Annex IV: Assessment of Disproportionate Burden

Annex IV of the European Accessibility Act (EAA) establishes the criteria for economic operators to assess whether compliance with accessibility requirements would impose a disproportionate burden. This provides a structured framework for organizations to determine when they may be exempt from certain accessibility requirements based on legitimate economic considerations.

This exemption recognizes that while accessibility is critically important, there may be situations where implementing certain accessibility requirements would create a fundamentally disproportionate financial and organizational burden relative to the benefits provided. Annex IV ensures this determination is made through a consistent, evidence-based approach.

Annex IV requires economic operators to use the following criteria when conducting their assessment of disproportionate burden:

1. Ratio of Net Costs to Overall Costs

The assessment must consider the ratio between the net costs of compliance with accessibility requirements and the overall costs (operating and capital expenditures) of manufacturing, distributing, or importing the product, or providing the service. This includes:

• One-time costs for redesigning products or services to meet accessibility requirements
• Ongoing operational costs related to maintaining accessibility features
• Costs for staff training related to accessibility
• Costs for testing with users with disabilities

These costs should be weighed against the organization's total costs for the product or service.

2. Estimated Costs and Benefits for the Economic Operator

The assessment must include an estimate of the costs and benefits for the economic operator in relation to the estimated benefit for persons with disabilities, taking into account:

• The frequency and duration of use of the specific product or service
• The estimated number of persons with disabilities who would benefit from improved accessibility
• The estimated market gains from increased accessibility
• The lifecycle of the product or service

3. Comparison of Net Costs with Organization Criteria

The assessment must compare the net costs of compliance with the accessibility requirements with:

• For Microenterprises: The organization's overall resources, ensuring the burden does not threaten the viability of the business
• For Other Enterprises: The proportion of accessibility-related expenditure compared to the organization's turnover

When claiming disproportionate burden, economic operators must document their assessment thoroughly. The documentation should include:

• Detailed Cost Analysis: Itemized breakdown of estimated costs for implementing each accessibility requirement identified as potentially imposing a disproportionate burden
• Benefit Analysis: Assessment of the potential benefits for persons with disabilities, including quantitative and qualitative factors where possible
• Alternatives Considered: Documentation of partial accessibility solutions or alternatives considered and why they were insufficient or still imposed a disproportionate burden
• Financial Context: Relevant financial information that demonstrates the disproportionate nature of the burden in relation to the organization's size and resources
• Expert Input: Any relevant expert opinions or stakeholder consultations conducted as part of the assessment

This documentation must be retained for at least five years from the last time the product is made available on the market, or the last time the service is provided, as appropriate.

The EAA requires economic operators to conduct a reassessment of disproportionate burden in the following situations:

• When a service provided is modified
• When a product is changed or redesigned
• When requested by a market surveillance authority
• At a minimum, every five years

The purpose of periodic reassessment is to determine whether circumstances have changed that might affect the previous determination of disproportionate burden. Such changes might include:

• Decreased implementation costs due to technological advances
• Availability of new tools that make accessibility implementation easier
• Changes in the organization's financial situation
• Changes in the product or service that might affect accessibility implementation
• Evolution of user needs and expectations regarding accessibility

The EAA includes special provisions for microenterprises providing services. According to the Act, microenterprises are exempt from complying with the accessibility requirements and from carrying out the disproportionate burden assessment. However:

• This exemption only applies to microenterprises providing services, not those manufacturing, importing, or distributing products
• A microenterprise is defined as an enterprise which employs fewer than 10 persons and whose annual turnover and/or annual balance sheet total does not exceed €2 million
• Market surveillance authorities can still request relevant documentation to verify that an enterprise qualifies as a microenterprise

Despite the exemption, microenterprises are encouraged to consider implementing accessibility features where feasible, as this can open up market opportunities and prepare them for growth beyond microenterprise status.

When conducting a disproportionate burden assessment, economic operators should follow these guiding principles:

• Requirement-Specific Analysis: Assess each accessibility requirement individually, rather than making a blanket determination for all requirements
• Evidence-Based Approach: Base the assessment on objective evidence rather than assumptions about costs or benefits
• Narrowest Possible Exemption: Seek the most limited exemption possible, implementing as many accessibility requirements as can be reasonably accommodated
• Alternative Solutions: Consider whether partial implementation or alternative approaches might mitigate the burden while still improving accessibility
• Consultation: Consult with accessibility experts and organizations representing persons with disabilities when possible to ensure a thorough understanding of the implications
• Forward-Looking: Consider future technological developments and potentially decreasing implementation costs over time
• Transparency: Be prepared to share the rationale for a disproportionate burden determination with stakeholders and authorities

Economic operators can use the following step-by-step approach to conduct a disproportionate burden assessment in line with Annex IV requirements:

1. Identify Applicable Requirements: Determine which accessibility requirements from Annex I apply to your specific product or service
2. Evaluate Implementation Options: For each requirement, identify the technical and organizational measures needed for implementation
3. Estimate Costs: Calculate the one-time and ongoing costs associated with implementing each accessibility requirement, including:
   • Design and development costs
   • Testing costs
   • Staff training
   • Documentation updates
   • Ongoing maintenance
4. Estimate Benefits: Assess the potential benefits of implementing each requirement, including:
   • Potential market expansion
   • Improved user experience for all users
   • Competitive advantages
   • Reduced legal risk
   • Enhanced brand reputation
5. Determine Net Burden: Calculate the net burden by comparing costs against benefits and organizational resources
6. Explore Alternatives: For requirements where the initial assessment indicates a disproportionate burden, explore alternative approaches that might be less burdensome
7. Document Assessment: Create comprehensive documentation of the assessment process, findings, and justifications
8. Set Reassessment Schedule: Establish a timeline for periodic reassessment, including triggers for earlier reassessment

This structured approach helps ensure a thorough and defensible assessment that meets the requirements of Annex IV while identifying opportunities to maximize accessibility within reasonable resource constraints.

While the disproportionate burden provision provides important flexibility, it is subject to several limitations:

• Not Automatic: The exemption is not automatically granted and must be justified through a documented assessment
• Subject to Verification: Market surveillance authorities can request and evaluate the assessment documentation
• Temporary Nature: A disproportionate burden determination is not permanent and must be periodically reassessed
• Not Applicable to EU Funds: Products or services funded by EU programs must comply with accessibility requirements regardless of burden
• Cannot Override Fundamental Requirements: The disproportionate burden provision cannot be used to avoid implementing accessibility features that are considered fundamental to the product or service's basic functionality
• Public Accountability: Organizations using this exemption should be prepared for potential public scrutiny and market pressure

These limitations ensure that the disproportionate burden provision is used appropriately and does not undermine the fundamental objectives of the EAA.

Annex IV works in conjunction with other annexes of the EAA:

• Annex I (Accessibility Requirements): The disproportionate burden assessment evaluates the feasibility of implementing the specific accessibility requirements detailed in Annex I
• Annex II (Examples of Implementation): The examples provided in Annex II can help economic operators understand potential implementation approaches and associated costs when conducting their assessment
• Annex V (Conformity Assessment for Products): Products claiming a disproportionate burden exemption must still undergo conformity assessment for any accessibility requirements that are being implemented
• Annex VI (Assessment Criteria): Works directly with Annex IV, providing more detailed criteria for assessing disproportionate burden

Understanding these relationships helps economic operators conduct comprehensive assessments that consider all relevant aspects of the EAA.