Understand your AI Act obligations.
Prove compliance.
Keep it aligned as AI evolves.

A practical compliance platform for companies deploying AI in the EU and the consultants who support them. Built around real deployments, not abstract models.

Join 300+ professionals already exploring AI Act compliance with Aigolex

The real AI Act problem

Companies don't know if they are AI providers, deployers, or both.

Obligations depend on how AI is used, not on the model itself.

Documentation becomes outdated as soon as systems or vendors change.

Audits, enterprise customers, and boards expect immediate answers.

AI Act compliance is not a one-time exercise.
It's an operational problem.

Compliance attaches to deployments, not to AI models

That's why the platform mirrors the structure of the AI Act itself

Company

the legal entity ultimately responsible for compliance

Workspaces

distinct operational perimeters where AI is developed, tested, or used

AI assets

the underlying AI systems or models, independent from any single feature

Deployments

how those AI assets are actually used in practice, by whom, and for what purpose

Under the AI Act, obligations, risk classification, and roles attach to deployments not to AI models in isolation. This ensures compliance decisions reflect real-world AI use, not theoretical system descriptions.

Scope

Define where AI exists, how it's used, and who is responsible.

•Maps AI usage across companies and workspaces
•Identifies AI assets and their concrete deployments
•Determines your role under the AI Act (provider, deployer, or both)

Misclassifying your role means misapplying every obligation that follows.

Obligations

Know exactly what the AI Act requires, per deployment.

•Assigns regulatory requirements at the deployment level
•Based on role, risk classification, and usage context
•Generates clear, trackable checklists
•Separates applicable obligations from irrelevant ones

The AI Act is obligation-driven. Guessing is not a strategy.

Evidence

Always-ready documentation to prove compliance.

•Centralizes compliance documentation per workspace and deployment
•Includes system descriptions and risk assessments
•Tracks human oversight measures and monitoring controls

Static documents fail the moment reality changes.

Continuity

Stay compliant as AI systems, vendors, and uses change.

•Monitors changes to AI assets, deployments, and operational perimeters
•Flags when obligations or risk levels must be updated
•Alerts when documentation needs to be refreshed

Most compliance failures happen after the first assessment.

AI Act compliance readiness assessment

Identify your AI Act obligations, classify risk exposure, and uncover compliance gaps — with a guided interactive assessment.

Built for teams that can't ignore regulation

EU-based or EU-operating

Active AI deployments

Exposure to audits

Legal & compliance leaders

Risk & trust teams

Engineering leaders accountable for AI systems

Built by people who've done this before

Experience in legaltech and regulated environments

Built with legal and technical teams

Not Big-4 complexity

Prepare now. Don't scramble later.

Enforcement

What are the penalties for non-compliance with these new rules?

Aigolex Team21 November 2025

Under the EU AI Act, penalties for non-compliance are structured in tiers based on the severity of the infringement and the type of rule violated. The fines can be substantial and are calculated as either a fixed monetary amount or a percentage of the offending undertaking's total worldwide annual turnover for the preceding financial year, whichever is higher.

Tiers of administrative fines

Prohibited AI practices — Non-compliance with the prohibition of unacceptable risk AI practices (outlined in Article 5) carries the most severe penalties. Offenders can be fined up to €35 million or up to 7% of their total worldwide annual turnover, whichever is higher.

Obligations for high-risk and other systems �� Failing to comply with obligations related to high-risk AI systems (such as risk management, data governance, and transparency), transparency obligations for certain AI systems, or the requirements for notified bodies will result in fines of up to €15 million or up to 3% of total worldwide annual turnover, whichever is higher.

Providers of general-purpose AI models — If providers of general-purpose AI models intentionally or negligently infringe on their specific obligations, fail to cooperate with requests for documents/information, or refuse to provide access for evaluation, they can be fined up to €15 million or 3% of their total worldwide annual turnover, whichever is higher.

Supplying incorrect information — Supplying incorrect, incomplete, or misleading information to notified bodies or national competent authorities in reply to a request is subject to fines of up to €7.5 million or up to 1% of total worldwide annual turnover, whichever is higher.

Exceptions and nuances

•SMEs and start-ups: To protect smaller businesses, if the offender is a small or medium-sized enterprise (SME) or a start-up, they will be subject to the lower of the two amounts (the fixed amount or the percentage of turnover) for each respective tier of fines.
•Union institutions: For Union institutions, bodies, offices, and agencies, the fines are capped at specific amounts: up to €1.5 million for violating prohibited AI practices, and up to €750,000 for non-compliance with other requirements.

When authorities decide whether to impose a fine and what the exact amount should be, they must take into account all relevant circumstances of the specific case. This includes the nature, gravity, and duration of the infringement, the number of affected persons, the size and market share of the operator, the degree of cooperation with authorities, any previous fines applied for the same activity, and whether the infringement was intentional or negligent.

Understand your AI Act obligations.Prove compliance.Keep it aligned as AI evolves.