The Relationship Between Completing a ROPA Report and the Timeline of the EU AI Act

The Record of Processing Activities (ROPA) and the EU AI Act both aim to enhance transparency, accountability, and compliance in data processing and artificial intelligence (AI) applications. While the ROPA is a GDPR requirement (Article 30) focusing on personal data processing, the EU AI Act regulates AI systems based on risk levels. The completion and maintenance of a ROPA report will play a key role in ensuring compliance as AI regulations take effect.

EU AI Act Timeline and Its Impact on ROPA

The EU AI Act follows a gradual implementation timeline, with different provisions coming into force in phases:

 

Why ROPA is Essential for AI Compliance

1. Helps Identify AI Use Cases That Involve Personal Data

The EU AI Act categorizes AI systems based on risk.

🛑 Unacceptable Risk – AI systems that pose a clear threat to safety, rights, and democracy are banned. Examples include social scoring (similar to China’s system), real-time biometric surveillance in public spaces (with limited exceptions), and manipulative AI that exploits vulnerabilities.

⚠️ High-Risk – AI systems that significantly impact health, safety, fundamental rights, or legal compliance are heavily regulated. These include AI in critical infrastructure, law enforcement, education, employment, financial services, and medical devices. Providers must conduct risk assessments, maintain transparency, and ensure human oversight.

⚖️ Limited Risk – AI systems with potential risks requiring transparency obligations but no strict compliance. This applies to AI chatbots, deepfake generators, and emotion recognition. Users must be informed that they are interacting with AI or manipulated content.

✅ Minimal Risk – AI systems with little to no regulatory requirements, such as spam filters, AI-powered translations, recommendation engines, and simple automation tools. Most consumer applications fall into this category.

A ROPA report documents AI-related personal data processing, allowing organizations to determine if they fall under the AI Act’s scope by evaluating the following key criteria:

🗺 Territorial Scope

✔ Established in the EU – Any organization developing, deploying, or using AI within the EU is covered.

✔ Outside the EU but impacting EU users – If the AI system affects individuals or businesses in the EU, the Act applies, regardless of where the provider is based.

🛠 AI System Definition & Functionality

The system must meet the EU AI Act’s definition of AI, which includes:

✔ Machine learning-based models (e.g., deep learning, neural networks).

✔ Logic and knowledge-based systems (e.g., expert systems, rule-based AI).

✔ Statistical approaches (e.g., Bayesian estimators, heuristics).

* If the system automates decision-making, generates predictions, or influences human behavior, it falls within the Act’s scope.

⚠️ Risk Classification

AI systems are categorized by risk level, determining their regulatory obligations:

✔ Unacceptable risk (e.g., social scoring, biometric categorization) → Prohibited

✔ High risk (e.g., hiring, credit scoring, law enforcement AI) → Strict compliance requirements

✔ Limited risk (e.g., AI chatbots, deepfakes) → Transparency obligations

✔ Minimal risk (e.g., spam filters, AI-driven recommendations) → Few or no restrictions

📊 Processing of Personal Data

AI systems that process personal data (as per GDPR definitions) are likely covered, especially if they involve:

✔ Biometric data processing (e.g., facial recognition, voice analysis).

✔ Profiling and automated decision-making (e.g., AI-based credit scoring, fraud detection).

✔ Sensitive data processing (e.g., race, health, political beliefs, sexual orientation).

* Compliance with both GDPR and AI Act is required when AI impacts individual rights, privacy, or fairness.

🏭 Purpose & Sector-Specific Considerations

The Act prioritizes high-risk AI used in critical sectors, including:

✔ Healthcare (e.g., AI diagnosing diseases).

✔ Finance (e.g., AI-driven loan approvals).

✔ Law enforcement (e.g., predictive policing, crime risk assessments).

✔ Public administration (e.g., AI systems affecting asylum applications).

👥 Organizational Role: Provider, Deployers, or Users

The AI Act applies differently depending on the organization’s role:

✔ AI Providers (Developers/vendors) → Responsible for ensuring system compliance, risk management, and documentation.

✔ Deployers (Organizations implementing AI) → Must ensure proper usage, risk mitigation, and transparency for end-users.

✔ Users (Businesses using AI tools) → Must comply with transparency and fair-use requirements.

2. Supports Compliance with AI Governance Requirements

AI systems categorized as high-risk under the AI Act require risk assessments, transparency, and human oversight. The ROPA serves as an accountability tool, helping businesses track AI-related data processing activities.

3. Assists with AI-Specific Documentation Obligations

The AI Act mandates record-keeping for high-risk AI systems, including training data sources, bias mitigation measures and risk assessments. Organizations can integrate AI-specific details into their ROPA reports for compliance.

4. Ensures Alignment with GDPR and AI Regulations

GDPR and the AI Act are complementary, while GDPR requires lawful processing and protection of personal data, the AI Act regulates how AI systems process and use data to prevent harm. A well-maintained ROPA ensures organizations comply with both regulations simultaneously.

Key Takeaways

¬ If an organization develops, deploys, or uses AI systems affecting EU citizens—especially high-risk AI processing personal data—it likely falls under the EU AI Act’s scope and must ensure compliance. ¬ Completing a ROPA report now prepares organizations for the upcoming AI Act enforcement by documenting AI-related data processing, risk levels, and compliance measures. Since the AI Act expands regulatory oversight over AI-driven systems, integrating AI-specific records into ROPA will become essential for organizations subject to both GDPR and the AI Act.