Chapter III · Section 3 · Obligations of providers and deployers of high-risk AI systems and other parties
Article 25 — Responsibilities along the AI value chain
▼ Primary text, verbatim. Our annotations appear below, visibly separated.
1. Any distributor, importer, deployer or other third-party shall be considered to be a provider of a high-risk AI system for the purposes of this Regulation and shall be subject to the obligations of the provider under Article 16, in any of the following circumstances:
(a) they put their name or trademark on a high-risk AI system already placed on the market or put into service, without prejudice to contractual arrangements stipulating that the obligations are otherwise allocated;
(b) they make a substantial modification to a high-risk AI system that has already been placed on the market or has already been put into service in such a way that it remains a high-risk AI system pursuant to Article 6;
(c) they modify the intended purpose of an AI system, including a general-purpose AI system, which has not been classified as high-risk and has already been placed on the market or put into service in such a way that the AI system concerned becomes a high-risk AI system in accordance with Article 6.
2. Where the circumstances referred to in paragraph 1 occur, the provider that initially placed the AI system on the market or put it into service shall no longer be considered to be a provider of that specific AI system for the purposes of this Regulation.
That initial provider shall closely cooperate with new providers and shall make available the necessary information and provide the reasonably expected technical access and other assistance that are required for the fulfilment of the obligations set out in this Regulation, in particular with regard to compliance with the conformity assessment of high-risk AI systems.
In particular, the obligation laid down in the second subparagraph shall include, where relevant for the purposes specified therein, the following:
(a) making available of technical documentation sufficient to assess compliance with the requirements laid down in Article 16;
(b) informing the new providers about known limitations and failure modes; and
(c) providing the new providers with targeted technical access, including for testing and validation.
This paragraph shall not apply in cases where the initial provider has clearly specified that its AI system is not to be changed into a high-risk AI system and therefore does not fall under the obligation to cooperate with the new providers and hand over the documentation.
3. In the case of high-risk AI systems that are safety components of products covered by the Union harmonisation legislation listed in Section A of Annex I, the product manufacturer shall be considered to be the provider of the high-risk AI system, and shall be subject to the obligations under Article 16 under either of the following circumstances:
(a) the high-risk AI system is placed on the market together with the product under the name or trademark of the product manufacturer;
(b) the high-risk AI system is put into service under the name or trademark of the product manufacturer after the product has been placed on the market.
4. The provider of a high-risk AI system and the third party that supplies an AI system, AI model, tools, services, components, or processes that are used or integrated in a high-risk AI system shall, by written agreement, specify the necessary information, capabilities, technical access and other assistance based on the generally acknowledged state of the art, in order to enable the provider of the high-risk AI system to fully comply with the obligations set out in this Regulation. This paragraph shall not apply to third parties making accessible to the public tools, services, processes, or components, other than general-purpose AI models, under a free and open-source licence.
The AI Office may develop and recommend voluntary model terms for contracts between providers of high-risk AI systems and third parties that supply tools, services, components or processes that are used for or integrated into high-risk AI systems. When developing those voluntary model terms, the AI Office shall take into account possible contractual requirements applicable in specific sectors or business cases. The voluntary model terms shall be published and be available free of charge in an easily usable electronic format.
5. Paragraphs 2 and 3 are without prejudice to the need to observe and protect intellectual property rights, confidential business information and trade secrets in accordance with Union and national law.
This text is meant purely as a documentation tool and has no legal effect. The Union's institutions do not assume any liability for its contents. The authentic versions of the relevant acts, including their preambles, are those published in the Official Journal of the European Union and available in EUR-Lex.
Passages marked with the accent edge in the primary text were inserted or replaced by the amendment.
Show the text as adopted, before the amendment
The authentic 2024 text of this provision, shown for comparison. It no longer states the law.
1. Any distributor, importer, deployer or other third-party shall be considered to be a provider of a high-risk AI system for the purposes of this Regulation and shall be subject to the obligations of the provider under Article 16, in any of the following circumstances:
(a) they put their name or trademark on a high-risk AI system already placed on the market or put into service, without prejudice to contractual arrangements stipulating that the obligations are otherwise allocated;
(b) they make a substantial modification to a high-risk AI system that has already been placed on the market or has already been put into service in such a way that it remains a high-risk AI system pursuant to Article 6;
(c) they modify the intended purpose of an AI system, including a general-purpose AI system, which has not been classified as high-risk and has already been placed on the market or put into service in such a way that the AI system concerned becomes a high-risk AI system in accordance with Article 6.
2. Where the circumstances referred to in paragraph 1 occur, the provider that initially placed the AI system on the market or put it into service shall no longer be considered to be a provider of that specific AI system for the purposes of this Regulation. That initial provider shall closely cooperate with new providers and shall make available the necessary information and provide the reasonably expected technical access and other assistance that are required for the fulfilment of the obligations set out in this Regulation, in particular regarding the compliance with the conformity assessment of high-risk AI systems. This paragraph shall not apply in cases where the initial provider has clearly specified that its AI system is not to be changed into a high-risk AI system and therefore does not fall under the obligation to hand over the documentation.
3. In the case of high-risk AI systems that are safety components of products covered by the Union harmonisation legislation listed in Section A of Annex I, the product manufacturer shall be considered to be the provider of the high-risk AI system, and shall be subject to the obligations under Article 16 under either of the following circumstances:
(a) the high-risk AI system is placed on the market together with the product under the name or trademark of the product manufacturer;
(b) the high-risk AI system is put into service under the name or trademark of the product manufacturer after the product has been placed on the market.
4. The provider of a high-risk AI system and the third party that supplies an AI system, tools, services, components, or processes that are used or integrated in a high-risk AI system shall, by written agreement, specify the necessary information, capabilities, technical access and other assistance based on the generally acknowledged state of the art, in order to enable the provider of the high-risk AI system to fully comply with the obligations set out in this Regulation. This paragraph shall not apply to third parties making accessible to the public tools, services, processes, or components, other than general-purpose AI models, under a free and open-source licence.
The AI Office may develop and recommend voluntary model terms for contracts between providers of high-risk AI systems and third parties that supply tools, services, components or processes that are used for or integrated into high-risk AI systems. When developing those voluntary model terms, the AI Office shall take into account possible contractual requirements applicable in specific sectors or business cases. The voluntary model terms shall be published and be available free of charge in an easily usable electronic format.
5. Paragraphs 2 and 3 are without prejudice to the need to observe and protect intellectual property rights, confidential business information and trade secrets in accordance with Union and national law.
Recital 83 — interpretive context
In light of the nature and complexity of the value chain for AI systems and in line with the New Legislative Framework, it is essential to ensure legal certainty and facilitate the compliance with this Regulation. Therefore, it is necessary to clarify the role and the specific obligations of relevant operators along that value chain, such as importers and distributors who may contribute to the development of AI…
Recital 85 — interpretive context
General-purpose AI systems may be used as high-risk AI systems by themselves or be components of other high-risk AI systems. Therefore, due to their particular nature and in order to ensure a fair sharing of responsibilities along the AI value chain, the providers of such systems should, irrespective of whether they may be used as high-risk AI systems as such by other providers or as components of high-risk AI…
Recital 88 — interpretive context
Along the AI value chain multiple parties often supply AI systems, tools and services but also components or processes that are incorporated by the provider into the AI system with various objectives, including the model training, model retraining, model testing and evaluation, integration into software, or other aspects of model development. Those parties have an important role to play in the value chain towards…
Recital 109 — interpretive context
Compliance with the obligations applicable to the providers of general-purpose AI models should be commensurate and proportionate to the type of model provider, excluding the need for compliance for persons who develop or use models for non-professional or scientific research purposes, who should nevertheless be encouraged to voluntarily comply with these requirements. Without prejudice to Union copyright law,…
What this means for you
In your terms · Becoming the provider along the value chain
Fine-tuning or wrapping a third-party system can quietly change who counts as its provider.
In your terms · Becoming the provider along the value chain
White-labelling and repurposing decisions are where this triggers: putting your brand on it or changing what you destine it for each flips the role on its own, and a substantial modification is the third route.
- Repurposing check in launch review
In your terms · Becoming the provider along the value chain
The software analogy holds: the moment you rebrand it, change it substantially or repurpose it, the whole compliance surface is yours.
- Value-chain role assessment per system
Failure smells likeA white-label deal ships, and only afterwards someone realizes the provider obligations moved with it.
Obligations derived from this article
Scenarios that touch this provision
A CV-screening feature in your product
Illustrative
You are about to ship a feature that ranks and filters job applications for the companies that use your hiring product.
- Your role
- ProviderDeployer
- Where it lands
- High risk 2 Dec 2027
- Decided by
- Annex III, point 4(a): systems intended to be used for the recruitment or selection of natural persons, in particular to analyse and filter job applications and to evaluate candidates.
What applies
- Risk management system
- Data and data governance
- Technical documentation
- Automatic recording of events
- Transparency and instructions for deployers
- Human oversight
- Accuracy, robustness and cybersecurity
- Conformity assessment
- EU declaration of conformity and CE marking
- Registration in the EU database
- Keeping the automatically generated logs
- Post-market monitoring
- Serious incident reporting
What you have to be able to produce
- Adversarial and injection test suite
- Annex IV technical file
- Authority notification runbook
- Bias examination report
- Conformity route decision per system
- Dataset cards with provenance
- Decision-correlation IDs across services
- Declared accuracy levels and metrics
- Doc generation wired into CI
- Documentation format decision on record
- Escalation path for emergent risk
- EU declaration of conformity per system
- Field-data review cadence
- Field-risk signal feed into the register
- Foreseeable-misuse analysis per release
- Incident classification with regulatory branch
- Inference event schema
- Instructions for use per system
- Kill switch and override, with tests
- Living risk register with review cadence
- Model performance SLOs with alerts
- Named reporting roles
- Output metadata deployers can read
- Oversight runbook
- Oversight UX with override path
- Per-run lineage records
- Post-market monitoring plan
- Registration entries per system
- Replay runbook
- Representativeness note for the target population
- Resource, lifetime and maintenance inputs for the instructions
- Restore test on aged logs
- Retention budget and DPO sign-off
- Retention policy meeting the six-month floor
- Risk-to-control mapping in the design docs
- Stated assumptions per data set
- Tamper-evident log storage
- Versioned field telemetry
What would change the answer
- The Article 6(3) derogation is the only way out, and a system that performs profiling of natural persons never qualifies. Ranking candidates is hard to argue as a narrow procedural task.
- Your customers are deployers of this system and carry Article 26 duties, including keeping the logs under their control and telling candidates they are subject to it.
- A customer who puts its own brand on your feature becomes its provider under Article 25(1)(a), and you stop being it.
If you would rather not read the law
The basics page explains the Regulation's own categories in order: scope, role, tier, date. The engineering view groups the obligations by the platform capability they demand.