Does an internal chatbot fall under the EU AI Act?

That depends on what it does and who relies on it, and the answer is for your counsel. We map the system against the categories in Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 and write down the facts your counsel needs to decide.

Depth 10.4 · AI engineering and automation · Level 3

AI governance readiness

AI governance readiness is the preparation a company needs to meet the EU Artificial Intelligence Act, Regulation (EU) 2024/1689. The Act applies to companies that build AI systems or use them in the European market, including companies based outside the EU. It sorts AI systems by risk: some uses are banned, high risk uses carry duties such as risk management, documentation, human oversight and logging, and some systems must tell people they are dealing with AI.

Specification

Input: A list of the AI systems and AI features you build, buy or use, what each is used for, and the documentation you already hold.
Method: We inventory every system, record whether you act as provider or deployer for it, place it in a risk category using the text of the Regulation, and compare what you have with what that category requires. Our review is preparation work, not legal advice, and where a classification is uncertain we say so and recommend you confirm it with counsel.
Deliverable: EU AI Act gap review: the system inventory, a proposed risk category for each system with the reasoning, and a list of gaps, each with an owner.
Measured by: Each system in the inventory has a recorded category, role and owner, and each gap is closed or carries a dated plan.

Most often bought inPayments and fintech

The artefact, before and after

EU AI Act gap review: the system inventory, a proposed risk category for each system with the reasoning, and a list of gaps, each with an owner.

Before: a blank AI governance readiness record with a row for each of ai system inventory, provider or deployer role per system, risk classification against regulation (eu) 2024/1689, transparency and human oversight checks, gap list with owners, and no entries. After: every row carries a finding and a checked status, which is the state the work hands over.

Inside it

01AI system inventory
02Provider or deployer role per system
03Risk classification against Regulation (EU) 2024/1689
04Transparency and human oversight checks
05Gap list with owners

Deliverable · Level 4→ EU AI Act gap reviewAn EU AI Act gap review lists the AI systems a company builds or uses, proposes a risk category for each under Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, and sets out what that category would require against what is in place today. The category and the obligations are for your counsel to confirm.

Typical first engagement

The usual order of a first piece of work. Timing and price are set at scoping, once we have seen the stack.

01System inventoryYou get: Each AI system in use or planned, with its purpose and the data it touches.
02ClassificationYou get: A draft risk category per system under the EU AI Act, for your counsel to confirm.
03Gap reviewYou get: Requirements per category set against current practice, as preparation only.
04Action listYou get: Owners and evidence needed for each open gap.

AI engineering and automation

Next in this line

A question people ask about this

Does an internal chatbot fall under the EU AI Act?: That depends on what it does and who relies on it, and the answer is for your counsel. We map the system against the categories in Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 and write down the facts your counsel needs to decide.

Ask about this part of the stack

Write one question about AI governance readiness in your own systems. We answer it in writing and name what we would need to see to answer it properly.

Send one question

A written reply, no call needed.