Redesigning Your Website for the European Accessibility Act (EAA): Scope, the Microenterprise Exemption, WCAG 2.2, Costs and Checklists (2026)

The European Accessibility Act (EAA) has applied across the EU since 28 June 2025. Businesses offering e-commerce, booking, banking and similar services to EU consumers must make their websites and apps usable by people with disabilities.

In March 2026, the Dutch regulator checked around 100 of the largest online shops and reported that 61% could not be used to complete an order with assistive technology. Duties and inspections have started; many sites are not ready.

This article shows businesses planning a redesign how to turn the EAA into redesign requirements. It is a general overview, not legal advice: check scope and exceptions against the legal text and regulator guidance, with professional advice where needed.

1. What is the European Accessibility Act?

Directive (EU) 2019/882 as a framework

The EAA's formal name is Directive (EU) 2019/882 on the accessibility requirements for products and services, adopted on 17 April 2019. An EU directive only takes effect once each Member State writes it into national law (transposition). The requirements are common across the EU, but regulators, reporting procedures and penalties differ by country.

The website requirements sit in Annex I. The core is to make websites and apps perceivable, operable, understandable and robust. These are the same four principles W3C uses in WCAG.

Applies from 28 June 2025; transition periods cover products and contracts only

Member States had to adopt their laws by 28 June 2022 and apply them from 28 June 2025 (Article 31). As transitional measures (Article 32), products lawfully used before that date may be used until 28 June 2030, and service contracts agreed before it may continue unchanged until they expire, for no more than five years.

Reading this as "websites have until 2030" is a mistake: it covers existing products and contracts, and the Dutch ACM states there is no transition period for services. The figure below sets out the key dates.

2. Which businesses are in scope, and which are not

Six consumer service types

Article 2(2) lists six types of services provided to consumers, and websites are covered as the front door to them. The table below gives typical web examples.

The type web teams meet most often is e-commerce. For urban, suburban and regional transport only interactive self-service terminals are covered, not websites. And because the EAA is about consumers, B2B ordering sites that deal only with businesses appear to fall outside it.

What the e-commerce definition tells you

The Directive defines e-commerce services as "services provided at a distance, through websites and mobile device-based services by electronic means and at the individual request of a consumer with a view to concluding a consumer contract" (Article 3(30)). The key words are "with a view to concluding a consumer contract".

A site that only presents products is usually not an e-commerce service; a cart, booking flow or paid sign-up can be. Adding e-commerce or booking to a brochure site during a redesign can bring it into scope, so check this at the very start of the requirements phase.

Content excluded within a site

Even on a covered site, Article 2(4) excludes five kinds of content. The table below shows the conditions and how to treat each in a redesign.

Moving or editing an old PDF can bring it into scope, so decide during the content inventory whether to migrate each item or freeze it as an archive.

3. Reading the microenterprise exemption precisely

Fewer than 10 employees, and turnover or balance sheet total of no more than EUR 2 million

The Directive defines a microenterprise as "an enterprise which employs fewer than 10 persons and which has an annual turnover not exceeding EUR 2 million or an annual balance sheet total not exceeding EUR 2 million" (Article 3(23)). The money test is turnover or balance sheet total, so meeting either one is enough.

Article 4(5) then states that microenterprises providing services are exempt from the service requirements and any obligations relating to compliance with them. Conversely, with 10 or more employees you are not exempt, however small your turnover. ACM summarises the rule as applying to firms with 10 or more employees, turnover above EUR 2 million, or both. Under the legal text, the money test uses turnover or balance sheet total. The figure below shows the decision path for a service provider.

The Directive does not spell out how to count staff (part-timers, group companies). If counting at group level could change the answer, for example for a European subsidiary of a Japanese parent, check with a professional.

Products and the "disproportionate burden" exception are different

The exemption covers services. Microenterprises dealing with products are not exempt from the requirements; only procedures are lighter, for example they need not document a disproportionate burden assessment (Article 14(4)). The table below compares the microenterprise exemption with the disproportionate burden exception, which any business can use.

It is assessed on criteria such as net compliance costs relative to overall costs, and is unavailable if you receive outside funding for accessibility. Given the paperwork, building accessibility into the design is usually cheaper than looking for an exception.

4. Dutch transposition and regulators

Implementatiewet toegankelijkheidsvoorschriften producten en diensten

In the Netherlands, the EAA was transposed by the Implementatiewet toegankelijkheidsvoorschriften producten en diensten (Act implementing the accessibility requirements for products and services). It was signed on 8 April 2024 and published in the Dutch official gazette on 15 April 2024 (Staatsblad 2024, 87).

It is an omnibus act that amends several existing laws. E-commerce duties went into Book 6 of the Dutch Civil Code (Burgerlijk Wetboek), financial services into the Financial Supervision Act (Wft), and passenger transport and e-books into the Equal Treatment on the Grounds of Disability or Chronic Illness Act (Wgbh/cz). A royal decree (Staatsblad 2024, 341) set the entry into force at 28 June 2025.

Regulators split by service type

Supervision is divided by service type. The table below lists the main regulators relevant to websites.

If you sell online to Dutch consumers, your regulator is usually ACM; finance brings in AFM, e-books CvdM.

How ACM works: a duty to self-report, and the March 2026 check

The key point in ACM's guidance is that if you find your service does not meet the requirements, you must report it yourself (Article 13(4) of the Directive). The table below summarises ACM's guidance.

On 24 March 2026, ACM published the results of checking around 100 of the largest Dutch online shops and other sites. On 61%, an order could not be completed with assistive technology, and a further 33% had serious problems. Typical examples were order buttons that cannot be reached by keyboard and inaccessible CAPTCHAs. ACM is focusing on critical barriers first and says companies that do not improve enough risk enforcement.

5. When does the EAA reach Japanese and other non-EU businesses?

The test: providing or offering services to EU consumers

The Directive defines a service provider as "any natural or legal person who provides a service on the Union market or makes offers to provide such a service to consumers in the Union" (Article 3(4)). Where the company is based is not a condition. The word "offers" suggests that not only actual sales but also signs that you are targeting EU consumers, such as euro prices, delivery to the EU or pages in EU languages, can count. The table below gives a rough guide for common positions.

Where you "can be in scope", the regulator depends on the country you sell to. ACM advises that if you provide services in several Member States, you report to the authority in each.

What head offices tend to miss

If the head office controls the platform or templates, it holds the power to fix the European site. When a redesign expands sales to Europe, add the EAA to the requirements then.

6. Which standard: EN 301 549, WCAG 2.1 AA and WCAG 2.2

EN 301 549 and presumption of conformity

Annex I does not say how to meet the requirements; harmonised standards fill that gap. Products and services that conform to a harmonised standard cited in the EU Official Journal are presumed to conform with the Directive to the extent the standard covers it (Article 15(1)).

The candidate standard for the web is EN 301 549, produced jointly by the European standards bodies ETSI, CEN and CENELEC. Its web section takes in W3C's WCAG almost word for word.

From V3.2.1 (WCAG 2.1) to V4.1.1 (WCAG 2.2)

EN 301 549 V3.2.1 from 2021 references WCAG 2.1 levels A and AA and has served as the harmonised standard under the Web Accessibility Directive (2016/2102) for public-sector sites. On 2 September 2026, ETSI published V4.1.1, which references WCAG 2.2 levels A and AA. As of 27 October 2026, its citation in the Official Journal as a harmonised standard under the EAA could not be confirmed. The table below compares the relevant standards.

WCAG 2.2 keeps almost all of 2.1 and adds new criteria (4.1.1 Parsing was removed). Meeting WCAG 2.2 AA means you also meet nearly all of 2.1 AA; the reverse is not true.

Six new level A and AA criteria in WCAG 2.2

Of the criteria added in WCAG 2.2, six at levels A and AA directly affect design and build. The table below lists them and what to decide in a redesign.

All are settled once at the design system stage; added later, they mean touching every header, button and form template.

Which one to build to

If you are redesigning now, write WCAG 2.2 AA into the requirements. You meet the current benchmark and avoid rework once V4.1.1 becomes the harmonised standard. EN 301 549 also has requirements beyond the web, such as real-time text in video calls, so sites with chat or video consultation should check the relevant clauses separately.

7. Prepare an accessibility statement

The "information on services" the Directive requires

Article 13(2) and Annex V require service providers to prepare information explaining how the service meets the accessibility requirements. It goes in the general terms and conditions or an equivalent document, must be accessible, must be available in written and oral form, and must be kept for as long as the service operates.

In practice this becomes a one-page accessibility statement linked from the footer. There is no fixed format for the private sector, but W3C WAI's statement generator is a useful model. The table below lists items to include, based on Annex V and ACM's guidance.

Avoid claiming "fully compliant" without evidence; stating your test method, date and remaining gaps earns more trust. Update the statement after every check.

8. Why a redesign is the efficient moment, and what it costs

Why adding it later costs more

Accessibility lives in the foundations: colours, type, components, templates and forms. Retrofitting means fixing those and rechecking every page.

In a redesign you rebuild the design, re-create the templates and migrate the content anyway. You only add checks to each step, so the extra effort is a top-up. For the overall process see "Website redesign process and schedule", and for common pitfalls "10 common website redesign mistakes". The figure below shows the extra hours for accessibility on a 30 to 60 page site with e-commerce.

Cost ranges

Multiplying hours by an hourly rate gives the cost range. The rates are the Dutch survey figures from "Website redesign cost and how to read a quote": EUR 73 for freelance web developers and EUR 106 as the agency average, both excluding VAT. Yen figures use JPY 176 per euro.

Hours depend on the current site and the number of templates. After launch, allowing 2 to 6 hours a month (EUR 150 to 640, about ¥26,000 to ¥110,000) for routine checks keeps new pages from breaking things.

What drives the cost

Where you land in the range depends mainly on the factors below. When comparing quotes, check they rest on the same assumptions.

Problems in third-party payment or booking screens cannot be fixed on your side, so make an accessibility conformance document from the provider a selection criterion.

9. Stage-by-stage checklists: design, build, content and testing

Assign checks to four stages

Checking only at final testing leaves no time to fix things, so assign checks to the four stages. The figure below shows the main checks.

Design stage

Decisions made in design spread to every page. The table below lists what to check at this stage.

If a brand colour fails the contrast test, the usual fix is not to drop it but to add a darker shade for text and buttons.

Build stage

The build creates the structure you cannot see. Assistive technology relies on that structure to read the page.

ARIA (attributes for assistive technology) backfires when misused. In WebAIM's 2026 study, pages using ARIA had more detected errors on average than pages without it (59.1 against 42). The rule is build with native HTML elements first and add ARIA only where they fall short.

Content and testing stages

Content migration is the one time you touch every page. Fixing content here avoids a separate budget later.

Making alt text a required field in the CMS prevents gaps in images added after launch. For testing, write these three launch criteria into the requirements:

1. No serious automated findings on the key screens (home, listing, detail, cart, checkout, contact)
2. A product can be chosen and an order completed with the keyboard alone
3. The same flow can be completed with a screen reader (NVDA or VoiceOver)

This mirrors ACM's question: can an order be completed? Put the order and contact flows first to clear the highest-impact problems.

10. What automated testing can and cannot catch

Reading the numbers

Automated tools such as axe (built on Deque's open-source axe-core engine) and Lighthouse find problems cheaply and quickly. In WebAIM's February 2026 study of the top one million home pages, 95.9% had automatically detected WCAG failures, averaging 56.1 per page.

But their reach is limited. In 2017, the UK Government Digital Service (GDS) tested 13 tools on a page with 143 planted barriers. The best tool found 41%, all tools together found 71%, and 29% were missed by every tool. Deque reports that axe caught 57% of issues by volume in its own audit data (2021, vendor data). It is safest to assume automated testing alone leaves around half of the problems.

Tools judge "present or missing"; people judge whether it is appropriate or usable.

A minimum set of manual tests

Even without specialists, a team can run the manual tests below. W3C WAI publishes evaluation approaches from quick checks to involving users.

Build automated tests into CI (continuous integration) and run them on every code change. Run manual tests before launch and whenever templates or checkout change.

11. The risk of relying on overlay products

The "one line of code" claim

Overlays add a script that shows a menu for enlarging text or changing colours and claim to make the site accessible automatically.

But in January 2025 the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced a consent order requiring overlay vendor accessiBe to pay USD 1 million for claiming without evidence that its product could make any site WCAG-compliant, and finalised the order on 22 April 2025. In Europe, the European Disability Forum (EDF) and the International Association of Accessibility Professionals (IAAP) stated jointly in May 2023 that overlays do not make a website accessible or compliant with European accessibility law.

Remaining problems still breach the EAA with an overlay installed. If a quote says "covered by an overlay", ask for it to be replaced with a quote to fix the code and content.

12. How Japan's JIS X 8341-3 and disability law line up

JIS X 8341-3 is also moving to WCAG 2.2

Japan's web accessibility standard, JIS X 8341-3, is currently the 2016 edition, identical to ISO/IEC 40500:2012, the international version of WCAG 2.0. ISO/IEC 40500 was revised in 2025 with the content of WCAG 2.2. On 30 October 2025, Japan's Web Accessibility Infrastructure Committee (WAIC) set up a committee to draft the JIS revision, with the policy of making it identical to ISO/IEC 40500:2025. As of 27 October 2026, publication of the revised JIS could not be confirmed.

Both Japan's JIS and the EU's EN 301 549 are being revised towards WCAG 2.2. If you rebuild your Japanese and European sites on a shared base, making WCAG 2.2 AA the common requirement prepares you for both revisions.

Reasonable accommodation and "improving the environment"

In Japan, the amended Act on the Elimination of Discrimination against Persons with Disabilities took effect on 1 April 2024, making reasonable accommodation by businesses mandatory: when a disabled person asks, the business must respond individually unless the burden is excessive. Improving website accessibility, by contrast, counts as "improving the environment", an advance measure for the public at large, and is only a duty to make efforts. The Cabinet Office's Basic Policy gives the example that answering a complaint about a hard-to-use site by phone or email is reasonable accommodation, while improving the site for the future is improving the environment.

Whether it is a duty to make efforts or a legal duty, the site you need to build is almost the same.

13. Working through cases (fictional examples)

Three fictional cases, not real companies.

Case A: a six-person Japanese food e-commerce business in The Hague

Turnover is EUR 1.8 million a year, so as a microenterprise it is exempt from the EAA's service duties. Even so, it decided to build to WCAG 2.2 AA in its redesign. Losing fewer customers translates directly into sales, and reaching 10 employees would bring it into scope. Building accessibility into the new design keeps the extra cost low.

Case B: a 40-person company selling cross-border from Japan to EU consumers

With 10 or more employees it is not a microenterprise, and it offers services to EU consumers, so it can be in scope. It first audited its key screens and checked the conformance of its third-party payment service, then wrote WCAG 2.2 AA into the requirements. It is preparing statements in the languages of its main markets and has set out how to report problems when they are found.

Case C: a Japanese machinery maker with a product site for Europe

A B2B site with product information and a contact form for distributors is usually out of scope. But because it plans to start selling parts to individuals, it built only the templates to WCAG 2.2 AA, so adding e-commerce later will not require a rebuild.

14. Steps to take from tomorrow

This order brings the EAA into a redesign without strain.

1. Check whether you are in scope: which of the six types applies, whether you serve EU consumers, and whether you are a microenterprise, using your employee count, turnover and balance sheet total. Record the result
2. Measure where you are: run automated tests on the key screens and try reaching an order by keyboard
3. Set the standard: write "WCAG 2.2 level AA" into the requirements and decide the pages in scope and the archives to freeze
4. Check third parties: ask payment, booking and chat providers for conformance documents
5. Assign checks by stage: turn the section 9 tables into checklists for the design, build, content and testing owners
6. Prepare the statement and reporting: draft the statement and decide who reports problems, and within how many days
7. Schedule post-launch checks: put monthly automated tests and manual tests after template changes into the maintenance scope

Summary

• The EAA has applied since 28 June 2025 to the sites of consumer e-commerce, banking, passenger transport, e-books and similar services in the EU. There is no transition period for websites.
• The microenterprise exemption for services covers businesses with fewer than 10 employees and turnover or balance sheet total of no more than EUR 2 million.
• Japanese and other non-EU companies can be in scope if they offer services to EU consumers. In the Netherlands ACM supervises e-commerce, and businesses must report problems themselves.
• With EN 301 549 V4.1.1 now referencing WCAG 2.2, writing WCAG 2.2 AA into the requirements is the sensible choice for a rebuild.
• Building accessibility into the four redesign stages keeps it a top-up: 60 to 192 hours for a 30 to 60 page e-commerce site.
• Automated tests catch around half of the problems. Combine them with manual testing and do not rely on overlays.

Sources

EU law and official guidance

• Directive (EU) 2019/882 — EUR-Lex: scope (Article 2), definitions (Article 3), microenterprise exemption (Article 4(5)), service provider duties (Article 13), disproportionate burden (Article 14), presumption of conformity (Article 15), application and transition (Articles 31 and 32), Annexes V and VI
• European Accessibility Act — European Commission: products and services covered

Dutch law and regulators

• Implementatiewet — Staatsblad 2024, 87: text of the Dutch law and designated regulators
• Entry-into-force decree — Staatsblad 2024, 341: in force from 28 June 2025
• Accessibility of e-commerce services — ACM: standard, statement, reporting deadlines
• Meldplicht (duty to report) — ACM: how to report
• Check of large online shops — ACM: 24 March 2026, 61% could not complete an order
• European Accessibility Act — business.gov.nl: which regulator supervises what
• Voor wie is het verplicht? — DigiToegankelijk: public-sector rules and the EAA

Technical standards and evaluation

• EN 301 549 V4.1.1 — ETSI: published 2 September 2026, references WCAG 2.2
• EN 301 549 V3.2.1 — ETSI: references WCAG 2.1
• EN 301 549 v4.1.1 is final — Deque: changes and expected Official Journal citation (vendor commentary)
• WCAG 2.2 — W3C / WCAG 2.1 — W3C: success criteria
• What's New in WCAG 2.2 — W3C WAI: added and removed criteria
• Developing an Accessibility Statement — W3C WAI: statement generator
• WCAG-EM — W3C WAI: evaluating a whole website
• Evaluation Tools List — W3C WAI: tools and their limits
• Involving Users — W3C WAI: evaluating with users

Automated testing and overlays

• WebAIM Million — WebAIM: February 2026, 95.9% with failures, ARIA and error counts
• Tool comparison — GOV.UK: 143 barriers, best tool 41%, all tools 71%
• Automated testing study — Deque: 57% by volume (vendor data)
• axe-core — GitHub: automated testing engine
• Proposed consent order — FTC: January 2025
• Final order — FTC: 22 April 2025
• Joint statement on accessibility overlays — EDF: EDF and IAAP joint statement

Japanese law and standards

• Promoting the elimination of disability discrimination — Cabinet Office: in force 1 April 2024, reasonable accommodation mandatory
• Basic Policy — Cabinet Office: improving the environment as a duty to make efforts, website example
• Web accessibility guidebook — Digital Agency: position of JIS X 8341-3
• JIS X 8341-3 revision committee launched — WAIC: policy to align with ISO/IEC 40500:2025

All sources were checked on 27 October 2026. Legal practice and standards change, so check the official pages for the latest information before deciding. This article is not legal advice.