BlogRegulation

The EU AI Act timeline and what to prepare first

The EU AI Act applies in phases. Different provisions came into effect at different dates, and the obligations for high-risk systems differ from those for GPAI. This piece maps the timeline and the preparation steps that deliver the most value first.

Drel Research10 min read

The EU AI Act does not apply all at once. Different provisions came into force at different dates, and the most substantive obligations — those affecting high-risk AI systems — have deadlines that give organisations meaningful preparation time. Understanding the phased structure is the foundation for a realistic compliance programme: you cannot prioritise correctly without knowing which obligations are already enforceable, which are imminent, and which give you more time.

This piece maps the timeline, explains what each phase means operationally, and describes the preparation sequence that delivers the most value in order of the effective dates.

The phased application structure

Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 entered into force on 1 August 2024, twenty days after publication in the Official Journal. But entry into force is not the same as application. The Act is structured with transition periods that allow organisations, notified bodies, and regulators time to prepare before each set of obligations becomes enforceable.

The phases broadly reflect the urgency of the risks addressed:

  • Prohibited practices — the highest-urgency provisions — applied first, with a six-month transition.
  • GPAI obligations applied twelve months after entry into force.
  • High-risk AI obligations under Annex III apply twenty-four months after entry into force.
  • High-risk AI obligations for Annex I safety-component systems apply thirty-six months after entry into force.

There are also sector-specific and embedded system provisions with longer timelines — see the final entry in the timeline for the 2030 deadline for systems already on the market.

EU AI Act — phased application dates

August 2024
Act entered into forcePassed

Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 published in the Official Journal. 20-day entry into force period.

February 2025
Prohibited AI provisions applyPassed

Article 5 prohibited AI practices are enforceable. Biometric mass identification, social scoring, subliminal manipulation, and related systems must not be placed on the market or used.

August 2025
GPAI model obligations applyNow

Chapter V obligations for general-purpose AI model providers apply. Technical documentation, downstream provider information, and copyright compliance obligations are enforceable. Codes of practice expected.

August 2026
High-risk AI obligations apply (Annex III)2026

Full provider obligations (Articles 9–15, Annex IV) apply to Annex III high-risk AI systems. Notified bodies for conformity assessment are designated. Deployer obligations under Article 26 also apply.

August 2026
General transparency obligations apply2026

Article 50 transparency obligations for chatbots, synthetic content, and emotion recognition systems. Limited-risk tier obligations are enforceable.

August 2027
High-risk obligations apply (Annex I)Future

High-risk obligations for AI systems that are safety components of Annex I products (medical devices, machinery, vehicles, aviation). Extended timeline reflects alignment with existing sector-specific conformity assessment processes.

August 2030
Embedded system obligations applyFuture

High-risk AI systems in products already on the market before August 2026 — embedded in existing product lines — must satisfy the Act's requirements by this date.

Based on the transition provisions in Article 113 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 and the dates in Articles 85, 86, and 112. Dates are from the Act's entry into force in August 2024. Some sector-specific timelines may differ.

Prohibited AI provisions

Article 5 — the prohibited AI practices — applied from February 2025, six months after the Act's entry into force. These are the hardest provisions in the Act: systems in scope cannot be placed on the market or put into service. There are no risk management or documentation alternatives.

The prohibited categories that are most likely to catch organisations by surprise are the emotion recognition restrictions (in workplaces and educational institutions), the biometric categorisation inferences restrictions (inferring political opinions, religious beliefs, sexual orientation, or race), and the predictive policing restrictions. These are areas where commercial AI products may have features that touch the prohibited categories without being obviously within them.

GPAI model provisions

Chapter V obligations for GPAI model providers applied from August 2025. This matters for enterprise organisations in two ways:

First, if your organisation provides a GPAI model — an open-weight model or a model made available to third parties — Chapter V obligations apply now. Technical documentation, downstream provider information, and copyright compliance are all required.

Second, if your organisation uses GPAI models from external providers, the providers are now obligated to publish the downstream provider information and technical documentation that Chapter V requires. This creates an opportunity to use that disclosure to populate the data governance section of your Annex IV documentation for high-risk systems built on GPAI models.

The European AI Office has been developing codes of practice for GPAI providers to facilitate compliance. The codes are voluntary guidance, not hard law, but they represent the practical framework within which major foundation model providers are operating.

High-risk AI obligations

The full provider obligations for Annex III high-risk AI systems — Articles 9–15 and Annex IV technical documentation — apply from August 2026. This is the central compliance deadline for most enterprise organisations.

August 2026 is the point at which high-risk AI systems must not be placed on the market or put into service without satisfying the conformity obligations. For systems already in production before that date, the obligations apply from that date — “already deployed” is not an exemption.

Conformity assessment for high-risk AI systems involves either a notified body assessment (for certain Annex III categories) or a self-assessment with technical documentation. The categories that require notified body involvement are those covered by existing harmonisation legislation with third-party conformity assessment requirements. For the majority of enterprise Annex III systems — employment, credit, essential services — self-assessment with internal technical documentation is the likely route.

The August 2026 deadline is not a point at which you start preparing. It is the point at which preparation must be complete. For high-risk systems with complex documentation requirements, 18–24 months of lead time is realistic.

Transparency obligations

Article 50 transparency obligations for limited-risk systems — chatbots, AI-generated content, emotion recognition — also apply from August 2026. These are operationally simpler than the high-risk obligations: they primarily require disclosure to users and labelling of AI-generated content, rather than pre-market documentation.

The practical implementation for most organisations involves updating user interfaces and terms of service to disclose AI interaction, adding labels to AI-generated content in public communications, and reviewing customer-facing chatbots and virtual assistants for compliance with the disclosure requirement.

Practical preparation sequence

The preparation sequence that delivers the most value in order of deadline urgency starts with inventory and prohibited AI review, proceeds through GPAI documentation and gap analysis for high-risk systems, and concludes with conformity assessment completion before August 2026.

Practical preparation sequence — what to do and when

Now — immediate
  • Review assessed systems for any that may fall within Article 5 (prohibited AI) — these must not be deployed
  • If you use GPAI models from external providers: review the provider's Chapter V documentation and compliance summaries
  • Begin building the AI system inventory if not already started — this is the prerequisite for all downstream work

Article 5 is already enforceable. GPAI obligations apply from August 2025. Inventory is the prerequisite for everything else.

6–12 months out
  • Complete the AI system inventory with tier classification for each discovered system
  • For Annex III high-risk systems: identify documentation gaps against Articles 9–15 and Annex IV
  • For systems approaching substantial modification or new high-risk deployments: begin Article 9 risk management process

August 2026 is the main compliance gate for Annex III high-risk systems. Gap analysis now allows time to address the largest gaps before the deadline.

12–18 months out
  • Complete Annex IV technical documentation for high-risk systems
  • Implement human oversight measures (Article 14) and document them
  • Conduct conformity assessment — notified body assessment or self-assessment depending on system category

Conformity assessment for some high-risk categories requires third-party notified body involvement. Lead time for notified body engagement is significant — do not leave this late.

Ongoing
  • Maintain the AI system inventory as systems change and new systems are deployed
  • Monitor for Annex III category updates — the European Commission can expand the list by delegated act
  • Embed AI Act classification review into procurement and change management processes

The AI Act's obligations are ongoing. The inventory and risk management records must be kept current throughout the system lifecycle.

What to prioritise first

If your organisation has not yet begun EU AI Act preparation, the two tasks with the highest return on effort right now are:

1. Build the AI system inventory. Everything else depends on knowing which systems you have and which tier each falls into. The inventory is the prerequisite for prohibited AI review, GPAI documentation, and high-risk obligation assessment. Without it, any other preparation work is being done blind. See the system inventory guide for the structured discovery process.

2. Classify each system and identify the high-risk ones.Once you have the inventory, tier classification tells you which systems face the August 2026 obligations. For those systems, a gap analysis against Articles 9–15 and Annex IV identifies the documentation work required. The gap analysis is what turns the inventory from an administrative exercise into a compliance programme.

For a structured approach to mapping existing review evidence to EU AI Act obligations and identifying remaining gaps, see the evidence mapping guide.

Blog

Get new posts in your inbox

AI security review, OWASP Agentic Top 10, ISO 42001 evidence, and what AI Committees actually need. No cadence promises — we publish when there's something worth reading.

Start your EU AI Act preparation with the right foundation

Drel's AI security review process produces the system inventory documentation, classification rationale, and obligation evidence that the EU AI Act requires — designed to be completed before the August 2026 deadline.

A note on scope: Drel reviews assessed systems against documented architecture, configuration and intent. It does not ingest live telemetry from production environments. Dispositions reflect the assessed system at the time of review and the re-assessment triggers that govern when the disposition must be revisited.