	AI Legislative Guide
	Netherlands
	(Europe) Firm Houthoff Contributors Thomas de Weerd Updated 14 May 2026
Has specific legislation, final regulations or other formal regulatory guidance addressing the use of AI in your jurisdiction been implemented (vs reliance on existing legislation around IP, cyber, data privacy, etc.)?	No, however, on 20 April 2026, the draft Implementation Act for the AI Act (Uitvoeringswet AI-Verordening (''Draft UAIV'')) was put into public consultation. The Draft UAIV sets out national rules to support the AI Act’s implementation/execution, application, supervision and enforcement in the Netherlands
Please provide a short summary of the legislation/regulations/guidance and explain how legislators aim to strike the balance between innovation and regulation.	The Draft UAIV primarily organizes who supervises which parts of the AI Act, and how those authorities are expected to work together (including to support innovation). Within the *Draft UAIV* text, this is reflected mainly through (i) allocation of supervisory responsibilities by AI Act topic, (ii) distribution of supervisory tasks across multiple designated authorities, (iii) coordination and harmonization mechanisms, and (iv) innovation-support measures. Below, each of these elements is briefly explained. Allocation of supervision by AI Act chapters/areas. The Draft UAIV designates different supervisory authorities for specific parts of the AI Act. Distributed supervision across multiple designated authorities. The Draft UAIV does not appoint one single supervisory authority for all AI Act obligations. Instead, it designates multiple supervisory authorities depending on the relevant AI Act topic. Coordination and harmonization mechanisms. The Draft UAIV requires the national supervisory authorities to record working arrangements in a cooperation protocol, including arrangements aimed at a harmonized approach. Innovation support. The Draft UAIV requires the supervisory authorities to jointly establish an AI regulatory sandbox or test environment and provides a framework for real-world testing.
Which agency regulates the use of AI in your jurisdiction?	As stated above, under the Draft UAIV, the supervision is distributed across multiple designated supervisory authorities (including, among others, the Dutch DPA (Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens), the Dutch Authority for the Financial Markets (Autoriteit Financiële Markten), and the Dutch Central Bank (De Nederlandsche Bank)). Furthermore, the Dutch DPA and the Dutch Authority for Digital Infrastructure (Rijksinspectie Digitale Infrastructuur ("RDI")) are described as having a central and coordinating role. If there is no clear sector supervisor for a given area, the Dutch DPA would take that role. In addition, the RDI is described as the central contact point. Furthermore, under the Draft UAIV the Dutch DPA would be responsible for supervision of: Prohibited AI practices Transparency obligations; and A large part of the high-risk AI applications, including in employment, education and government.

AI Legislative Guide

Back XLS

Has specific legislation, final regulations or other formal regulatory guidance addressing the use of AI in your jurisdiction been implemented (vs reliance on existing legislation around IP, cyber, data privacy, etc.)?

No, however, on 20 April 2026, the draft Implementation Act for the AI Act (Uitvoeringswet AI-Verordening (''Draft UAIV'')) was put into public consultation. The Draft UAIV sets out national rules to support the AI Act’s implementation/execution, application, supervision and enforcement in the Netherlands

Please provide a short summary of the legislation/regulations/guidance and explain how legislators aim to strike the balance between innovation and regulation.

The Draft UAIV primarily organizes who supervises which parts of the AI Act, and how those authorities are expected to work together (including to support innovation). Within the Draft UAIV text, this is reflected mainly through (i) allocation of supervisory responsibilities by AI Act topic, (ii) distribution of supervisory tasks across multiple designated authorities, (iii) coordination and harmonization mechanisms, and (iv) innovation-support measures. Below, each of these elements is briefly explained.

Allocation of supervision by AI Act chapters/areas. The Draft UAIV designates different supervisory authorities for specific parts of the AI Act.
Distributed supervision across multiple designated authorities. The Draft UAIV does not appoint one single supervisory authority for all AI Act obligations. Instead, it designates multiple supervisory authorities depending on the relevant AI Act topic.
Coordination and harmonization mechanisms. The Draft UAIV requires the national supervisory authorities to record working arrangements in a cooperation protocol, including arrangements aimed at a harmonized approach.
Innovation support. The Draft UAIV requires the supervisory authorities to jointly establish an AI regulatory sandbox or test environment and provides a framework for real-world testing.

Which agency regulates the use of AI in your jurisdiction?

As stated above, under the Draft UAIV, the supervision is distributed across multiple designated supervisory authorities (including, among others, the Dutch DPA (Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens), the Dutch Authority for the Financial Markets (Autoriteit Financiële Markten), and the Dutch Central Bank (De Nederlandsche Bank)).

Furthermore, the Dutch DPA and the Dutch Authority for Digital Infrastructure (Rijksinspectie Digitale Infrastructuur ("RDI")) are described as having a central and coordinating role. If there is no clear sector supervisor for a given area, the Dutch DPA would take that role. In addition, the RDI is described as the central contact point.

Furthermore, under the Draft UAIV the Dutch DPA would be responsible for supervision of:

Prohibited AI practices
Transparency obligations; and
A large part of the high-risk AI applications, including in employment, education and government.