Comparison

Article 5 versus Annex III: prohibited or high-risk

Article 5 is a prohibition: the listed practices are not allowed, and no file makes them permissible after the fact. Annex III is a classification: the listed uses are allowed, but only under the requirements that apply to high-risk AI systems.

The official source remains authoritative. This is general interpretation and not legal advice about your situation.

The fields side by side

Every row comes from the objects themselves. Where a field is empty, it says so; we do not fill in an assumption where the source is silent.

Article 5 versus Annex III: prohibited or high-risk
Field	Article 5, prohibition	Annex III, high-risk
Status	Applicable	Upcoming
Applies from	2 February 2025	2 December 2027
Who carries the duty	Deployer, Provider of an AI system	Provider of an AI system
Who is affected	Not recorded	Deployer
Who supervises	Not recorded	Not recorded
When this applies	Placing on the market, putting into service or using AI falls under one of the practices in Article 5(1), including harmful manipulation or exploitation of vulnerabilities, social scoring, predicting criminal offences based on profiling, untargeted scraping of facial images, emotion recognition in the workplace or education, biometric categorisation by sensitive characteristics and real-time remote biometric identification in publicly accessible spaces for law enforcement.	The intended purpose falls within a use case listed in Annex III. Classification follows Article 6(2).
Exceptions	The exceptions are narrow: among others, emotion recognition for medical or safety reasons, and the exhaustively defined law-enforcement situations with authorisation for real-time remote biometric identification in Article 5(2) to (7). The exception must be established and documented in advance.	A listed Annex III system may fall outside high-risk under the strict conditions in Article 6(3), except where it profiles. The assessment and registration must be documented.
First actions	Screen every use case against Article 5 first	Classify the use case and document the outcome
Evidence that belongs with it	Article 5 screening record	Article 6 and Annex III classification record
Control	Article 5 gate at intake and change	Reclassification on purpose or context change
Version and review status	v1.0.0, placed against the official source	v1.0.0, placed against the official source

Status

Article 5, prohibition: Applicable
Annex III, high-risk: Upcoming

Applies from

Article 5, prohibition: 2 February 2025
Annex III, high-risk: 2 December 2027

Who carries the duty

Article 5, prohibition: Deployer, Provider of an AI system
Annex III, high-risk: Provider of an AI system

Who is affected

Article 5, prohibition: Not recorded
Annex III, high-risk: Deployer

Who supervises

Article 5, prohibition: Not recorded
Annex III, high-risk: Not recorded

When this applies

Article 5, prohibition: Placing on the market, putting into service or using AI falls under one of the practices in Article 5(1), including harmful manipulation or exploitation of vulnerabilities, social scoring, predicting criminal offences based on profiling, untargeted scraping of facial images, emotion recognition in the workplace or education, biometric categorisation by sensitive characteristics and real-time remote biometric identification in publicly accessible spaces for law enforcement.
Annex III, high-risk: The intended purpose falls within a use case listed in Annex III. Classification follows Article 6(2).

Exceptions

Article 5, prohibition: The exceptions are narrow: among others, emotion recognition for medical or safety reasons, and the exhaustively defined law-enforcement situations with authorisation for real-time remote biometric identification in Article 5(2) to (7). The exception must be established and documented in advance.
Annex III, high-risk: A listed Annex III system may fall outside high-risk under the strict conditions in Article 6(3), except where it profiles. The assessment and registration must be documented.

First actions

Article 5, prohibition: Screen every use case against Article 5 first
Annex III, high-risk: Classify the use case and document the outcome

Evidence that belongs with it

Article 5, prohibition: Article 5 screening record
Annex III, high-risk: Article 6 and Annex III classification record

Control

Article 5, prohibition: Article 5 gate at intake and change
Annex III, high-risk: Reclassification on purpose or context change

Version and review status

Article 5, prohibition: v1.0.0, placed against the official source
Annex III, high-risk: v1.0.0, placed against the official source

Article 5: prohibited practices Annex III: high-risk AI

Official sources and locators

Per side, the provisions the statements above rest on.

Article 5, prohibition

EU Artificial Intelligence Act 2024/1689
Locator: Article 5, Article 99(3) and Article 113(a)
Open official source
Digital Omnibus on AI 2026/1744
Locator: Amendment to Article 5 and transition to 2 December 2026
Open official source
EU Artificial Intelligence Act 2024/1689
Locator: Article 5(1)(a)-(h)
Open official source
EU Artificial Intelligence Act 2024/1689
Locator: Article 5 read with Article 6 classification order
Open official source

Annex III, high-risk

Digital Omnibus on AI 2026/1744
Locator: Amended Article 113, Article 6(2) and Annex III application date
Open official source
EU Artificial Intelligence Act 2024/1689
Locator: Article 6 and Annex III
Open official source
EU Artificial Intelligence Act 2024/1689
Locator: Article 6(2)-(4), Article 49 and Annex III
Open official source

Referring to these two objects

Each side has its own stable identifier, version and hash. Take them separately; you cite a comparison by citing the two objects.

Referring to this object

Citation block

Copy this reference into your advice, article or file. The identifier, the version and the hash keep the statement findable later, even once the dataset has moved on.

Reference

Praxikon, "Article 5: prohibited practices",
praxikon:eu:ai-act:obligation:article-5-prohibited-practices@1.0.0,
dataset praxikon:sys:registry:dataset:ai-act-implementation-graph 2.1.0 (schema 1.4.0),
effective_at 2025-02-02T00:00:00.000Z, known_at 2026-08-08T00:00:00.000Z,
sha256 674c4b85d1cf177b2ab9256989e18b2d685fdb69388f02f22bcc8cebd4f5faf8,
https://www.praxikon.com/en/verplichtingen/article-5-prohibited-practices
(https://www.praxikon.com/api/v1/obligations?id=praxikon%3Aeu%3Aai-act%3Aobligation%3Aarticle-5-prohibited-practices&effective_at=2025-02-02&known_at=2026-08-08&lang=en, accessed 2026-08-24)

Short form

praxikon:eu:ai-act:obligation:article-5-prohibited-practices@1.0.0 (sha256 674c4b85)

BibTeX

@misc{praxikon-eu-ai-act-obligation-article-5-prohibited-practices-1-0-0,
  author       = {{Praxikon}},
  title        = {Article 5: prohibited practices},
  year         = {2026},
  version      = {1.0.0},
  number       = {praxikon:eu:ai-act:obligation:article-5-prohibited-practices},
  howpublished = {AI Act Change \& Evidence Graph, dataset 2.1.0, schema 1.4.0},
  note         = {effective_at 2025-02-02T00:00:00.000Z; known_at 2026-08-08T00:00:00.000Z; sha256 674c4b85d1cf177b2ab9256989e18b2d685fdb69388f02f22bcc8cebd4f5faf8},
  url          = {https://www.praxikon.com/en/verplichtingen/article-5-prohibited-practices},
  urldate      = {2026-08-24},
  language     = {en}
}

CSL JSON

[
  {
    "id": "praxikon:eu:ai-act:obligation:article-5-prohibited-practices@1.0.0",
    "type": "dataset",
    "title": "Article 5: prohibited practices",
    "container-title": "AI Act Change & Evidence Graph",
    "publisher": "Praxikon",
    "version": "1.0.0",
    "number": "praxikon:eu:ai-act:obligation:article-5-prohibited-practices",
    "URL": "https://www.praxikon.com/en/verplichtingen/article-5-prohibited-practices",
    "language": "en",
    "issued": {
      "date-parts": [
        [
          2026,
          8,
          8
        ]
      ]
    },
    "accessed": {
      "date-parts": [
        [
          2026,
          8,
          24
        ]
      ]
    },
    "note": "dataset praxikon:sys:registry:dataset:ai-act-implementation-graph 2.1.0; schema 1.4.0; effective_at 2025-02-02T00:00:00.000Z; known_at 2026-08-08T00:00:00.000Z; sha256 674c4b85d1cf177b2ab9256989e18b2d685fdb69388f02f22bcc8cebd4f5faf8; retrieved_from https://www.praxikon.com/api/v1/obligations?id=praxikon%3Aeu%3Aai-act%3Aobligation%3Aarticle-5-prohibited-practices&effective_at=2025-02-02&known_at=2026-08-08&lang=en; licence https://www.praxikon.com/nl/legal/terms"
  }
]

How to verify a reference later is set out in the methodology. Terms

Referring to this object

Citation block

Copy this reference into your advice, article or file. The identifier, the version and the hash keep the statement findable later, even once the dataset has moved on.

Reference

Praxikon, "Annex III: high-risk AI",
praxikon:eu:ai-act:obligation:annex-iii-high-risk@1.0.0,
dataset praxikon:sys:registry:dataset:ai-act-implementation-graph 2.1.0 (schema 1.4.0),
effective_at 2026-07-27T00:00:00.000Z, known_at 2026-08-08T00:00:00.000Z,
sha256 c0afd1789ed393ba3f9ce04205bd74b4831ff0fd58146108fdd8dd08d2f4f6c9,
https://www.praxikon.com/en/verplichtingen/annex-iii-high-risk
(https://www.praxikon.com/api/v1/obligations?id=praxikon%3Aeu%3Aai-act%3Aobligation%3Aannex-iii-high-risk&effective_at=2026-07-27&known_at=2026-08-08&lang=en, accessed 2026-08-24)

Short form

praxikon:eu:ai-act:obligation:annex-iii-high-risk@1.0.0 (sha256 c0afd178)

BibTeX

@misc{praxikon-eu-ai-act-obligation-annex-iii-high-risk-1-0-0,
  author       = {{Praxikon}},
  title        = {Annex III: high-risk AI},
  year         = {2026},
  version      = {1.0.0},
  number       = {praxikon:eu:ai-act:obligation:annex-iii-high-risk},
  howpublished = {AI Act Change \& Evidence Graph, dataset 2.1.0, schema 1.4.0},
  note         = {effective_at 2026-07-27T00:00:00.000Z; known_at 2026-08-08T00:00:00.000Z; sha256 c0afd1789ed393ba3f9ce04205bd74b4831ff0fd58146108fdd8dd08d2f4f6c9},
  url          = {https://www.praxikon.com/en/verplichtingen/annex-iii-high-risk},
  urldate      = {2026-08-24},
  language     = {en}
}

CSL JSON

[
  {
    "id": "praxikon:eu:ai-act:obligation:annex-iii-high-risk@1.0.0",
    "type": "dataset",
    "title": "Annex III: high-risk AI",
    "container-title": "AI Act Change & Evidence Graph",
    "publisher": "Praxikon",
    "version": "1.0.0",
    "number": "praxikon:eu:ai-act:obligation:annex-iii-high-risk",
    "URL": "https://www.praxikon.com/en/verplichtingen/annex-iii-high-risk",
    "language": "en",
    "issued": {
      "date-parts": [
        [
          2026,
          8,
          8
        ]
      ]
    },
    "accessed": {
      "date-parts": [
        [
          2026,
          8,
          24
        ]
      ]
    },
    "note": "dataset praxikon:sys:registry:dataset:ai-act-implementation-graph 2.1.0; schema 1.4.0; effective_at 2026-07-27T00:00:00.000Z; known_at 2026-08-08T00:00:00.000Z; sha256 c0afd1789ed393ba3f9ce04205bd74b4831ff0fd58146108fdd8dd08d2f4f6c9; retrieved_from https://www.praxikon.com/api/v1/obligations?id=praxikon%3Aeu%3Aai-act%3Aobligation%3Aannex-iii-high-risk&effective_at=2026-07-27&known_at=2026-08-08&lang=en; licence https://www.praxikon.com/nl/legal/terms"
  }
]

How to verify a reference later is set out in the methodology. Terms

Execution

Record the classification in an AI register

The distinction between these two is a classification decision, and a classification without a register, an owner and a date cannot be defended afterwards. Praxikon does not carry that out; Embed AI guides the classification, the register and the reassessment in a fixed approach.

See the Embed AI approach

Unsure about your role itself rather than the duties that come with it? Work out whether you are a provider or a deployer

The fields side by side

Official sources and locators

Article 5, prohibition

Annex III, high-risk

Referring to these two objects

Citation block

Citation block

Record the classification in an AI register

Other comparisons