Source: OJ L, 2024/1689, 12.7.2024 · Consolidated text

Article 75 Market surveillance and control of AI systems and mutual assistance

Summary What does Article 75 of the AI act regulation say?

This article carves out a distinct supervisory lane for the AI Office, granting it exclusive competence over a specific category of AI systems — primarily those built on general-purpose AI models by the same provider, and those integrated into very large online platforms or search engines.

It sits in close relationship with Article 74, which governs market surveillance more broadly, and effectively overrides the general market surveillance framework for the systems falling within its scope.

Beyond defining that exclusive remit, the article also establishes how the AI Office and national market surveillance authorities are expected to work together, covering everything from incident reporting and inspections to information sharing and pre-decision notifications.

Important points:

The AI Office holds exclusive supervisory and enforcement competence over AI systems based on general-purpose AI models developed by the same provider, and those embedded in very large online platforms or search engines — though several carve-outs apply (e.g., law enforcement, financial institutions, administration of justice).
Providers of high-risk AI systems within the AI Office's competence must report serious incidents to the AI Office rather than to national market surveillance authorities, which is a direct derogation from Article 73.
Providers of high-risk AI systems within the AI Office's scope that require third-party conformity assessment bear the costs of those tests and assessments, paying the relevant notified bodies directly.

Springlex's summary of the article is a reading aid, not a substitute for the legal text.

▼M1ModificationReplacedParagraph 1 replaced by Regulation (EU) 2026/1744, Article 1(31)(b). Published in the Official Journal 24 July 2026.
1. The AI Office shall be exclusively competent for the supervision and enforcement of the obligations under this Regulation in relation to the following AI systems:
  AI systems based on general-purpose AI models where the model and the system are developed by the same provider, or by providers forming part of the same undertaking as that provider, with the exception of:
  AI systems related to products covered by the Union harmonisation legislation listed in Annex I;
  AI systems referred to in point 2 of Annex III;
  AI systems provided by law enforcement authorities, border management authorities and financial institutions, insofar as those AI systems fall under Article 74(6); and
  AI systems referred to in point 8 of Annex III as regards the administration of justice;
  AI systems that constitute or that are integrated into a very large online platform or very large online search engine designated in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2022/2065.
2. The exclusive competence referred to in the first subparagraph shall apply to the providers of those systems. It shall apply to the deployers of those systems only when they are also the provider or form part of the same undertaking as the provider.
▼M1ModificationInsertedParagraphs 1a – 1e inserted by Regulation (EU) 2026/1744, Article 1(31)(c). Published in the Official Journal 24 July 2026.▲
1. 1. By way of derogation from Article 73, providers of high-risk AI systems subject to the competence of the AI Office pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article shall report any serious incidents to the AI Office. Article 73 (2) to (9), shall apply mutatis mutandis. The AI Office shall promptly transmit the relevant information to the market surveillance authority of the Member State in the territory of which the provider or its legal representative is situated.
2. 1. The authorities involved in the application of this Regulation shall cooperate actively with the AI Office and provide the AI Office the necessary assistance for the exercise of its powers, including, where necessary, in connection with inspections or other enforcement measures carried out in the territory of a Member State. To that end, those authorities shall enjoy the powers provided for pursuant to this Regulation and Regulation (EU) 2019/1020, and where relevant and limited to what is necessary to fulfil their tasks under this paragraph, in accordance with the applicable national procedures.
3. 1. When taking investigatory or enforcement action in the territory of a Member State that involves access to a public authority’s data or AI system, the AI Office shall be assisted by the relevant market surveillance authority.
4. 1. Before taking a decision that would have the effect of prohibiting or restricting the AI system being made available or put into service on a national market, or a decision to withdraw or recall the AI system from such market, the AI Office shall, without undue delay, notify the market surveillance authority competent for that market of its intention to take such a decision. The AI Office shall consult the authorities involved in the application of this Regulation, where appropriate, on any matter relating to the application and enforcement of this Regulation.
5. 1. The AI Office shall be responsible for conformity assessments and tests of AI systems referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article that are classified as high-risk and subject to a third-party conformity assessment pursuant to Article 43 before such AI systems are placed on the market or put into service. Those tests and assessments shall verify that the systems comply with the relevant requirements of this Regulation and may be placed on the market or put into service in the Union in accordance with this Regulation. The Commission shall entrust the performance of those tests or assessments to notified bodies designated in accordance with this Regulation, in which case the notified body shall act on behalf of the Commission. If a notified body to which the Commission has delegated tasks under this paragraph does not perform those tasks adequately, the Commission may withdraw the delegation with immediate effect.
  2. The fees for testing and assessment activities shall be levied on the provider of a high-risk AI system who has applied for a third-party conformity assessment to the Commission. The provider shall pay the costs related to the services entrusted by the Commission to the notified bodies in accordance with this Article directly to the notified body.
1. Where the relevant market surveillance authorities have sufficient reason to consider general-purpose AI systems that can be used directly by deployers for at least one purpose that is classified as high-risk pursuant to this Regulation to be non-compliant with the requirements laid down in this Regulation, they shall cooperate with the AI Office to carry out compliance evaluations, and shall inform the Board and other market surveillance authorities accordingly.
▼M1ModificationInsertedParagraph 2a inserted by Regulation (EU) 2026/1744, Article 1(31)(d). Published in the Official Journal 24 July 2026.▲
1. Where a market surveillance authority has well-founded and sufficient reasons to suspect that a provider or a deployer of an AI system referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article has infringed this Regulation, it may request, through the relevant single point of contact designated in accordance with Article 70(2), the AI Office to assess the matter in order to take the necessary supervisory and enforcement measures to ensure prompt compliance with this Regulation. Such a request shall be duly reasoned and shall include at least:
  the name of the provider or the deployer concerned;
  a description of the relevant facts, the provisions of this Regulation that have allegedly been infringed, and any well-founded and sufficient reasons for suspecting an infringement, including, where applicable, the description of the negative effects of the alleged infringement;
  the market surveillance authority making the request.
2. The AI Office shall take utmost account of the request and the market surveillance authority shall cooperate actively and provide the AI Office the necessary assistance for the exercise of its powers in accordance with paragraph 1a.
3. The AI Office shall, without undue delay and in any event no later than four months following receipt of the request, inform the single point of contact of its intention to exercise its powers in accordance with Article 75a or of its reasons for not exercising its powers. If the AI Office decides to exercise its powers in accordance with Article 75a, it shall periodically inform that single point of contact about major developments in the proceedings and the outcome of such proceedings, without disclosing any confidential information.
1. Where a market surveillance authority is unable to conclude its investigation of the high-risk AI system because of its inability to access certain information related to the general-purpose AI model despite having made all appropriate efforts to obtain that information, it may submit a reasoned request to the AI Office, by which access to that information shall be enforced. In that case, the AI Office shall supply to the applicant authority without delay, and in any event within 30 days, any information that the AI Office considers to be relevant in order to establish whether a high-risk AI system is non-compliant. Market surveillance authorities shall safeguard the confidentiality of the information that they obtain in accordance with Article 78 of this Regulation. The procedure provided for in Chapter VI of Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 shall apply mutatis mutandis.

Relevant recitals

Recital 156 Powers of market surveillance authorities

In order to ensure an appropriate and effective enforcement of the requirements and obligations set out by this Regulation, which is Union harmonisation legislation, the system of market surveillance and compliance of products established by Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 should apply in its entirety. Market surveillance authorities designated pursuant to this Regulation should have all enforcement powers laid down in this Regulation and in Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 and should exercise their powers and carry out their duties independently, impartially and without bias. Although the majority of AI systems are not subject to specific requirements and obligations under this Regulation, market surveillance authorities may take measures in relation to all AI systems when they present a risk in accordance with this Regulation. Due to the specific nature of Union institutions, agencies and bodies falling within the scope of this Regulation, it is appropriate to designate the European Data Protection Supervisor as a competent market surveillance authority for them. This should be without prejudice to the designation of national competent authorities by the Member States. Market surveillance activities should not affect the ability of the supervised entities to carry out their tasks independently, when such independence is required by Union law.

Recital 161 Responsibility for supervision of general-purpose AI models

It is necessary to clarify the responsibilities and competences at Union and national level as regards AI systems that are built on general-purpose AI models. To avoid overlapping competences, where an AI system is based on a general-purpose AI model and the model and system are provided by the same provider, the supervision should take place at Union level through the AI Office, which should have the powers of a market surveillance authority within the meaning of Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 for this purpose. In all other cases, national market surveillance authorities remain responsible for the supervision of AI systems. However, for general-purpose AI systems that can be used directly by deployers for at least one purpose that is classified as high-risk, market surveillance authorities should cooperate with the AI Office to carry out evaluations of compliance and inform the Board and other market surveillance authorities accordingly. Furthermore, market surveillance authorities should be able to request assistance from the AI Office where the market surveillance authority is unable to conclude an investigation on a high-risk AI system because of its inability to access certain information related to the general-purpose AI model on which the high-risk AI system is built. In such cases, the procedure regarding mutual assistance in cross-border cases in Chapter VI of Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 should apply mutatis mutandis.

Table of contents

Springlex and this text is meant purely as a documentation tool and has no legal effect. No liability is assumed for its content. The authentic version of this act is the one published in the Official Journal of the European Union.