The numbers

What this is built on

Every figure here is either read straight out of the shipped code or carries its source. None of them are adoption numbers — this is what the engine tracks, who the law reaches, and what the alternatives cost, on three switches below. If a number cannot be traced to what produced it, it does not belong on a page selling proof.

What the engine actually tracks

Counted from the code at build time, so the page cannot drift from the product. Risk classes and obligation text come from fixed rules — never from a language model. Where a market is labelled mapped rather than verified, a person has not yet re-checked it against the primary texts, and it carries no penalty figures anywhere in the product.

3

markets your findings are read against, chosen when you scan

1 verified · 2 mapped from primary sources

22

duties mapped across those markets — GDPR, ePrivacy, the AI Act, PECR, CalOPPA, the FTC Act and the rest, each named with its article

lib/jurisdictions.ts

27

member states mapped, each with its own supervising authority

lib/countries.ts

11

national implementing statutes in force, cited by name on your policy

5 more designated without a statute · 11 pending

3

statutory deadlines counted down from today, not from a blog post

2 Dec 2026 · 2 Dec 2027 · 2 Aug 2028

SHA-256

fingerprint on every issued document, so you can prove it never changed

Append-only evidence log

Who the law applies to

The Act is a Regulation: it applies directly and identically in every member state, which is why the EU is where Kritia encodes first — it is the only one of our three markets with a statutory clock. Most of the businesses inside its scope have never been told they are.

~25M

EU SMEs the Act can reach

Eurostat structural business statistics

~4–5M

of them already using AI — inside Article 4's literacy duty

Derived from Eurostat AI adoption rates

1.5–2.5M

already in Article 50 scope — a chatbot or published AI content is enough

Derived from Eurostat AI adoption rates

<20%

of SME AI users have heard of the AI Act at all

Themio SME Digital Compliance Barometer 2026

What the alternatives charge

Nothing here is a knock on solicitors — a solicitor is the right call for a hard question. This is what maintaining an ordinary evidence file costs when you buy it by the hour, or by the enterprise seat. The gap in the middle is the whole business: officer-grade records at a subscription price you can read before you talk to anyone.

€250–450

per hour for a solicitor

Irish legal rate guides 2026

€5,000–25,000

for a one-off SME AI Act readiness project, then 20–40% annually

Consultancy estimates

€1,000–5,000

per month for an enterprise governance platform, quoted on request after a sales call

Published vendor pricing

€20–30

per month here — less than one hour of solicitor time per year

Flat. Scope check, scanner and policy generator stay free

9 plain-English guides cover the EU AI Act side of this in depth, free and without an account: Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 as amended by Regulation (EU) 2026/1744. The duties from the other regimes are cited article by article inside the report itself rather than written up as guides. If you find a figure on this page you cannot trace to its source, that is a bug worth telling us about.

What the file is for

The questionnaire usually arrives before the regulator does.

For most small firms the first real test is not an inspection. It is a tender pack, an insurer, or an enterprise buyer’s vendor questionnaire asking which AI tools you use, who classified them, and what you tell your customers about them.

Answering that from scratch costs days and reads like an improvisation. Answering it from a maintained record costs an afternoon and reads like a company that has its house in order. The regulator is the reason the duties exist. The customer asking is what makes the file pay for itself.

Two plans, one product, and the price is on the page.

See pricing