recital 142To ensure that AI leads to socially and environmentally beneficial outcomes, Member States are encouraged to support and promote research and development of AI solutions in support of socially and…
Recital 143In order to promote and protect innovation, it is important that the interests of SMEs, including start-ups, that are providers or deployers of AI systems are taken into particular account.
Recital 144In order to promote and protect innovation, the AI-on-demand platform, all relevant Union funding programmes and projects, such as Digital Europe Programme, Horizon Europe, implemented by the…
Recital 145In order to minimise the risks to implementation resulting from lack of knowledge and expertise in the market as well as to facilitate compliance of providers, in particular SMEs, including…
Recital 146Moreover, in light of the very small size of some operators and in order to ensure proportionality regarding costs of innovation, it is appropriate to allow microenterprises to fulfil one of the…
Recital 147It is appropriate that the Commission facilitates, to the extent possible, access to testing and experimentation facilities to bodies, groups or laboratories established or accredited pursuant to…
Recital 148This Regulation should establish a governance framework that both allows to coordinate and support the application of this Regulation at national level, as well as build capabilities at Union level…
Recital 149In order to facilitate a smooth, effective and harmonised implementation of this Regulation a Board should be established.
Recital 150With a view to ensuring the involvement of stakeholders in the implementation and application of this Regulation, an advisory forum should be established to advise and provide technical expertise to…
Recital 151To support the implementation and enforcement of this Regulation, in particular the monitoring activities of the AI Office as regards general-purpose AI models, a scientific panel of independent…
Recital 152In order to support adequate enforcement as regards AI systems and reinforce the capacities of the Member States, Union AI testing support structures should be established and made available to the…
Recital 153Member States hold a key role in the application and enforcement of this Regulation.
Recital 154The national competent authorities should exercise their powers independently, impartially and without bias, so as to safeguard the principles of objectivity of their activities and tasks and to…
Recital 155In order to ensure that providers of high-risk AI systems can take into account the experience on the use of high-risk AI systems for improving their systems and the design and development process…
Recital 156In order to ensure an appropriate and effective enforcement of the requirements and obligations set out by this Regulation, which is Union harmonisation legislation, the system of market…
Recital 157This Regulation is without prejudice to the competences, tasks, powers and independence of relevant national public authorities or bodies which supervise the application of Union law protecting…
Recital 158Union financial services law includes internal governance and risk-management rules and requirements which are applicable to regulated financial institutions in the course of provision of those…
Recital 159Each market surveillance authority for high-risk AI systems in the area of biometrics, as listed in an annex to this Regulation insofar as those systems are used for the purposes of law enforcement…
Recital 160The market surveillance authorities and the Commission should be able to propose joint activities, including joint investigations, to be conducted by market surveillance authorities or market…
Recital 161It is necessary to clarify the responsibilities and competences at Union and national level as regards AI systems that are built on general-purpose AI models.
Recital 162To make best use of the centralised Union expertise and synergies at Union level, the powers of supervision and enforcement of the obligations on providers of general-purpose AI models should be a…
Recital 163With a view to complementing the governance systems for general-purpose AI models, the scientific panel should support the monitoring activities of the AI Office and may, in certain cases, provide…
Recital 164The AI Office should be able to take the necessary actions to monitor the effective implementation of and compliance with the obligations for providers of general-purpose AI models laid down in this…
Recital 165The development of AI systems other than high-risk AI systems in accordance with the requirements of this Regulation may lead to a larger uptake of ethical and trustworthy AI in the Union.
Recital 166It is important that AI systems related to products that are not high-risk in accordance with this Regulation and thus are not required to comply with the requirements set out for high-risk AI…
Recital 167In order to ensure trustful and constructive cooperation of competent authorities on Union and national level, all parties involved in the application of this Regulation should respect the…
Recital 168Compliance with this Regulation should be enforceable by means of the imposition of penalties and other enforcement measures.
Recital 169Compliance with the obligations on providers of general-purpose AI models imposed under this Regulation should be enforceable, inter alia, by means of fines.
Recital 170Union and national law already provide effective remedies to natural and legal persons whose rights and freedoms are adversely affected by the use of AI systems.
Recital 171Affected persons should have the right to obtain an explanation where a deployer’s decision is based mainly upon the output from certain high-risk AI systems that fall within the scope of this…
Recital 172Persons acting as whistleblowers on the infringements of this Regulation should be protected under the Union law.
Recital 173In order to ensure that the regulatory framework can be adapted where necessary, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 TFEU should be delegated to the Commission to amend the…
Recital 174Given the rapid technological developments and the technical expertise required to effectively apply this Regulation, the Commission should evaluate and review this Regulation by 2 August 2029 and…
Recital 175In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission.
Recital 176Since the objective of this Regulation, namely to improve the functioning of the internal market and to promote the uptake of human centric and trustworthy AI, while ensuring a high level of…
Recital 177In order to ensure legal certainty, ensure an appropriate adaptation period for operators and avoid disruption to the market, including by ensuring continuity of the use of AI systems, it is…
Recital 178Providers of high-risk AI systems are encouraged to start to comply, on a voluntary basis, with the relevant obligations of this Regulation already during the transitional period.
Recital 179This Regulation should apply from 2 August 2026.
Recital 180The European Data Protection Supervisor and the European Data Protection Board were consulted in accordance with Article 42(1) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 and delivered their joint opinion…