{"id":25022,"date":"2025-04-16T14:57:11","date_gmt":"2025-04-16T14:57:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/25022\/"},"modified":"2025-04-16T14:57:11","modified_gmt":"2025-04-16T14:57:11","slug":"the-eu-ai-act-whats-not-going-according-to-the-plan","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/25022\/","title":{"rendered":"The EU AI Act: What\u2019s (Not) Going According to the Plan"},"content":{"rendered":"

The EU AI Act<\/a> is set to become the world\u2019s first major regulation focused entirely on artificial intelligence. It aims to ensure that AI systems used in Europe are safe, fair, and respect people\u2019s rights. But as the rules start to take shape, many companies\u2014especially startups and small businesses\u2014are wondering: what\u2019s the current status, and what do we need to do to prepare?<\/p>\n

This is what we know about the implementation timeline<\/a> from the European Commission: The AI Act officially entered into force on 1 August 2024<\/b>, but it will be rolled out in phases. From 2 February 2025<\/b>, the first provisions<\/a>\u2014like the bans on certain unacceptable AI practices and the obligation to promote AI literacy\u2014 entered into force. Next, the governance framework and the rules for general-purpose AI models will kick in on 2 August 2025<\/b>. The bulk of the law, including the main requirements for high-risk AI systems, will apply from 2 August 2026<\/b>. For high-risk AI systems embedded into regulated products like medical devices or cars, the deadline is extended to 2 August 2027<\/b>.<\/p>\n

A new report<\/a> by Dr. Robert Kilian, Linda J\u00e4ck, and Dominik Ebel offers an inside look at how the AI Act is being implemented<\/b>, with a focus on one of its most important (and complicated) parts: technical standards<\/b>. Their conclusions are a result of in-depth qualitative interviews with 23 leading European AI companies, including Mistral and Helsing.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The AI Act sets out strict rules for \u201chigh-risk\u201d AI systems\u2014like those used in healthcare, hiring, finance, or critical infrastructure. But instead of giving step-by-step instructions, the law stays quite general. That\u2019s where technical standards<\/b> come in.<\/p>\n

These standards are like instruction manuals that explain how companies can meet the law\u2019s requirements. If a company follows them, it\u2019s assumed to be in compliance. This makes them essential for product development, legal certainty, and market access in the EU.<\/p>\n

Where are we now?<\/p>\n

The EU asked a group of experts (under the CEN-CENELEC JTC 21 committee) to draft around 35 technical standards<\/b> that will support the AI Act. These cover areas like risk management, data quality and bias, transparency for users, human oversight, cybersecurity and accuracy<\/b>.\u00a0<\/p>\n

But most of these standards are still being written<\/b>. Originally, they were supposed to be ready by April 2025<\/b>, but delays have pushed that deadline to August 2025<\/b>\u2014and even that looks optimistic.<\/p>\n

Once finished, the standards will need to be reviewed and officially published, probably in early 2026<\/b>. That gives companies just a few months to implement them before the AI Act starts applying to high-risk systems in August 2026<\/b>.<\/p>\n

Challenges ahead<\/p>\n

The report identifies several key challenges<\/b> for companies preparing for compliance. First, the timeline is tight<\/b>. Having only six to eight months<\/b> to digest, implement, and validate dozens of new technical standards is a major concern, particularly for smaller teams without legal or compliance departments.<\/p>\n

Second, there\u2019s the issue of cost<\/b>. Buying access to all relevant standards can easily run into the thousands of euros, which can be a serious burden for startups and SMEs. Even knowing which standards apply to your AI system can be a challenge in itself.<\/p>\n

Another major concern is access to the standards<\/b>. Until recently, many harmonized standards were not publicly available, even though companies were expected to comply with them. A recent ruling from the EU Court of Justice in the Malamud case<\/a> addressed this by confirming that such standards must be freely accessible. While this is a positive development, it has triggered pushback from international standardization bodies that rely on selling access to these documents.<\/p>\n

Finally, there\u2019s the issue of who gets a seat at the table<\/b>. The standardization process has been dominated by large tech and consulting firms<\/b>\u2014many based outside the EU. Meanwhile, smaller European players, academic institutions, and civil society groups have struggled to participate due to limited time, funding, or expertise. This imbalance could result in standards that reflect the priorities of big industry players rather than the broader AI ecosystem.<\/p>\n

What can be done?<\/p>\n

The authors of the report suggest several ways to improve the process<\/b>:<\/p>\n