Appearance
EU AI Act — Commission guidance
The European Commission has issued interpretive guidance on five areas of the EU AI Act: the definition of an AI system (Article 3(1)), the prohibited AI practices (Article 5), the classification of high-risk AI systems (Article 6, in draft form), the transparency obligations for certain AI systems (Article 50), and the scope of obligations for general-purpose AI models (Chapter V). This page is the entry point for the docs.modulos.ai treatment of those seven source documents.
Status
Commission interpretive guidance, not binding law. The EU AI Act text and any Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) interpretation prevail in case of conflict. The high-risk classification guidance on this site is currently a draft whose stakeholder consultation closed 23 July 2026 (extended from 23 June); the Commission has stated the final guidelines will be adopted by the end of 2026, and the text may change before then. The transparency guidance (Article 50) had its content approved on 20 July 2026 and awaits formal adoption once all language versions are available.
Quick decision
- You want to know whether your system falls within the AI Act at all → Commission guidance on the AI system definition (Article 3(1)).
- You want to know whether your intended use is prohibited → Commission guidance on prohibited AI practices (Article 5).
- You want to know whether your system is high-risk → Commission draft guidance on high-risk classification (Article 6).
- You want concrete examples for an Annex III use case → Commission draft worked examples for the eight Annex III categories.
- You want to know how the transparency duties apply to chatbots, synthetic content, or deepfakes → Commission guidance on Article 50 transparency obligations.
- You want to know whether your model is a GPAI model, or whether modifying one makes you a provider → Commission guidance on GPAI-model scope (Chapter V).
- You want the underlying law, not the interpretation → start at the EU AI Act overview.
TL;DR
- Commission guidance under Article 96 AI Act is soft law — interpretive, not binding. The Regulation text and the CJEU prevail.
- Five sets, seven Commission source documents: the AI-system definition (C(2025) 5053, final, 29 July 2025); prohibited practices (C(2025) 5052, final, 29 July 2025); the draft high-risk classification guidelines (May 2026, three companion documents, consultation closed 23 July 2026); the transparency obligations (C(2026) 5054, content approved 20 July 2026); and the GPAI-model scope guidelines (C(2025) 7719, final, 19 November 2025).
- The final adopted Communications (definition, prohibited practices, GPAI models) are stable references. The draft high-risk guidance may change before adoption, and the transparency guidance awaits formal adoption — flag this in any compliance assessment that relies on them.
- Market surveillance authorities will read the Commission's interpretation closely; documenting how your own assessment relates to it is good practice.
- This site keeps the Regulation text on the primary EU AI Act spokes and the Commission's reading on the
commission-guidance/pages. The split is intentional.
What Commission guidance is and is not
Article 96(1) AI Act mandates the Commission to develop guidelines on the application of the Regulation. These guidelines have a specific legal character:
- They are adopted by the Commission as Communications, not as legislative acts. They go through Commission internal procedures and stakeholder consultation, not the ordinary legislative procedure.
- They state the Commission's interpretation. They do not amend the Regulation. They cannot create new obligations beyond the Regulation text, and they cannot remove obligations the Regulation imposes.
- They are not binding on Member States, national market surveillance authorities, providers, deployers, courts, or the CJEU. The CJEU has the final word on the meaning of EU law.
- In practice, they shape how market surveillance authorities approach enforcement and how courts read ambiguous Regulation text. A defensible compliance position usually engages with the Commission's reading even where it ultimately departs from it.
The Commission itself states this status explicitly in each Communication — see for example the AI-system definition guidance at paragraph (7): "The Guidelines are not binding. Any authoritative interpretation of the AI Act may ultimately only be given by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU)."
The guidance source documents
| Document | Identifier | Status | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Commission Guidelines on the definition of an AI system | C(2025) 5053 final | Final Communication | 29 July 2025 | AI Act Service Desk PDF |
| Commission Guidelines on prohibited AI practices | C(2025) 5052 final | Final Communication | 29 July 2025 | AI Act Service Desk PDF |
| Draft Commission Guidelines on the classification of high-risk AI systems — general principles | (consultation draft) | Draft for stakeholder consultation | May 2026, consultation closed 23 July 2026 | Commission newsroom PDF |
| Draft Commission Guidelines on the classification of high-risk AI systems — Annex I route | (consultation draft) | Draft for stakeholder consultation | May 2026, consultation closed 23 July 2026 | Annex I PDF |
| Draft Commission Guidelines on the classification of high-risk AI systems — Annex III route | (consultation draft) | Draft for stakeholder consultation | May 2026, consultation closed 23 July 2026 | Annex III PDF |
| Commission Guidelines on the transparency obligations under Article 50 | C(2026) 5054 | Content approved; formal adoption pending translation | 20 July 2026 | Guidelines PDF |
| Commission Guidelines on the scope of obligations for providers of GPAI models | C(2025) 7719 final | Final Communication | 19 November 2025 (first published 18 July 2025) | Commission PDF |
The three draft high-risk documents are companions and are intended to be read together. This site keeps the classification framework on one page and the worked examples on a separate page because the framework is decision-logic-dense and the examples are reference material.
Primary source
Commission Communications adopted on 29 July 2025 for the definition and prohibited-practices guidelines (C(2025) 5053 and C(2025) 5052). Draft high-risk classification guidelines published on 19 May 2026 for stakeholder consultation that closed 23 July 2026. The final Communications and the three draft high-risk consultation documents © European Union. PDFs available via the AI Act Service Desk and via the Commission newsroom redirection links referenced in the table above.
How to use the guidance in a Modulos compliance program
Each guidance document anchors to a specific Modulos requirement on the EU AI Act framework template:
| Guidance document | Article | Modulos requirement | Code |
|---|---|---|---|
| AI-system definition (final) | Article 3(1) | AI System Classification | MRF-38 |
| Prohibited AI practices (final) | Article 5 | Art. 5 — Prohibited AI practices | MRF-119 |
| High-risk classification (draft) — framework | Article 6(1), 6(2), 6(3) | AI System Classification; Art. 6 — AI system classification exemption | MRF-38, MRF-111 |
| High-risk classification (draft) — worked examples | Article 6 + Annex I/III | AI System Classification; Art. 6 — AI system classification exemption | MRF-38, MRF-111 |
| Transparency obligations (content approved) | Article 50(1)–(4) | Transparent Interaction; Computer-Generated Works Marking; Transparency of Biometric Categorisation / Emotion Recognition / Deepfakes / Computer-Generated Reporting | MRF-44, MRF-45, MRF-58, MRF-59, MRF-60, MRF-61 |
| GPAI-model scope (final) | Articles 51–55, Article 3(63) | GPAIM Classification; Art. 52 — GPAIM classification exemption | MRF-120, MRF-121 |
The Modulos framework templates are OFF-1 (organization) and MFF-1 (AI application). For details see Operationalizing the EU AI Act in Modulos.
Cross-framework mapping (preview)
| Commission guidance | Adjacent reading |
|---|---|
| Definition (Article 3(1)) | OECD updated AI-system definition (2024); ISO/IEC 22989 vocabulary; NIST AI RMF Section 2 (Characteristics of trustworthy AI). |
| Prohibited practices (Article 5) | UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of AI; OECD AI Principles (2019/2024); Council of Europe Framework Convention on AI. |
| High-risk classification (Article 6) | OECD high-risk classification framework; NIST AI RMF MAP function (system characterization); national risk-based AI laws (e.g. Colorado SB 24-205, Canada AIDA draft). |
| GPAI-model scope (Chapter V) | NIST AI RMF Generative AI Profile; OECD definitions of AI models/systems; emerging compute-reporting practice. |
Related pages
Definition of an AI system
The seven elements of Article 3(1) per Commission interpretation
Prohibited practices
Article 5(1)(a)–(h) Commission interpretation + RBI authorization regime
High-risk classification
Article 6(1) / 6(2) / 6(3) decision framework — draft guidance
High-risk worked examples
Annex I sectoral examples + Annex III per-sub-point examples — draft guidance
Transparency obligations
Article 50(1)–(5) interactive disclosure, synthetic-content marking, emotion/biometric, deepfakes — content approved
GPAI models
The 10²³ GPAI-model criterion, the one-third-compute modifier rule, compute estimation, AI agents — final guidance
EU AI Act overview
The underlying Regulation: four obligation regimes, phased application, AI Omnibus
Operationalizing the EU AI Act in Modulos
OFF-1 + MFF-1 rollout, scoping, evidence, exports
Source attribution
Commission Communication C(2025) 5052 final, 29 July 2025 — Commission Guidelines on prohibited artificial intelligence practices established by Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (AI Act). Commission Communication C(2025) 5053 final, 29 July 2025 — Commission Guidelines on the definition of an artificial intelligence system established by Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (AI Act). Draft Commission Guidelines on the classification of high-risk artificial intelligence systems under Article 6 of the EU AI Act for stakeholder consultation, May 2026 (three companion documents). Commission Guidelines on the implementation of the transparency obligations for certain AI systems under Article 50 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (AI Act), C(2026) 5054, content approved 20 July 2026 (formal adoption pending translation). Commission Communication C(2025) 7719 final, 19 November 2025 (first published 18 July 2025) — Commission Guidelines on the scope of the obligations for providers of general-purpose AI models established by Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (AI Act). The final Communications, the draft high-risk consultation documents, and the content-approved transparency guidelines © European Union. PDFs available via the AI Act Service Desk and the Commission newsroom.
Disclaimer
This page is for general informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice.