Authorised Representatives for Non-EU Providers
Third-country GPAI provider representation requirements under Article 54.
Learning Objectives
By the end of this chapter, you will be able to:
- Determine when a third-country GPAI provider must appoint an authorised representative in the EU
- Identify the specific tasks and powers that must be included in the written mandate
- Understand the documentation retention obligations (10-year period)
- Recognise the authorised representative's independent duty to terminate the mandate
- Apply the open-source exemption criteria to authorised representative requirements
When Is an Authorised Representative Required?
Article 54(1) establishes a clear rule: providers of general-purpose AI models established in third countries must appoint an authorised representative established in the Union before placing their GPAI model on the EU market.
Applicability Assessment
| Factor | Requirement Triggered? | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Provider established outside the EU placing GPAI on EU market | Yes | Article 54(1) — mandatory appointment |
| Provider established in the EU | No | Provider can fulfil obligations directly |
| Third-country provider of open-source GPAI (parameters publicly available, no systemic risk) | No | Article 54(6) exemption applies |
| Third-country provider of open-source GPAI with systemic risk | Yes | Article 54(6) — exemption does not cover systemic risk models |
| Third-country provider whose model is only used outside the EU | No | No placing on the Union market |
Key Distinction: The authorised representative requirement for GPAI models under Article 54 is separate from the authorised representative requirement for high-risk AI systems under Article 22. A provider operating in both domains may need to appoint representatives under both provisions, though the same entity could serve in both roles.
The Written Mandate
Article 54(1) requires a written mandate to formalise the appointment. This is not an informal arrangement — it must be a documented legal instrument.
Mandatory Mandate Content (Article 54(3))
The mandate must empower the authorised representative to carry out at least the following tasks:
| Task | Article Reference | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Verify technical documentation | Article 54(3)(a) | Verify that technical documentation specified in Annex XI has been drawn up and that all obligations under Article 53 (and Article 55 where applicable) have been fulfilled by the provider |
| Retain documentation | Article 54(3)(b) | Keep a copy of the Annex XI technical documentation at the disposal of the AI Office and national competent authorities for 10 years after the GPAI model has been placed on the market, along with the contact details of the appointing provider |
| Provide information on request | Article 54(3)(c) | Provide the AI Office, upon reasoned request, with all information and documentation necessary to demonstrate compliance with Chapter V obligations |
| Cooperate with authorities | Article 54(3)(d) | Cooperate with the AI Office and competent authorities, upon reasoned request, in any action taken in relation to the GPAI model, including when the model is integrated into AI systems placed on the market or put into service in the Union |
Extended Powers (Article 54(4))
The mandate must also empower the authorised representative to be addressed — in addition to or instead of the provider — by the AI Office or competent authorities on all issues related to ensuring compliance with the Regulation.
| Aspect | Implication |
|---|---|
| "In addition to" | Authorities may contact both the representative and the provider simultaneously |
| "Instead of" | Authorities may address the representative as the sole point of contact |
| Scope | Covers all issues related to ensuring compliance — not limited to the four tasks in Article 54(3) |
Practical Note: The mandate must be provided to the AI Office upon request, in one of the official languages of the EU institutions. Providers should ensure their mandate is drafted or translated accordingly.
Provider Obligations Towards the Authorised Representative
Article 54(2) places a reciprocal obligation on the provider: the provider must enable its authorised representative to perform the tasks specified in the mandate. This means the provider cannot appoint a representative in name only.
Enabling Requirements
| Provider Obligation | Practical Implementation |
|---|---|
| Share technical documentation | Provide complete Annex XI documentation to the representative |
| Keep representative informed | Notify of model updates, compliance changes, and any incidents |
| Provide access to information | Ensure the representative can respond to AI Office requests |
| Financial support | Provide adequate resources for the representative to fulfil duties |
| Timely communication | Respond to representative queries to support authority cooperation |
Documentation Retention: The 10-Year Rule
Article 54(3)(b) requires the authorised representative to retain documentation for 10 years after the GPAI model has been placed on the market.
What Must Be Retained
| Document Category | Source | Content |
|---|---|---|
| Annex XI Technical Documentation | GPAI provider | Model architecture, training methodology, capabilities and limitations, evaluation results, computational resources used |
| Provider contact details | GPAI provider | Name, address, and contact information of the provider that appointed the representative |
| Mandate copy | Joint | The written mandate itself, including all empowered tasks |
Retention Considerations
| Consideration | Guidance |
|---|---|
| Start of retention period | From the date the GPAI model is placed on the Union market |
| Model versions | Each version placed on the market triggers its own 10-year period |
| Storage requirements | Must be "at the disposal of" the AI Office and national competent authorities — implying ready accessibility |
| Post-termination | If the mandate is terminated, the retention obligation should be addressed in the termination arrangements |
Termination of the Mandate
Article 54(5) creates an unusual obligation: the authorised representative has an independent duty to terminate the mandate under certain circumstances.
Termination Triggers
| Trigger | Article Reference | Action Required |
|---|---|---|
| Representative considers the provider is acting contrary to its AI Act obligations | Article 54(5) | Must terminate the mandate |
| Representative has reason to consider the provider is acting contrary | Article 54(5) | Must terminate the mandate |
| Immediate notification | Article 54(5) | Must immediately inform the AI Office about the termination and the reasons |
Implications of Termination
| Consequence | Detail |
|---|---|
| For the provider | Cannot lawfully continue placing the GPAI model on the EU market without a new representative |
| For the representative | Must report the termination and reasons to the AI Office — this is not optional |
| For the AI Office | Receives a signal that the provider may be non-compliant, potentially triggering investigation |
| Market impact | The GPAI model may need to be withdrawn from the EU market until a new representative is appointed |
Compliance Note
The termination duty means the authorised representative is not merely an agent of the provider. It has an independent regulatory responsibility to act as a compliance gatekeeper. Organisations considering serving as authorised representatives must understand this obligation and the potential reputational consequences.
Open-Source Exemption (Article 54(6))
Article 54(6) exempts certain open-source GPAI models from the authorised representative requirement. This mirrors the broader open-source exemption structure in the AI Act.
Exemption Criteria
All of the following conditions must be met for the exemption to apply:
| Condition | Requirement |
|---|---|
| Free and open-source licence | The model must be released under a licence that allows access, usage, modification, and distribution |
| Parameters publicly available | The model's parameters, including weights, must be made publicly available |
| Architecture publicly available | Information on the model architecture must be publicly available |
| Usage information publicly available | Information on model usage must be publicly available |
| No systemic risk | The GPAI model must not present systemic risks as defined in Article 51 |
Exemption Boundaries
| Scenario | Exempt from Article 54? | Reasoning |
|---|---|---|
| Fully open model, no systemic risk | Yes | All Article 54(6) criteria met |
| Open weights but restricted licence | No | Licence does not allow full access, usage, modification, and distribution |
| Open model with systemic risk | No | Article 54(6) explicitly excludes systemic risk models |
| Partially open model (e.g., weights available but architecture not disclosed) | No | All transparency conditions must be met |
Selecting an Authorised Representative
The AI Act does not prescribe specific qualifications for authorised representatives of GPAI models, but practical considerations are significant.
Selection Criteria
| Criterion | Consideration |
|---|---|
| EU establishment | Must be established in the Union (Article 54(1)) |
| Technical competence | Must be able to verify Annex XI technical documentation (Article 54(3)(a)) |
| Regulatory expertise | Must understand Article 53 and Article 55 obligations |
| Language capability | Must be able to provide the mandate in an official EU institution language |
| Independence | Must be willing to exercise the termination duty under Article 54(5) |
| Longevity | Must be able to retain documentation for 10 years |
| Responsiveness | Must be able to cooperate with the AI Office upon reasoned request |
Comparison with Article 22 Authorised Representatives
| Aspect | Article 22 (High-Risk AI Systems) | Article 54 (GPAI Models) |
|---|---|---|
| Appointing entity | Provider of high-risk AI system | Provider of GPAI model |
| Supervisory authority | National market surveillance authorities | AI Office |
| Documentation standard | Annex IV (AI system documentation) | Annex XI (GPAI model documentation) |
| Retention period | 10 years (Article 22(3)) | 10 years (Article 54(3)(b)) |
| Termination duty | Not explicitly stated | Explicit duty under Article 54(5) |
| Open-source exemption | No equivalent | Article 54(6) |
Further Reading
- Article 54 — Authorised representatives of providers of general-purpose AI models (full text)
- Article 53 — Obligations for providers of all general-purpose AI models
- Article 55 — Additional obligations for providers of GPAI models with systemic risk
- Article 22 — Authorised representatives of providers of high-risk AI systems (comparative reference)
- Annex XI — Technical documentation for providers of general-purpose AI models
- Article 51 — Classification of general-purpose AI models with systemic risk
What You Learned
Key concepts from this chapter
**Third-country GPAI providers** must appoint an EU-established authorised representative by written mandate before placing a model on the Union market (Article 54(1))
The mandate must cover **four core tasks**: verification of technical documentation, 10-year document retention, information provision to the AI Office, and authority cooperation (Article 54(3))
The authorised representative can be addressed **in addition to or instead of** the provider by the AI Office and competent authorities (Article 54(4))
Providers must **enable** their representatives to perform mandate tasks — a paper appointment is insufficient (Article 54(2))
The representative has an **independent duty to terminate** the mandate if the provider acts contrary to its obligations, and must immediately notify the AI Office (Article 54(5))