Regulatory scoping for autonomous decision systems
Systems that make or materially inform consequential decisions about people — credit, employment, access to services — sit under the EU AI Act high-risk regime, the Colorado AI Act, and GDPR’s automated-decision rules. This vertical overlaps the AI Act high-risk corpus by design; the scoping job is largely to identify which decisions are consequential and which regime governs them.
Regulations Magist tracks for this vertical
Coverage of these newer regimes is published as draft and reviewed on a rolling basis.
Questions that determine your footprint
Does the system make consequential decisions about people?
Decisions affecting access to employment, credit, education, or essential services can fall within the EU AI Act high-risk categories and the Colorado AI Act’s consequential-decision scope.
Is there a solely-automated decision with legal effect?
GDPR Article 22 can restrict decisions based solely on automated processing that produce legal or similarly significant effects, typically requiring a lawful basis, safeguards, and a route to human review.
Can a human meaningfully intervene?
Several of these regimes turn on human oversight and an explanation of the decision, which is usually a process and product design question rather than a documentation exercise.
See exactly which of 155+ regulations apply to your autonomous decision systems product.
Magist is an instrument, not a consultancy. It does not sell compliance services or take payment from vendors for placement; the analysis is the same for everyone.
Magist provides legal information, not legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney.