Article 88: National Competent Authorities
Article 88 gives the Commission exclusive powers to supervise and enforce Chapter V (general-purpose AI model obligations), taking into account the procedural guarantees under Article 94. The Commission entrusts implementation to the AI Office. Market surveillance authorities may request the Commission to exercise powers under this Section where necessary and proportionate to assist their tasks under the Regulation.
Who does this apply to?
- -Member States establishing national AI governance structures and designating competent authorities
- -National competent authorities designated under the AI Act exercising supervisory and enforcement powers
- -The Commission receiving notifications of designated authorities and monitoring Member State compliance with governance requirements
Scenarios
Germany designates the Federal Network Agency (Bundesnetzagentur) as the national market surveillance authority for the AI Act, while retaining its existing notified body infrastructure under sector-specific legislation. Germany must ensure the Bundesnetzagentur has sufficient AI-specialist staff to supervise high-risk AI systems across healthcare, employment, and critical infrastructure sectors.
A small Member State considers designating a single authority to serve as both notifying authority and market surveillance authority for the AI Act. Political pressure from the national government leads to attempts to influence the authority's enforcement priorities against certain domestic AI providers.
What Article 88 does (in plain terms)
Article 88 establishes the national governance architecture for the AI Act. Its core elements:
1. Mandatory designation: Each Member State must establish or designate at least one notifying authority (responsible for assessing and designating conformity assessment bodies) and at least one market surveillance authority (responsible for overseeing compliance and enforcement) for the purposes of the AI Act. 2. Independence guarantee: National competent authorities must exercise their powers independently, impartially, and without bias, safeguarding the objectivity of their activities and tasks. This mirrors independence requirements found in other EU regulatory frameworks like the GDPR. 3. Commission notification: Member States must inform the Commission of the identity of their designated authorities, enabling the Commission to maintain an overview of national governance structures. 4. Resource adequacy: National competent authorities must be provided with adequate financial and human resources, and in particular with sufficient technical expertise in AI technologies, data, and fundamental rights. The requirement for fundamental rights expertise reflects the AI Act's dual focus on safety and rights.
Article 88 does not prescribe the institutional form — Member States may create new bodies, designate existing regulators, or combine roles — provided the independence, impartiality, and resource requirements are met.
How Article 88 connects to the rest of the Act
- Article 28 — Notifying authorities: Article 28 sets out the detailed requirements for notifying authorities whose designation is mandated by Article 88.
- Article 74 — Market surveillance and control: the market surveillance authorities designated under Article 88 exercise their enforcement powers under Article 74.
- Article 70 — AI Board: the European AI Board, on which national competent authorities are represented, coordinates governance across Member States.
- Article 113 — Application dates: Article 88 applies from 2 August 2026, but Member States should begin designation processes well in advance.
Practical guidance: what Member States and regulated entities should do
For Member States:
1. Designate early — Begin the legislative or administrative process for designating national competent authorities well before August 2026. Delays in designation create an enforcement vacuum. 2. Ensure independence — Build structural safeguards into the authority's governance: fixed-term appointments, independent budgets, protection against dismissal, and transparency obligations. 3. Invest in expertise — Recruit or train staff with backgrounds in AI/ML, data science, and fundamental rights law. Generic regulatory experience is insufficient for the technical complexity of AI Act supervision. 4. Coordinate across regulators — Where multiple existing regulators have sectoral AI oversight roles (health, finance, transport), establish clear jurisdictional boundaries and cooperation mechanisms.
For providers and deployers:
1. Monitor designations — Track which authorities are designated in each Member State where you operate, as this determines your supervisory contact points. 2. Prepare for resource-constrained authorities — In practice, newly designated authorities may initially lack capacity. Proactively provide clear, well-structured documentation to facilitate supervision.
Official wording: Article 88
Article 88
Enforcement of the obligations of providers of general-purpose AI models
1. The Commission shall have exclusive powers to supervise and enforce Chapter V, taking into account the procedural guarantees under Article 94. The Commission shall entrust the implementation of these tasks to the AI Office, without prejudice to the powers of organisation of the Commission and the division of competences between Member States and the Union based on the Treaties.
2. Without prejudice to Article 75(3), market surveillance authorities may request the Commission to exercise the powers laid down in this Section, where that is necessary and proportionate to assist with the fulfilment of their tasks under this Regulation.
Compliance checklist
- Identify which national competent authority (market surveillance and notifying authority) has been designated in each Member State where your AI systems are placed on the market or put into service.
- Monitor Commission publications for the list of notified national competent authorities as Member States submit their designations.
- Establish contact protocols with designated national competent authorities in your key markets.
- Ensure internal compliance documentation is structured for submission to authorities that may have varying levels of AI technical expertise.
- Track legislative developments in each relevant Member State regarding the transposition of Article 88 governance requirements.
- Map your AI systems to the jurisdictional scope of each designated authority to understand which authority supervises which system.
Map your authority landscape across Member States — start the free assessment.
Start Free AssessmentRelated Articles
Frequently asked questions
Can a Member State designate an existing regulator instead of creating a new authority?
Yes. Article 88 allows Member States to either establish new authorities or designate existing ones. Many Member States are expected to assign AI Act competences to existing data protection authorities, product safety regulators, or telecommunications regulators. The key requirement is that the designated authority must have adequate resources and technical AI expertise, and must exercise its powers independently.
What happens if a Member State fails to designate authorities by August 2026?
The AI Act does not specify a sanction for late designation, but failure to establish national competent authorities would prevent enforcement of the AI Act within that Member State's territory. The Commission could initiate infringement proceedings against the Member State for failing to fulfil its obligations under the Regulation.
Does each Member State need separate notifying and market surveillance authorities?
Article 88 requires at least one notifying authority and at least one market surveillance authority, but it does not prohibit a single body from performing both functions. Several smaller Member States may designate one authority for both roles, provided it meets the independence and resource requirements for each function.