What is the official EU AI Act notified body designation list and how do I find it?

Understanding the EU AI Act Notified Body Designation List

The EU AI Act notified body designation list refers to the official compilation maintained by the European Commission that identifies which legal entities have been designated as notified bodies under the Artificial Intelligence Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689). These notified bodies are responsible for assessing high-risk AI systems before they can be placed on the EU market or put into service, particularly for systems falling under the scope of conformity assessment procedures outlined in Articles 19 through 25 of the Act. As of August 2026, the designation process has been shaped significantly by the EU AI Omnibus legislative package, which entered into force in mid-2025 and introduced amendments to streamline certain conformity assessment pathways while maintaining strict oversight for biometric identification systems and other high-risk categories. The list itself is published in the NANDO (New Approach Notification and Information Network) database, which is publicly accessible via the European Commission’s website and updated in near real-time as new bodies receive their designations.

Also worth reading: How Can a Private AI Deal-Flow Network for Founders Unlock Better Rounds? · Why Are Founders Rushing to Join AI Deal Networks in 2025? · Who bears the liability when AI sources your next private deal?

How the Designation Process Works

Notified bodies seeking designation under the AI Act must undergo a rigorous accreditation process overseen by national competent authorities and validated by the European Commission. Applicants typically need to demonstrate technical expertise in AI systems, including knowledge of machine learning algorithms, data governance frameworks, and risk management protocols aligned with ISO/IEC standards such as ISO/IEC 23053 and ISO/IEC 38507. Once accredited, these bodies are assigned specific scopes of accreditation that define the types of AI systems they are authorized to assess—ranging from limited-risk applications like chatbots to high-risk use cases such as AI-powered medical diagnostics or critical infrastructure monitoring. The designation list includes key details such as the body’s legal name, country of establishment, scope of designation, and any restrictions or conditions attached to its authorization. Importantly, only systems assessed by designated notified bodies can affix the CE marking and legally circulate within the EU single market.

Practical Steps to Locate and Use the List

To access the current AI Act notified body designation list, users should navigate directly to the NANDO database hosted on the European Commission’s website at ec.europa.eu/growth/tools-databases/nando/. Within the platform, filters allow users to search specifically for AI Act designations by selecting “Artificial Intelligence Act” from the legislation dropdown menu. From there, stakeholders can identify bodies operating in their jurisdiction or sector of interest, review their designated scopes, and verify accreditation validity dates. For founders and operators engaged in private deal-flow networks, particularly those developing AI-driven healthcare tools or enterprise software solutions, it is essential to cross-reference potential partners against this list early in product development cycles. Doing so avoids costly delays during market entry and ensures alignment with evolving regulatory expectations introduced through the Digital Omnibus reforms affecting compliance timelines and documentation requirements.

Comparison of Major Notified Bodies

As of August 2026, several prominent notified bodies have emerged as leaders in AI Act conformity assessments, each offering distinct advantages depending on organizational needs and geographic focus. TÜV Rheinland, based in Germany, holds one of the broadest scopes covering AI systems across multiple sectors including automotive, industrial automation, and consumer electronics. Its strength lies in deep integration with existing EU regulatory ecosystems and multilingual support teams serving clients throughout Western Europe. In contrast, Korea Testing Laboratory (KTL), recently granted CE certification testing laboratory status under the EU Cyber Resilience Act, offers competitive pricing models tailored for startups entering both AI and cybersecurity domains simultaneously. Meanwhile, France-based Bureau Veritas leverages extensive experience in medical device certifications under MDR and IVDR frameworks, making it a preferred choice for health-tech innovators navigating overlapping compliance regimes. Selecting among these options requires balancing factors such as turnaround time, cost structure, language capabilities, and familiarity with niche application areas.

One frequent error companies make is assuming that any ISO 17025-accredited laboratory qualifies as an AI Act notified body. While such laboratories may possess relevant technical competencies, they must separately obtain formal designation under the AI Act framework—a distinction often overlooked during vendor selection processes. Another misstep involves failing to update internal compliance documentation after the implementation of the EU AI Omnibus amendments, which modified certain procedural obligations related to post-market surveillance reporting and human oversight mandates. Additionally, some organizations mistakenly believe that third-country providers can self-certify AI systems destined for the EU market without engaging a local notified body—a misconception that has led to enforcement actions by national regulators in France and Italy during 2025 and 2026. Founders operating within private deal-flow networks should also be wary of relying solely on verbal assurances from service providers; written confirmation of active designation status remains a non-negotiable prerequisite for legal compliance.

Timing Considerations and Cost Implications

Given the dynamic nature of AI regulation in the EU, timing plays a critical role in securing assessments from notified bodies. High-demand periods—such as the six months preceding major regulatory deadlines—often result in extended wait times exceeding standard processing windows. For instance, following the July 2025 enforcement date for foundational model provisions, demand for notified body services surged by approximately 40%, leading to backlogs reported by major players like DEKRA and SGS. Costs associated with conformity assessments vary widely depending on system complexity, with basic AI applications ranging between €15,000 and €30,000, while sophisticated multimodal systems incorporating facial recognition or predictive analytics can exceed €100,000 per evaluation cycle. Organizations planning multi-jurisdictional rollouts should budget accordingly and consider phased engagement strategies to optimize resource allocation across different regulatory milestones.

Future Outlook Beyond 2026

Looking ahead, the landscape of AI Act notified bodies is expected to evolve further as the European Commission continues refining implementation guidelines and expanding the pool of eligible assessors. Proposed revisions under discussion include lowering barriers for academic institutions and public research organizations to participate in conformity evaluations, potentially increasing capacity and reducing costs for emerging technologies. Simultaneously, enhanced digital verification mechanisms—such as blockchain-based certificates and automated audit trails—are being piloted to improve transparency and reduce administrative overhead. For participants in private deal-flow networks focused on AI innovation, staying informed about shifts in designated body portfolios and adapting procurement strategies accordingly will remain vital for maintaining competitive advantage in an increasingly regulated global marketplace.