EAA -- Accessibility Statements
What It Is
"Accessibility statement" in the EU does not refer to a single obligation. Two separate directives impose overlapping but distinct written-information requirements, and the one a given site has to satisfy depends on who operates it and what is being delivered.
The Web Accessibility Directive (Directive (EU) 2016/2102) applies to public-sector bodies' websites and mobile applications. Article 7(1) requires each in-scope body to "provide and regularly update a detailed, comprehensive and clear accessibility statement" on conformance with the Directive, and Article 7(2) directs the Commission to adopt an implementing act establishing a model for that statement[1]. That implementing act is Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2018/1523, which sets out the mandatory structure: conformance status, list of non-accessible content with reasons, accessible alternatives, feedback contact, and a link to the enforcement procedure under Article 9[2].
The European Accessibility Act (Directive (EU) 2019/882) applies to private-sector economic operators placing in-scope products or providing in-scope services (e-commerce, consumer banking, e-books, electronic communications, passenger transport websites and apps, and so on)[3]. For services, Article 13 obligates providers to prepare information meeting Annex V and to include, in the general terms and conditions or equivalent document, a description of how the service meets the accessibility requirements of Article 4. Annex V lists the required elements: a general description of the service in accessible formats, descriptions necessary to understand its operation, and a clause-by-clause account of how the Annex I requirements are satisfied[3].
Why It Matters
The two regimes do different jobs with similar-looking artefacts, and conflating them is how public-sector bodies ship a WAD statement and assume it covers EAA obligations (it does not), or how a private e-commerce operator copies a WAD template and omits the Annex V content requirements (also incorrect). The WAD statement is a public compliance declaration keyed to the feedback and enforcement machinery in Articles 7-9 of 2016/2102; any member of the public can use the contact listed in the statement to request accessible alternatives or file a complaint with the designated monitoring body. The EAA Annex V information is part of the conformity position of the service itself and must be retained "for as long as the service is in operation" per Article 13(2) -- it is evidence the market surveillance authority can demand under Article 23 if the service is audited.
There is a second pressure loop that only works if the document is honest. Article 14 of the EAA lets an operator claim that full compliance would impose a "disproportionate burden", but only after a documented assessment against the criteria in Annex VI, kept on file for five years. Operators that quietly ship inaccessible services without either meeting Annex V or documenting a disproportionate-burden assessment have no defensible position when a national enforcement body comes asking[3].
How It Relates to WCAG
WCAG itself does not require a statement. The W3C specifies success criteria; it does not mandate disclosure. The disclosure requirement is layered on top by EU law. WAD references the harmonised standard EN 301 549 (which in turn imports WCAG 2.1 AA as the web baseline) as the compliance target the Article 7 statement reports against[4]. EAA Annex I, Section III also anchors on the same harmonised standard for ICT services, so the substantive accessibility bar in both regimes is currently EN 301 549 v3.2.1 -- but the statement formats, audiences, and legal consequences are not interchangeable.
Practical Implications
- Identify which regime applies. Public-sector body website or mobile app inside the EU -- WAD Article 7 statement using the 2018/1523 model. In-scope private-sector service (see Article 2 of 2019/882 for the service list) -- EAA Article 13 / Annex V information. Both can apply to the same organisation for different products.
- Use the 2018/1523 model verbatim for WAD. The Implementing Decision prescribes the structure; deviating from it invites a finding from the national monitoring body. Mandatory fields: compliance status (fully / partially / non-compliant), non-accessible content with justification, feedback mechanism, enforcement procedure link.
- For EAA services, meet Annex V in the terms of service or an equivalent document. The required elements are a general description of the service in accessible formats, descriptions and explanations sufficient to understand operation, and a mapping of how the Annex I functional requirements are satisfied. Annex V is not the WAD model -- do not substitute one for the other.
- Publish where users can find it. For WAD this is customarily a footer link labelled "Accessibility" or "Accessibility statement"; for EAA Annex V information the Directive requires it to be "made available to the public in writing and orally, including in a manner which is accessible to persons with disabilities".
- Keep the document fresh and retained. WAD Article 7(1) requires regular updates. EAA Article 13(2) requires the Annex V information to be maintained for the life of the service. Annex VI disproportionate-burden assessments must be retained five years from the last date the service was provided, per Article 14(8).
- Name the gaps honestly. A statement that claims full compliance and is contradicted by a single automated scan is worse than one that lists known non-conformances with remediation dates -- it forecloses the "we are transparently working on it" posture that both regimes are designed to reward.