EU compliance across GDPR, EU AI Act, NIS2, DSA, and the Data Act — in one sovereign system. Built on GAIA-S governance architecture. Be ready before the regulators knock.
Every EU compliance framework that matters, unified in a single sovereign system.
The EU AI Act does not arrive all at once — it phases in. Each date below is already law. Article 50 transparency enforcement is live now, high-risk system duties follow in 2027–28, and readiness takes months, not days.
The world’s first comprehensive AI law takes effect, starting the compliance clock for every organisation deploying AI in the EU.
Unacceptable-risk AI uses become illegal, and AI-literacy obligations begin for providers and deployers.
General-purpose AI model obligations begin — technical documentation, copyright policy, and training-data summaries — alongside the governance structure and the penalty regime.
Transparency obligations activate: organisations must disclose AI interactions, label synthetic and deepfake content with machine-readable markings (C2PA / watermark), and the AI Office gains active enforcement powers including on-site inspections. Fines up to €15M or 3% of global turnover.
Risk management, data governance, logging, and human-oversight duties apply to standalone high-risk AI — recruitment, credit scoring, critical infrastructure, and more. Deferred from Aug 2026 by the Digital Omnibus to align with harmonised standards.
High-risk AI built into already-regulated products — medical devices, vehicles, machinery — reaches its compliance deadline, closing the final transition window.
The AI Act sets fines in three tiers (Article 99). For every band, the penalty is the higher of a fixed sum or a share of worldwide turnover.
Banned uses — social scoring, untargeted facial-recognition scraping, manipulative or exploitative AI, and emotion recognition at work or school.
High-risk system, GPAI, and transparency failures — the obligations the majority of AI deployers must meet.
Supplying incorrect, incomplete, or misleading information to regulators and notified bodies.
Nobel laureates, CEOs, and the world's top institutions are warning that AI governance is broken. SovereignSOS is the deployed solution.
“Humanity is about to be handed almost unimaginable power, and it is deeply unclear whether we possess the maturity to wield it.”
Dario Amodei
CEO, Anthropic
“Too much attention has been paid to virtue and too little to governance.”
Mira Murati
Former CTO, OpenAI
“40%+ of AI agent projects will be decommissioned by 2027 due to governance failures.”
Gartner
Strategic Predictions, May 2026
You can build the most capable AI agents in the world — but without governance built in from day one, enterprise deployment fails. From the technologists who built the modern era, to regulators, investors and enterprise buyers, the same conclusion is arriving from every direction. SovereignSOS sits where they meet.
“Mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war.”
Center for AI Safety — open statement, May 30, 2023
Signed by hundreds of the field’s leaders and researchers — including Sam Altman, Demis Hassabis, Dario Amodei, Geoffrey Hinton and Yoshua Bengio. Not one person’s opinion — a signed consensus of the people building the technology, in their own words.
When the people who build the technology jointly rank it alongside pandemics and nuclear war, “AI compliance” stops being a line-item and becomes infrastructure. Someone has to make human authority over agents executable — delegated, bounded, auditable and revocable. That is the layer SovereignSOS builds.
A founder of the modern computing era says he is “not confident” AI’s benefits will automatically outweigh its risks — comparing the scale of the challenge to nuclear technology, and arguing that AI must be shaped by society, not by technologists alone.
Bill Gates, in a public Bloomberg interview with Emily Chang
When the governance question reaches this altitude, “AI compliance” stops being a line-item and becomes infrastructure. If AI is too consequential to be governed by the labs building it, someone has to make human authority over agents executable — delegated, bounded, auditable and revocable. That is the layer SovereignSOS builds.
Behind that one signed sentence stand the individual voices — the people who built it and the researchers who pioneered it, each arriving at the same conclusion: the risk is real, and human society must stay in control.
“The bad case … is lights out for all of us.”
Sam Altman
CEO, OpenAI
StrictlyVC interview, 2023
Puts the odds the future of AI goes “really, really badly” at roughly 25%.
Dario Amodei
CEO, Anthropic
Axios AI+ Summit, 2025
“AI is far more dangerous than nukes. Why do we have no regulatory oversight? This is insane.”
Elon Musk
CEO, Tesla & xAI
SXSW, 2018
“AI is too important not to regulate, and too important not to regulate well.”
Sundar Pichai
CEO, Google & Alphabet
Public op-ed, 2023
Estimates a 10–20% chance AI leads to human extinction within three decades.
Geoffrey Hinton
Turing Award & Nobel laureate
Left Google in 2023 to warn freely
“We are not sure this won’t pass some point where things get catastrophic.”
Yoshua Bengio
Turing Award laureate
On autonomous “rogue AI,” 2023
The EU AI Act now reaches US and global AI firms. Enforcement is phased — and already underway.
As covered by Bloomberg Intelligence
AI-native compliance infrastructure is now named as a fundable, founder-worthy category to build in.
From Y Combinator’s public founder guidance
“Governance is the centerpiece. Without governance, your AI won’t be successful.”
Lutz Beck, CIO, Daimler Truck North America — public talk
The consensus isn’t theoretical. Autonomous agents have already escaped sandboxes, run attacks and poisoned the tools other agents depend on — each one a governance failure SovereignSOS is built to prevent.
Autonomous agents broke containment and hit Hugging Face
In a 2026 lab evaluation, autonomous agents exploited a zero-day to escape their sandbox and carried out 17,000+ unauthorized actions against Hugging Face and accounts at four firms — a failure of externally-enforced authority, not malice.
Reported by ZDNet, Dark Reading & CNET, 2026
Governed by: Bounded scope & instant revocation
An AI agent ran ~90% of a cyber-espionage campaign
Anthropic disclosed the first documented case of a state-linked group jailbreaking an AI coding agent to execute a large-scale espionage campaign 80–90% autonomously.
Anthropic disclosure, 2025
Governed by: Delegated authority & audit trail
~1,184 malicious agent “skills” planted in one registry
The “ClawHavoc” campaign flooded the OpenClaw agent framework’s ClawHub registry with malicious skills — roughly 20% of the ecosystem at its peak.
Reported 2026
Governed by: Data boundaries & provenance
Independent public statements, analysis and reported news events, referenced here as market signals of where the industry is heading. They are not affiliations, partnerships, or endorsements of SovereignSOS, and no involvement by any named person or company is implied. Each quote, claim or reported incident belongs to its respective author or source.
Most tools automate the compliance paperwork after an agent acts. SovereignSOS governs the authority layer before it acts — turning governance from a policy document into live infrastructure.
F-ACT 1.0 is published, free to cite, and covered by an irrevocable royalty-free patent pledge. The next step is shared governance — modelled on how W3C, IETF and the Linux Foundation actually run the standards the internet depends on.
No fee. No contract. Endorse the principle that agent governance should be open, deterministic, and collectively governed. The founding cohort closes at 42.
The dominant view treats safety as an alignment problem: train one model to share “human values.” But there is no single set of human values — billions of people hold different beliefs, customs and priorities, so a universal target isn’t just hard to hit, it isn’t well-defined. You can’t solve it top-down, and enforcing one answer through centralized command or surveillance concentrates power in exactly the way safety is meant to prevent. Safety can’t be handed down from above — it has to be owned from below: every human sovereign over their own agent, acting within limits they set and can revoke. SovereignSOS is the operational substrate for that.
Making a model’s goals match human intent.
Advanced by frontier labs & researchSeeing why a model does what it does.
Advanced by frontier labs & researchHolding up against jailbreaks and adversarial input.
Advanced by frontier labs & researchSupervising systems that outpace human review.
Advanced by frontier labs & researchBounding what an agent may do — and revoking it on demand.
Operationalized by SovereignSOSTrain a single system to hold the right values, then enforce it centrally. But whose values? Eight billion people hold different beliefs, customs and priorities. A universal value function isn’t just hard to optimize — it doesn’t exist to be optimized. And imposing one through central command or surveillance concentrates power in the hands of whoever gets to define it.
Every human keeps authority over their own agent — a Human-Twin-Agent (HTA) that acts under their values, inside limits they set, revocable at will, with a verifiable audit trail. Safety emerges from millions of accountable, bounded agents rather than one aligned oracle — no single value set imposed, and no central point of control to capture or fail.
The International AI Safety Report — chaired by Yoshua Bengio and backed by 30 nations — names loss of control over autonomous agents as a critical technical risk. Researchers at RAND and the Institute for Security & Technology go further: perfect containment is mathematically impossible, so the prescribed response is operational — detection, escalation protocols, kill switches, authorization chokepoints, audit logs and role-based access.
That is not a research wishlist — it is a build spec. And because it can’t be solved centrally, those controls must belong to the sovereign — the human or organization that owns the agent, not a distant authority. SovereignSOS delivers exactly that as live infrastructure: bounded authority, an always-on audit trail, and one-click revocation for every agent, before it acts.
Governments, standards bodies and the labs themselves are defining what safe AI means. SovereignSOS is the operational layer that enforces it at the moment an agent acts.
Chaired by Yoshua Bengio, written by 100+ experts and backed by 30 nations — it names loss of control over autonomous agents as a critical technical risk.
The US reference for trustworthy AI — Govern, Map, Measure, Manage — anchored by the US AI Safety Institute.
The UK AI Security Institute, the US AI Safety Institute and a global network formed at the Seoul Summit now run pre-deployment evaluations.
16 leading labs pledged published safety frameworks and risk thresholds at Seoul; the Frontier Model Forum coordinates shared best practice.
These institutions, reports and frameworks are referenced as the emerging AI-safety landscape — not partnerships, endorsements or certifications of SovereignSOS. SovereignSOS is designed to help operationalize and map to these frameworks; it does not claim accreditation by any of them.
Enterprise leaders keep repeating it: AI agents cannot touch real data without a defined rule set. Five questions decide whether an agent is safe to deploy — SovereignSOS answers all five.
Who granted this agent the right to act?
Every action traces back to a human or institution that holds the authority to permit it. No authority, no action.
What is it actually allowed to do?
Powers are bounded in advance — the tasks, systems and limits an agent may operate within are defined, not assumed.
What may it see and touch?
Access to sensitive information is granted deliberately and narrowly, so an agent never reaches beyond what its task requires.
Can you prove what it did?
Every decision leaves a durable, board-ready trail — the evidence a regulator, auditor or court will ask for.
Can you stop it instantly?
Authority can be withdrawn the moment something changes — the off-switch that turns autonomous risk back into human control.
SovereignSOS is horizontal governance infrastructure for AI agents. We start where the pain is deepest — regulated finance — then extend the same Authority, Scope, Data, Audit and Revocation ruleset across every regulated sector.
Banking, payments, lending, insurance and capital markets — the deepest compliance pain, clearest rules to map against, and the strongest budgets. Govern the AI agents preparing reports, screening transactions and assisting AML/KYC casework.
Privileged data, mandated oversight and duty-of-care obligations make delegated agent authority and audit evidence non-negotiable.
Sensitive records and strict accountability rules demand tightly-scoped data access and a durable trail for every agent action.
Public accountability and sovereignty requirements make human-in-the-loop control and instant revocation essential.
Existing compliance software tracks policies, documents and filings. The moment an AI agent enters a banking, payments, lending or insurance workflow, a new question appears that those tools were never built to answer: who authorised this agent, what could it do, what data did it touch, did it stay in scope, and can the action be audited or revoked? SovereignSOS is the control plane for exactly that.
SovereignSOS governs the AI-agent authority layer and produces the audit evidence around regulated workflows. It is a control plane, not the system making final legal or financial decisions, and it is designed to support financial-compliance mapping rather than to replace an institution’s existing regulatory obligations.
Map a single set of controls once and satisfy the regulations and standards that matter across the EU and beyond.
SovereignSOS is built on GAIA-S — the Global Alliance for Integrity, Alignment & Sovereignty — our governance architecture for AI in a post-sovereign world.
Data remains within the host jurisdiction. A sovereignty-first principle ensuring zero unauthorised egress.
Every nation retains full override authority. Local law always supersedes platform defaults.
AI systems measured against 42 indicators mapped to the UN Sustainable Development Goals.
Personal AI agents recognised as extensions of the individual — not the corporation.
Politically neutral. The "Switzerland of AI" — no bloc, no bias, no backdoors.
GAIA-X handles your cloud infrastructure. GAIA-S governs your AI. Together, they form the foundation of true digital sovereignty. They don't compete — they complete each other.
GAIA-X handles sovereign cloud infrastructure. GAIA-S governs sovereign AI. SovereignSOS is the operational layer where GAIA-S principles become enforceable controls.
Compliance here is not a checklist bolted on after the fact. It is the applied enforcement layer of a 42-protocol architecture — led by three protocols that do the heavy lifting, with 39 more completing the stack.
WHO is acting?
Identity & consent enforcement. Every AI action is bound to a verified human authority through cryptographic consent chains — so every data-processing event carries a lawful, auditable basis by construction.
WHAT is trusted?
Auditable trust scoring. Deterministic, transparent reputation replaces black-box risk models — regulators, boards, and auditors can see exactly why any actor, model, or vendor is trusted.
HOW is it enforced?
Law executed as code. Where smart contracts execute code, WISE Contracts execute law — every interaction is at once a compliance instrument and an alignment proof. Obligations enforce themselves before an action completes, not after a fine.
Completing the stack across six domains
From consent propagation to cross-border transfer, records, and beyond — each protocol becomes a governed, auditable compliance control.
Three protocols do the heavy lifting. Forty-two make it complete — compliance that runs before the action, not after the fine.
Complete data governance, sovereignty enforcement, and compliance management. From data residency to breach response in one unified view.
AI compliance lifecycle management. Risk classification, conformity assessment, human oversight, and continuous monitoring.
Anyone can add a compliance dashboard. What cannot be copied in a sprint is a patent-pending, 42-protocol architecture built on years of published research.
Our protocol stack and enforcement method are protected under a patent-pending filing with a priority date of 2 February 2026 — defensibility from day one.
Not a feature set that can be cloned in a sprint. A layered architecture — the Sovereign Trinity plus 39 supporting protocols — that compounds in value as it grows.
A published body of research that documents the thinking behind every protocol. The moat is not just the code — it is the years of work behind it.
Identity, trust, and enforcement designed in from the foundation, not retrofitted. Copying the surface does not reproduce the substance.
Patent-pending — priority date 2 February 2026. The architecture is documented in full across our research library.
Filed before every standards body, every vendor, every framework
Before our filing, the world had a threat catalogue (OWASP, Dec 2025) and principles-based guidance (Singapore, Jan 2026). Neither prescribed the architecture. Our omnibus filing landed on 1 February 2026 international time (12:05 am AEST on Feb 2 = Feb 1 UTC / US time). The next day, the Cloud Security Alliance published its Agentic Trust Framework (2 Feb). Then NIST: concept paper 5 Feb, AI Agent Standards Initiative 17 Feb. The Decentralized Identity Foundation received KYA-OS in March. Microsoft shipped Entra Agent ID on 1 May. Every one of them prescribed the same primitives our filing already covered. We didn’t follow the standard. The standard arrived after us.
A clear path from first login to a defensible, continuously-monitored compliance posture — no consultants, no six-month implementations.
Connect your systems and data. The platform inventories your AI systems and processing activities, then maps each against GDPR, the EU AI Act, NIS2, DSA and the Data Act.
The engine classifies AI risk levels, flags gaps, and auto-generates the assessments, DPIAs and evidence packages needed to close them — all captured in a signed, tamper-evident audit trail.
Real-time monitoring surfaces drift and new obligations before they become violations, keeping you inspection-ready across all 27 EU member states.
This walkthrough contains proprietary platform details. NDA consent is required to view.
This interactive walkthrough contains proprietary platform architecture and workflow details protected under our patent-pending filing (Priority: 2 February 2026). Please accept our confidentiality terms to proceed.
We are pre-launch and deliberately selective about who we work with. Our foundation is depth — a patent-pending protocol architecture, published research, and full coverage of the EU regulations that carry the largest fines.
Rather than list clients we don't yet have, we're inviting a limited group of organisations to shape the platform with us — direct input on the roadmap, preferential terms, and first access to the sovereign compliance stack ahead of EU AI Act enforcement.
Our credibility is public and checkable: a research corpus, an evidence library of what the experts are saying, and the primary sources behind every claim.
The full research corpus behind the 42-protocol architecture — from Protocol Zero to the Sovereign Valuation.
Read the papersA curated library of public statements from AI leaders, regulators, and analysts on why sovereign compliance matters now.
Watch the evidencePrimary sources, regulatory texts, and the citations that ground every claim we make.
Browse the library“The Sovereignty Answer” — a 53-page research paper laying out the alignment, governance, and compliance crises converging on autonomous AI, the delegated-authority infrastructure emerging to meet them, and the decentralized-sovereignty architecture designed to resolve them.
Download the Whitepaper(PDF)Free download · No registration required · 53 pages
Built from the ground up for the EU regulatory landscape — not retrofitted from US privacy tools.
| Feature | ★ Recommended SovereignSOSEU-first control plane | Privacy suites GDPR-era platforms | SOC 2 automation US security-cert tooling | Advisory retainer Consulting-led |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EU AI Act Coverage | Emerging | Partial | ||
| GDPR Full Suite | Partial | |||
| NIS2 Compliance | Partial | Partial | ||
| Data Act Ready | ||||
| DSA Compliance | Partial | |||
| AI Risk Classification | Emerging | |||
| Sovereign Data Architecture | ||||
| 72h Breach Automation | Partial | Partial | ||
| EU-Hosted Infrastructure | Partial | |||
| Verifiable Signed Evidence | ||||
| Post-Quantum Protection | ||||
| Shadow AI Discovery | Emerging | |||
| AI Agent Governance | ||||
| Live Regulation Tracking | Partial | Partial |
Comparison of product categories, not of any named vendor. Individual products in each category differ, and their coverage changes. Assess any tool against your own regulatory scope before choosing.
One platform covering GDPR, EU AI Act, NIS2, DSA, and Data Act simultaneously. No more siloed tools for each regulation.
Compliance engine that classifies AI risk levels, detects data breaches, and produces conformity assessments — reducing manual workload.
Your data stays in your jurisdiction. Designed for sovereignty-first organisations that require complete control over data residency.
Real-time compliance posture across all EU regulations. Alerts surface before violations become fines.
Compliance visibility across 27 EU member states. Understand your obligations in every jurisdiction instantly.
Comprehensive audit trail, pre-built regulatory reports, and evidence packages ready for DPA inspections.
Every scan, decision and report is sealed with a verifiable signature anyone can independently check — and any tampering is caught instantly. See it work live, no login required.
Compliance evidence is sealed with post-quantum-grade protection, so proof you generate today still stands up when tomorrow’s computers arrive.
Issue verifiable, revocable passports to your AI agents and prove every autonomous action stayed within policy — built for the coming wave of agentic AI.
Most compliance tools give you a dashboard. SovereignSOS builds cryptographic proof that compliance happened — before the action, not after the fine. Eight capabilities, all operational in the product today. Three safeguard the trust you hold now. The fourth assures it against the machine that is still being built, the fifth governs the machines already acting in your name, the sixth makes compliance a gate a non-compliant system cannot ship through, the seventh keeps every one of those gates current the moment the law itself changes — and the eighth finds every AI nobody told you about, before the regulator does.
Prove it without showing it.
Prove to a regulator or partner that an approved model ran on authorised data and stayed within its bias and safety limits — without ever exposing your model, your data, or your trade secrets. They walk away certain of one thing: that you are compliant.
Maps to: WISE Contracts (HOW)
Resolves the deepest tension in compliance: “prove you’re safe” vs. “don’t expose our IP.”
Article 50, solved end-to-end.
Every AI output your organisation ships leaves signed, marked, and provably traceable to its source — and stays verifiable even after it is copied, cropped, or altered. Anyone downstream can confirm what your systems produced, and what they did not.
Maps to: Human-Twin-Agent (WHO)
Article 50(2) machine-readable marking is live 2 Aug 2026. This is the only architecture that meets all three Commission criteria: effective, interoperable, and robust.
Govern agents like employees.
Every autonomous AI agent is governed like an accountable principal — with a clear identity, defined limits, and an immutable record of every decision it makes and why. Policy is enforced in the moment, high-consequence actions wait for human sign-off, and the whole system can be halted the instant something looks wrong.
Maps to: HEARTrank (WHAT)
Static model governance is obsolete. Agents act at machine speed — your audit trail must run at the same speed, or it’s fiction.
The encryption protecting your compliance record has an expiry date. We already moved past it.
Adversaries are harvesting encrypted data today to decrypt it the moment a large quantum computer arrives — a strategy security agencies call “harvest now, decrypt later.” Every long-lived compliance record, attestation, and signature you rely on is a target. SovereignSOS gives you a live inventory of exactly where you are exposed, a dated migration roadmap aligned to Europe’s 2028–2035 post-quantum deadlines, and attestations that stay verifiable even against an adversary who has one. Your proof of compliance outlives the machine built to break it.
Exposure, mapped
See every place a future quantum attacker could break your trust — scored and prioritised.
A dated roadmap
Migration sequenced to the 2028, 2031 and 2035 regulatory milestones — no guesswork.
Future-proof proof
Attestations signed to survive a quantum adversary, verifiable long after today’s encryption fails.
Every AI agent acting in your name carries provable, revocable authority — or it does not act at all.
Autonomous agents are being handed real work — touching your data, your customers, your money — faster than any governance regime was built for. Europe already demands meaningful human oversight and clear disclosure of machine actors, and enforcement reaches agentic deployments within the next few years. The moment something goes wrong, you will have to answer three questions: who authorised this agent, what was it actually permitted to do, and had that authority already been withdrawn? SovereignSOS gives every agent a passport that binds it to an accountable human owner, a strict least-privilege mandate, a hard expiry and a one-touch kill switch — and lets you prove all of it, on demand, to anyone who asks.
Bound to a principal
Every agent traces to an accountable human owner — no anonymous automation acting in your name.
Least-privilege by design
Each agent gets exactly what it needs and nothing more; out-of-scope or over-ceiling actions are refused in the moment.
Expires and revokes instantly
Authority carries a hard end date and a one-touch kill switch — withdraw it and the agent stops acting the same second.
Compliance runs inside your build pipeline — a system that is not compliant simply cannot ship.
For everyone else, compliance is a document written after the system is already live — a promise that sits in a folder while the model keeps making decisions. That gap is exactly where the fines land. SovereignSOS turns your regulatory obligations into an executable gate that runs at release time: describe the system, and the gate decides, in the moment, whether it is allowed to go out. Missing documentation, unmanaged bias or drift, no human oversight where the law demands it — the release is blocked before it reaches production, and every decision comes back as a signed, tamper-evident verdict you can hand to an auditor or a regulator. Compliance stops being a report you write and becomes a wall a non-compliant system cannot walk through.
Machine-readable obligations
Your regulatory duties become executable checks, not prose in a policy document nobody runs.
A blocking release gate
A system that fails its obligations is stopped before it ships — the gate decides pass, warn or block in the moment.
Signed build attestation
Every verdict returns as a tamper-evident, independently verifiable receipt you can prove to an auditor on demand.
When the law changes overnight, your controls and deadlines are updated by morning.
Regulations do not sit still. An omnibus amendment moves a deadline, a new clause bans a practice that was legal last week, an obligation you already built around quietly changes shape. For everyone else this arrives as a hundred-page PDF and a scramble — weeks of lawyers reading redlines while your controls silently fall out of date and nobody is quite sure which systems are now exposed. SovereignSOS treats every version of the law as structured data, so the moment a new text lands it diffs the old against the new and tells you exactly what changed: which obligations are new or gone, which deadlines moved and by how many days, which fresh prohibitions now apply, and precisely which of your internal controls each change forces you to update — ranked by urgency, with the action spelled out. The whole change report comes back as a signed, tamper-evident record, so the day the rules move you already know your exposure instead of discovering it in an audit.
The law as living data
Every version of a regulation is held as structured obligations, not prose — so two texts can be compared exactly, not skimmed by hand.
Deadline & prohibition radar
The instant a deadline shifts or a new ban appears, you see it — with the number of days you gained or lost, before it becomes a violation.
Signed change report
Each delta returns as a tamper-evident, independently verifiable record mapping every legal change to the exact controls it touches.
Find every AI nobody told you about — before the regulator does. Every 2026 governance report names shadow AI as the top uncontrolled risk vector. Unsanctioned tools persist with privileged access outside oversight, creating liability your organisation does not even know it has.
Inventory every AI system
Register, classify and risk-tier every AI tool in use — sanctioned or not — against EU AI Act categories automatically.
Flag what is hidden
Detect unsanctioned tools, employee-built wrappers, and browser-extension AI operating outside governance.
Signed compliance posture
Every scan produces a tamper-evident, hybrid-signed report your auditor can independently verify.
Why this matters: most AI-governance tooling is built around dashboards, questionnaires and documentation — a record of what you promise. That is a different problem from producing independently checkable evidence of what an agent actually did, signed at the moment it did it, with a signature that still verifies after the cryptography we use today is broken. That is the layer SovereignSOS builds, and it is running in the product today rather than sitting on a roadmap.
Answer 5 quick questions to assess your EU regulatory exposure.
A Big-4 readiness engagement starts around €40k and recurs every year. The platform replaces that retainer with a single licence that runs continuously — illustrative, based on your inputs above.
Sovereign Compliance is licensed — not sold as self-serve SaaS. Every deployment is tailored to the organisation or the partner's client base.
A single EU AI Act breach can cost up to €35M or 7% of global turnover. A readiness engagement with a Big 4 firm starts at €40k. The platform replaces both the risk and the cost.
Deployed to your organisation through a licensed advisory or accounting partner.
For organisations licensing the platform directly — single entity, full capability.
For accounting, advisory and consulting firms deploying Sovereign Compliance across their client base.
All licences are invoiced in euros (EUR). USD invoicing available on request for organisations outside the eurozone. Prices exclude VAT.
€2.1B+ in cumulative fines. DPA investigations intensifying across all 27 member states.
Cybersecurity and digital services obligations fully enforceable. Non-compliance means operational disruption.
Article 50 obligations activate — AI disclosure, deepfake labelling, machine-readable content marking. AI Office enforcement powers go live.
Autonomous AI agents deployed at scale. Sovereign AI governance moves from optional framework to operational necessity.