EAA -- Plain Language in Consumer Communications

What the EAA actually says

The European Accessibility Act (Directive (EU) 2019/882)^[1] does not contain a clause literally titled "plain language." The obligation is assembled from several places in Annex I. Annex I Section I (general accessibility requirements for products) requires that information on the use of the product -- instructions, warnings, labelling, and user interface text -- be "presented in an understandable way," available through more than one sensory channel, and set in fonts of adequate size and suitable shape. Annex I Section III (general accessibility requirements for services) extends the same understandability principle to service information provided electronically: it must be "perceivable, operable, understandable and robust."

The most concrete plain-language clause is in Annex I Section IV, which adds specific requirements for consumer banking services. It requires that the information be understandable "without exceeding a level of complexity superior to level B2 (upper intermediate) of the Council of Europe's Common European Framework of Reference for Languages." B2 is the only numeric reading-level threshold named in the Act. It does not apply to other sectors by its terms, but supervisory authorities and the EN 301 549 alignment work have used it as a reference point for what "understandable" looks like in practice across services in scope.

Article 13 and Annex V require service providers to publish, as part of their general terms and conditions, "a general description of the service in accessible formats" and the "descriptions and explanations necessary for the understanding of the operation of the service." Accessibility statements and contractual information that describe the service must themselves meet the accessibility requirements of Annex I -- an accessibility statement written in impenetrable legalese does not discharge the obligation.

The mechanism: who is locked out by dense prose

Understandability is the access need that the W3C Cognitive Accessibility Task Force groups under "cognitive and learning disabilities." Dense regulatory or technical writing -- long sentences, nominalised verbs, nested subordinate clauses, unexplained jargon, passive constructions with elided agents -- raises working-memory load past the point where users with cognitive and learning disabilities, users with aphasia, users with reading disabilities such as dyslexia, users reading in a second language, and users with low general literacy can extract what they need to do. Roughly half of adults in OECD countries score at or below Level 2 on the PIAAC prose literacy scale^[2], which means they struggle with texts that require inference across multiple paragraphs. A terms-of-service document written for a corporate counsel audience is not readable for that population, even though it is technically "provided."

Annex II of the EAA gives indicative, non-binding examples of what the understandability requirement looks like in practice. It calls out "using words in a consistent manner, or in a clear and logical structure" so that users with cognitive and learning disabilities can follow the text, providing text that can be read aloud by assistive technology, and pairing text warnings with tactile or auditory signals.^[1] The Annex uses the phrase "intellectual disabilities"; we use "cognitive and learning disabilities" on this site to match the W3C COGA vocabulary.

Relationship to WCAG 3.1.5

WCAG 2.2 Success Criterion 3.1.5 Reading Level (Level AAA)^[3] asks that "when text requires reading ability more advanced than the lower secondary education level after the removal of proper names and titles, supplemental content, or a version that does not require reading ability more advanced than the lower secondary education level, is available." Lower secondary is roughly CEFR B1 -- one level below the B2 banking threshold in the EAA. Because 3.1.5 sits at Level AAA, WCAG 2.2 at Level AA conformance does not require it. The EAA's Annex I understandability language and its explicit B2 ceiling for banking effectively promote a plain-language obligation into a compliance concern for consumer services in scope, independently of which WCAG level a site targets.

What a plain-language rewrite actually changes

"Plain language" is not a style preference; it is a drafting methodology with documented techniques. ISO 24495-1:2023 Plain language -- Part 1: Governing principles and guidelines codifies four principles (relevant, findable, understandable, usable) and a set of concrete drafting practices:

• Name the reader and their decision. Write to the person who has to act, not to a legal reviewer.
• Use short sentences -- typically 15 to 20 words -- and one main idea per sentence.
• Use common words in their common meaning. Define technical terms on first use or link to a glossary entry.
• Use active voice with a named subject. "You must submit the form" beats "the form must be submitted."
• Structure content with descriptive headings every 100 to 200 words and with bulleted lists for parallel items.
• Put the conclusion or required action first, then the reasoning. Do not bury the instruction under three paragraphs of context.
• Test the draft with users from the target audience, not with readability formulas alone. Formulas measure sentence and word length; they do not measure whether a reader can act on the text.

Practical scope for EAA-regulated services

• Accessibility statements published under Annex V must themselves be written to the Annex I understandability bar -- a statement that only a compliance lawyer can parse fails the requirement it claims to discharge.
• Consumer contracts and terms of service for banking, e-commerce, e-books, and electronic communications services in scope of Article 2 should target the Annex I Section IV B2 ceiling where it applies (banking) and the general "understandable" standard everywhere else.
• Product labelling, warnings, and instructions for products in scope (general-purpose computers, self-service terminals, e-readers, consumer terminal equipment used for electronic communications and audiovisual media) fall under Annex I Section I and must meet the same understandability requirements as the user interface.
• Easy Read or "Easy-to-Read" versions of critical information -- short, illustrated, concrete-noun versions designed for users with cognitive and learning disabilities -- are an accepted way to satisfy the understandability requirement for safety-critical or rights-critical content, but they supplement rather than replace the primary accessible version.

Related clauses

• EAA accessibility statements
• EAA feedback mechanisms