By role · Provider / developer
AI regulation for providers and developers
A provider is the organisation that develops an AI system, or has one developed, and puts it on a market or into service under its own name. Most binding AI law lands here first: risk management, data governance, technical documentation, logging, accuracy and security, conformity assessment and post-market monitoring are provider duties before they are anyone else's.
- Jurisdictions
- 12
- Evidence items
- 76
What is different about being a provider?
The provider carries the design-time duties and the paper trail. A deployer can rely on the provider's instructions and documentation; the provider has to have produced them. That makes the technical file, the risk management record and the quality management system the centre of gravity, and it makes a change to the system a regulatory event rather than an engineering one.
Where the same control does double duty
A risk assessment written once to the structure a management standard expects satisfies or supports the risk-management duty in several jurisdictions at once. The controls listed below are counted by the number of duties each one serves, so the ones worth building first are at the top.
Which controls meet these duties?
Sorted by how many of the duties on this page each control satisfies, so the ones worth building first are at the top. A control page lists every other duty it serves, in every jurisdiction.
| Control | Satisfies | Supports | Owner · frequency |
|---|---|---|---|
| AI governance policy and accountability structure Policy | 7 | 3 | Executive sponsor for AI · annual |
| AI incident management and regulatory reporting Process | 6 | 4 | Incident coordinator · continuous |
| AI risk assessment and lifecycle risk register Process | 6 | 3 | AI system owner · once per ai system |
| Privacy and data-protection controls for AI Process | 6 | 1 | Data protection officer · once per ai system |
| Technical documentation, model cards and instructions for use Process | 5 | 5 | Product or model owner · at launch and on material change |
| Accuracy, robustness, fairness and security testing Technical measure | 4 | 7 | Quality or testing lead · at launch and on material change |
| Contractual allocation of AI duties across the supply chain Contractual term | 4 | 2 | Legal counsel · once per ai system |
| AI interaction and use disclosure notices Process | 4 | 1 | Product owner · at launch and on material change |
| Synthetic content labelling and provenance marking Technical measure | 4 | 0 | Engineering lead · continuous |
| Prohibited and unacceptable-use screening gate Process | 4 | 0 | AI governance lead · once per ai system |
| Automatic event logging and record retention Technical measure | 3 | 3 | Engineering lead · continuous |
| Post-deployment monitoring and drift detection Technical measure | 2 | 4 | AI system owner · continuous |
| Data governance and dataset documentation Process | 2 | 4 | Data governance lead · once per ai system |
| AI impact and fundamental-rights impact assessment Process | 2 | 4 | AI system owner · once per ai system |
| Human oversight design and override procedure Process | 2 | 1 | AI system owner · once per ai system |
| AI system inventory and classification Process | 1 | 7 | AI governance lead · continuous |
| Model release and change-management gate Process | 1 | 3 | Release manager · at launch and on material change |
| AI literacy and role-based training programme Training programme | 1 | 3 | Learning and development lead · annual |
| Conformity assessment, declaration and registration Process | 1 | 2 | Regulatory compliance lead · once per ai system |
| Quality management system for AI development and supply Policy | 1 | 2 | Quality lead · annual |
| Frontier model safety and security framework Policy | 1 | 2 | Head of AI safety · annual |
| Decision explanation, human review and appeal route Process | 1 | 2 | Customer operations lead · once per ai system |
| Adversarial and red-team testing for generative AI Technical measure | 0 | 5 | AI security or safety lead · at launch and on material change |
| Training-data provenance and copyright register Process | 0 | 3 | Model development lead · at launch and on material change |
| Vendor and third-party AI due diligence Process | 0 | 3 | Procurement or vendor risk lead · once per ai system |
Which duties are recorded?
Every published duty whose record names this audience. It is the recorded set, not every rule in the world; a jurisdiction missing here may simply not be mapped yet (open gaps).
Australia 3 duties
-
VoluntaryAustralian Voluntary AI Safety Standard · Guardrails 1 and 2Establish accountability processes and a risk-management process (guardrails 1 and 2)
-
VoluntaryAustralian Voluntary AI Safety Standard · Guardrails 7, 8 and 9Provide contestability, supply-chain transparency and records (guardrails 7 to 9)
-
VoluntaryAustralian Voluntary AI Safety Standard · Guardrails 4, 5 and 6Test and monitor systems, enable human control, and be transparent with users (guardrails 4 to 6)
California (United States) 3 duties
-
Legal requirementCalifornia SB 53 · Labor Code Section 1107 (as added by SB 53)applies from 1 Jan 2026Frontier developers must protect employees who report catastrophic-risk concerns
-
Legal requirementCalifornia SB 53 · Business and Professions Code Section 22757.12 (as added by SB 53)applies from 1 Jan 2026Frontier developers must publish a transparency report before deploying a new frontier model
-
Legal requirementCalifornia SB 53 · Business and Professions Code, Chapter 25.1 (as added by SB 53)applies from 1 Jan 2026Report critical safety incidents to the Office of Emergency Services
Colorado (United States) 4 duties
-
Legal requirementColorado AI Act · C.R.S. 6-1-1704applies from 30 Jun 2026Deployers and developers must disclose to consumers that they are interacting with an AI system
-
Legal requirementColorado AI Act · C.R.S. 6-1-1702applies from 30 Jun 2026Developers must document high-risk systems and disclose known risks
-
Legal requirementColorado AI Act · C.R.S. 6-1-1702(5)applies from 30 Jun 2026Developers must notify the Attorney General and deployers of discovered algorithmic discrimination
-
Legal requirementColorado AI Act · C.R.S. 6-1-1702(1)applies from 30 Jun 2026Developers must use reasonable care to avoid algorithmic discrimination
European Union 24 duties
-
Legal requirementEU AI Act · Article 15applies from 2 Aug 2026Achieve appropriate accuracy, robustness and cybersecurity
-
Legal requirementEU AI Act · Article 10applies from 2 Aug 2026Apply data governance and quality criteria to training, validation and testing data
-
Legal requirementEU AI Act · Articles 43, 47, 48 and 49; Annex VIIIapplies from 2 Aug 2026Complete conformity assessment, CE marking and EU database registration
-
Legal requirementEU AI Act · Article 25(1) and 25(2)applies from 2 Aug 2026Deployers, distributors and importers must assume provider duties when they rebrand or substantially modify high-risk AI
-
Legal requirementEU AI Act · Article 12; Article 26(6) for deployersapplies from 2 Aug 2026Design high-risk systems to log events automatically
-
Legal requirementEU AI Act · Article 50applies from 2 Aug 2026Disclose AI interaction and label synthetic content
-
Legal requirementEU AI Act · Article 5applies from 2 Feb 2025Do not deploy or provide AI for prohibited practices
-
Legal requirementEU AI Act · Article 11 and Annex IVapplies from 2 Aug 2026Draw up technical documentation before placing a high-risk system on the market
-
Legal requirementEU AI Act · Article 14; Article 26(2) for deployersapplies from 2 Aug 2026Enable and assign effective human oversight
-
Legal requirementEU AI Act · Article 4applies from 2 Feb 2025Ensure AI literacy of staff operating AI systems
-
Legal requirementEU AI Act · Article 9applies from 2 Aug 2026Establish a risk management system for high-risk AI
-
Legal requirementEU AI Act · Article 22applies from 2 Aug 2026Non-EU providers must appoint an EU authorised representative for high-risk AI
-
Legal requirementEU AI Act · Article 72applies from 2 Aug 2026Operate a post-market monitoring system
-
Legal requirementEU AI Act · Article 17applies from 2 Aug 2026Operate a quality management system
-
Legal requirementEU AI Act · Article 13applies from 2 Aug 2026Provide deployers with clear instructions for use
-
Legal requirementEU AI Act · Article 6(4); Article 49(2)applies from 2 Aug 2026Providers must document and register a conclusion that an Annex III system is not high-risk
-
Legal requirementEU AI Act · Article 18applies from 2 Aug 2026Providers must keep high-risk AI documentation for ten years
-
Legal requirementEU AI Act · Article 16applies from 2 Aug 2026Providers must meet the full set of provider duties for high-risk AI
-
Legal requirementEU AI Act · Article 19applies from 2 Aug 2026Providers must retain automatically generated logs under their control
-
Legal requirementEU AI Act · Article 21applies from 2 Aug 2026Providers must supply conformity evidence and log access to authorities on request
-
Legal requirementEU AI Act · Article 20applies from 2 Aug 2026Providers must take corrective action and inform the supply chain about non-conforming high-risk AI
-
Legal requirementEU AI Act · Article 50(2)applies from 2 Aug 2026Providers of generative AI must mark synthetic output as artificially generated in a machine-readable way
-
Legal requirementEU AI Act · Article 25(4)applies from 2 Aug 2026Providers of high-risk AI must have written agreements with suppliers of components, tools and services
-
Legal requirementEU AI Act · Article 73applies from 2 Aug 2026Report serious incidents to market surveillance authorities
India 4 duties
-
Legal requirementIndia DPDP Act · Section 8(5) and 8(6); DPDP Rules on breach intimationImplement reasonable security safeguards and notify breaches
-
Legal requirementIndia DPDP Act · Sections 4 to 7Process personal data only with valid consent or a legitimate use, after notice
-
Legal requirementIndia DPDP Act · Section 10Significant Data Fiduciaries must appoint a DPO and run impact assessments and audits
-
VoluntaryIndia AI Governance Guidelines · Guiding principles and recommendations sectionsAdopt the guiding principles and risk-based governance (voluntary)
Nepal 1 duty
-
Legal requirementNepal Privacy Act 2075 · Chapter on collection and protection of personal information (reviewer to cite sections)Collect and use personal information only with consent and for the stated purpose
Singapore 4 duties
-
Legal requirementPDPC AI advisory guidelines · Advisory guidelines, sections on consent, business improvement and research exceptionsIdentify consent or an applicable PDPA exception before using personal data in AI
-
VoluntarySingapore Model AI Governance Framework · Second edition, Part on internal governance structures and measuresEstablish internal governance structures and measures for AI
-
VoluntarySingapore Model AI Governance Framework · Second edition, Part on operations managementManage data quality, model development and monitoring across the lifecycle
-
VoluntarySingapore Model AI Governance Framework · Generative AI framework, dimensions on incident reporting and content provenanceReport incidents and mark AI-generated content (generative AI framework)
South Korea 9 duties
-
Legal requirementFramework Act on the Development of Artificial Intelligence and Establishment of a Foundation for Trust · Article 31(2) and 31(3)applies from 22 Jan 2026AI business operators must label generative AI output and clearly flag realistic synthetic media
-
Legal requirementFramework Act on the Development of Artificial Intelligence and Establishment of a Foundation for Trust · Article 31(1)applies from 22 Jan 2026AI business operators must notify users in advance that a product or service runs on high-impact or generative AI
-
Legal requirementFramework Act on the Development of Artificial Intelligence and Establishment of a Foundation for Trust · Article 36applies from 22 Jan 2026Foreign AI business operators above the threshold must designate a domestic representative in Korea
-
Legal requirementFramework Act on the Development of Artificial Intelligence and Establishment of a Foundation for Trust · Article 32applies from 22 Jan 2026Operators of AI above the compute threshold must run lifecycle risk management and report safety results
-
Legal requirementFramework Act on the Development of Artificial Intelligence and Establishment of a Foundation for Trust · Article 34(1)applies from 22 Jan 2026Operators of high-impact AI must be able to explain outputs and the main criteria behind them
-
Legal requirementFramework Act on the Development of Artificial Intelligence and Establishment of a Foundation for Trust · Article 34(1)applies from 22 Jan 2026Operators of high-impact AI must ensure human management and supervision
-
Legal requirementFramework Act on the Development of Artificial Intelligence and Establishment of a Foundation for Trust · Article 34(1)applies from 22 Jan 2026Operators of high-impact AI must establish and operate a risk management plan
-
Legal requirementFramework Act on the Development of Artificial Intelligence and Establishment of a Foundation for Trust · Article 34(1)applies from 22 Jan 2026Operators of high-impact AI must prepare user-protection measures and keep records of their safety and trust measures
-
VoluntaryFramework Act on the Development of Artificial Intelligence and Establishment of a Foundation for Trust · Article 35applies from 22 Jan 2026Operators of high-impact AI should assess its impact on fundamental rights before use
Texas (United States) 3 duties
-
Legal requirementTexas Responsible AI Governance Act (TRAIGA) · Business and Commerce Code Section 551.052applies from 1 Jan 2026Developers and deployers must not use AI to incite self-harm, harm to others or crime
-
Legal requirementTexas Responsible AI Governance Act (TRAIGA) · Business and Commerce Code Section 551.056applies from 1 Jan 2026Developers and deployers must not use AI with the intent to unlawfully discriminate against a protected class
-
Legal requirementTexas Responsible AI Governance Act (TRAIGA) · Business and Commerce Code Section 551.057applies from 1 Jan 2026Developers and distributors must not build AI intended to produce child sexual abuse material or unlawful sexual deepfakes
United Arab Emirates 1 duty
-
Legal requirementUAE PDPL · Article on data protection impact assessment (reviewer to cite article number)Conduct a data protection impact assessment for high-risk processing using new technologies
United Kingdom 5 duties
-
Legal requirementICO AI guidance · UK GDPR Article 35; ICO guidance, accountability and governance sectionCarry out a data protection impact assessment for high-risk AI processing
-
VoluntaryUK AI regulation framework · Principle 1, Part 3Ensure AI systems are safe, secure and robust throughout their lifecycle
-
VoluntaryUK AI regulation framework · Principle 4, Part 3Establish accountability and governance for AI
-
VoluntaryUK AI regulation framework · Principle 2, Part 3Provide appropriate transparency and explainability
-
VoluntaryUK AI regulation framework · Principle 3, Part 3Use AI in ways that are fair and do not discriminate unlawfully
United States 4 duties
-
VoluntaryNIST AI RMF · GOVERN functionEstablish AI governance policies, roles and accountability (Govern)
-
VoluntaryNIST AI RMF · MAP functionMap context, intended use and potential impacts (Map)
-
VoluntaryNIST AI RMF · MEASURE functionMeasure and test trustworthiness characteristics (Measure)
-
VoluntaryNIST AI RMF · MANAGE functionPrioritise, respond to and monitor AI risks (Manage)
What evidence would a reviewer expect?
- AI customer or deployer clause set Contract clause or supplier term
- AI data-flow and legal-basis record Register entry
- AI decision challenge and human review procedure Procedure or standard operating process
- AI governance forum minutes Governance meeting record
- AI impact assessment Impact assessment
- AI incident record Incident record
- AI incident response playbook Procedure or standard operating process
- AI intake and classification procedure Procedure or standard operating process
- AI interaction or use notice Disclosure or notice
- AI policy Policy document
- AI quality management system manual Policy document
- AI responsibility map Register entry
- AI supplier and component register Register entry
- AI supplier clause set Contract clause or supplier term
- AI supplier due-diligence assessment Supplier assessment
- AI system event logs Access or activity log
- AI system register Register entry
- AI system risk assessment Risk assessment
- AI training completion records Training record
- AI training curriculum and materials Policy document
- Adversarial findings tracker Risk register
- Adverse-decision explanation template Disclosure or notice
- Board or executive approval of the AI policy Approval or sign-off record
- Challenge and reversal log Monitoring record
- Conformity evidence pack Technical documentation file
- Content labelling and provenance standard Procedure or standard operating process
- Contract clause index against the AI register Register entry
- Copyright and rights-reservation policy Policy document
- Dangerous-capability evaluation report Evaluation or test report
- Data protection impact assessment for an AI system Data protection impact assessment
- Data quality and bias check report Evaluation or test report
- Dataset approval for use Approval or sign-off record
- Dataset documentation sheet Dataset documentation
- Declaration of conformity or certificate Conformity declaration or certificate
- Human oversight and override procedure Procedure or standard operating process
- Human-involvement design rationale Approval or sign-off record
- Impact assessment approval Approval or sign-off record
- Impact assessment procedure and template Procedure or standard operating process
- Incident report to an authority Regulatory filing or notification
- Independent data audit or DPO review Audit or assurance report
- Instructions for use Disclosure or notice
- Internal audit of the AI management system Audit or assurance report
- Log integrity and retention check Audit or assurance report
- Log schema and retention standard Procedure or standard operating process
- Management review minutes Governance meeting record
- Model card or deployer information pack Model documentation
- Monitoring dashboard or periodic monitoring report Monitoring record
- Monitoring review decision Approval or sign-off record
- Notice catalogue Register entry
- Notice wording approval Approval or sign-off record
- Overseer training completion Training record
- Per-system AI risk register Risk register
- Post-market monitoring plan Procedure or standard operating process
- Pre-release test report Evaluation or test report
- Privacy notice section on AI use Disclosure or notice
- Prohibited-use screening record Approval or sign-off record
- Public summary of training content Disclosure or notice
- Published frontier safety framework Policy document
- Red-team exercise report Evaluation or test report
- Red-team rules of engagement and scenario library Procedure or standard operating process
- Registration record in the relevant database Regulatory filing or notification
- Release and change-classification procedure Procedure or standard operating process
- Release or change approval record Approval or sign-off record
- Release test sign-off Approval or sign-off record
- Residual-risk acceptance Approval or sign-off record
- Risk-tier classification sign-off Approval or sign-off record
- Role-to-curriculum training matrix Procedure or standard operating process
- Screening list and escalation procedure Procedure or standard operating process
- Supplier onboarding decision Approval or sign-off record
- Technical documentation file Technical documentation file
- Test plan and acceptance criteria Procedure or standard operating process
- Threshold notification to an authority Regulatory filing or notification
- Training compute tracking record Register entry
- Training source register Register entry
- Visible AI-generated content label Disclosure or notice
- Watermark and provenance robustness test Evaluation or test report
Latest changes to these instruments
Texas TRAIGA takes effect
California SB 53 frontier-model transparency duties become operative
European Commission proposes Digital Omnibus adjustments to AI Act timelines
India notifies the Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025
Informational only, not legal advice. Verify every claim against the linked official sources and consult qualified counsel before acting.
Frequently asked questions
- Am I a provider if I fine-tune or rebrand someone else's model?
- Often yes. Several instruments treat a substantial modification, or putting a system on the market under your own name, as becoming the provider. Check the definition in the instrument that applies to you; the duty pages cite the article.
- Does this page tell me which duties apply to my product?
- No. It lists every recorded duty that binds providers anywhere. Use the applicability check for a screening of your own situation, then open the official source.