EU AI Act Is this industry use high-risk?

A system falls under Annex III when its intended purpose matches a listed use, subject to Article 6(3). A covered product or safety component can separately be high-risk under Article 6(1). Keep both checks: the product route does not itself put a system in Annex III. The Commission FAQ explains that classification follows function, specific purpose and conditions of use.

A predictive-maintenance dashboard, production-quality analytics tool or internal knowledge assistant is not high-risk solely because a factory, utility, insurer, bank or public-sector supplier uses it. Check for a listed purpose, such as recruitment, worker management, creditworthiness, life or health insurance pricing, emergency triage or a safety component in specified infrastructure. Biometrics, education, law enforcement, migration, justice and democratic processes also need a use-specific check.

Commission examples and draft classification guidelines can help apply the rule, but they do not add an Annex III category. Record the exact Annex III point, the system's intended purpose, and the deployment facts instead of classifying from an industry label or an example alone.

Annex III lists eight areas: biometrics; critical infrastructure; education and vocational training; employment, worker management and access to self-employment; essential private and public services and benefits; law enforcement; migration, asylum and border control; and justice and democratic processes. Match the specific use within the area.

Industrial uses most often need closer review where the AI affects natural persons or safety-critical infrastructure. Examples include recruitment screening for plant workers, task allocation or performance monitoring based on worker behaviour, credit scoring of natural persons, life or health insurance pricing, emergency-call triage, biometric identification, emotion recognition, or an AI safety component in road traffic, critical digital infrastructure, or water, gas, heating or electricity supply. By contrast, equipment-failure forecasting, inventory planning, energy-use optimisation, document search, or translation may fall outside Annex III if they do not serve a listed intended purpose.

The Article 6(3) exception applies only to Annex III systems. The system must pose no significant risk of harm to health, safety or fundamental rights, including because it does not materially influence decision outcomes. It must also meet at least one of the four listed task conditions.

The four conditions cover a narrow procedural task, improving completed human work, detecting decision patterns or deviations with proper human review, or preparing for an Annex III assessment. Pattern detection must not replace or influence a completed human assessment without proper human review. An Annex III system that profiles natural persons is always high-risk.

For a high-risk conclusion, connect the intended purpose to the exact Annex III point. Then assemble the records for conformity assessment, quality management, traceability and registration before market placement or first use, as applicable.

For an Article 6(3) conclusion, document the condition used and why the system does not materially influence decisions or otherwise pose significant risk. Article 6(4) still requires this internal assessment. Amended Annex VIII Section B keeps the applicable exception conditions as registration fields, but removes the former short grounds-summary and Member States-of-availability fields.

Track dates by provision and classification route. The 2026 amendment moves Chapter III Sections 1-3, except Article 6(5), to 2 December 2027 for Annex III systems and 2 August 2028 for Annex I systems. Articles 72 and 73, on monitoring and serious incidents, remain on the general 2 August 2026 date. Keep the amendment's 24 July 2026 publication and 27 July 2026 entry into force with the deadline decision.