DO WE HAVE AN EU AI ACT PROBLEM?
Identify the AI system, intended purpose, actor role, EU exposure, possible risk path and unresolved facts before treating a generic checklist as applicable.
If your organization develops, sells, deploys, imports or operates AI connected to the European market, the hard part is no longer finding the regulation. The hard part is maintaining a defensible record of the system, the obligation, the evidence, the decision, the limitation and what changed.
AI systems change. Vendors change. intended purpose changes. Evidence ages. Guidance changes. People need a current answer to four operational questions.
Identify the AI system, intended purpose, actor role, EU exposure, possible risk path and unresolved facts before treating a generic checklist as applicable.
Map obligations to the documents, tests, notices, decisions, owners, versions and limitations that actually support the position being taken.
Expose evidence gaps, stale evidence, review-required determinations and material changes instead of burying them in folders.
Revalidate when the model, use case, vendor, evidence, authority, deployment or legal-source state changes.
The system starts with a real AI use case, not a subscription tier.
Start with the actual AI system and identify possible actor, scope and risk pathways.
OPEN →02Translate applicable or potentially applicable requirements into bounded evidence and ownership routes.
OPEN →03Create a living System Passport and evidence state instead of a one-time spreadsheet.
OPEN →04Keep prior determinations under pressure when the system or source state changes.
OPEN →Use the free classifier to establish the system, intended purpose, possible actor role, EU exposure and unresolved facts. You do not need to understand TA-14 before starting.
A fixed-scope review for one AI system when your organization needs more than software and wants a bounded second set of eyes on the current position.
Identify the system, intended purpose, organizational role, EU exposure and declared scope.
Map the relevant or potentially relevant EU AI Act routes and preserve unresolved questions rather than forcing certainty.
Separate what is currently supported from evidence gaps, stale objects, unsupported reliance and review-required conditions.
Return a bounded readiness record with findings, limitations and the next evidence actions. The review is not legal advice, certification, conformity assessment or regulatory approval.
The regulation is public. The subscription value is the operating layer that keeps system identity, classification, obligations, evidence, change, review and revalidation connected over time.
Keep a small AI portfolio organized around a living evidence record instead of scattered compliance files.
Turn EU AI Act work into a repeatable team process with owners, evidence gaps, documentation and oversight records.
Operate a serious governance program across a growing portfolio and know what changed, what is under pressure and what must be revalidated.
Give leadership, governance teams and examiners a shared operating picture across business units without collapsing evidence, authority or review boundaries.
Subscription access does not purchase a favorable finding, certification, legal opinion, conformity assessment, CE marking or regulatory approval. Human review remains a separately governed activity unless a specific written scope says otherwise.
Teams selling or deploying AI products into Europe that need system-level evidence and change continuity.
Organizations using AI in recruitment, workforce management, support, monitoring or other consequential workflows.
Providers and operators outside Europe with systems, customers, users or market exposure inside the EU.
Counsel, privacy, risk, security and AI-governance teams that need one operating picture instead of disconnected spreadsheets.
Professionals who need a governed evidence workspace while preserving the boundary between advisory work and formal determinations.
Businesses with enough AI systems that version drift, evidence age and ownership become a portfolio problem.
If you are unsure what applies, classify the system free. If you already know you need help, request the $750 readiness review. If you need continuing evidence infrastructure, start a subscription.
TA-14 can structure and preserve applicability reasoning, evidence, gaps, review, change and outcome records. Subscription access and a readiness review do not themselves constitute legal advice, regulatory approval, CE marking, notified-body conformity assessment, certification or a favorable regulator determination.
TA-14 Exchange Activity
Live cumulative activity recorded across the public Exchange surface.
···
Visitors
Recorded public visitors
···
Page Views
Recorded Exchange views