What your customer actually asked for — and what they didn't
They didn't ask for a VPAT. They didn't ask for a marketing paragraph. They didn't ask you to hire Deque. They asked for an accessibility statement compliant with Directive (EU) 2019/882, which is structured following the European harmonised model of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2018/1523, adapted to the scope of Directive (EU) 2019/882. That document has fixed sections:
EAA-Report generates that document as a 9-page PDF with all of the above, plus criterion-by-criterion evaluation of the 17 applicable WCAG 2.1 Level AA criteria and official W3C remediation guidance for each failed or partial criterion. Country-specific enforcement data for Germany, Spain, France, Italy and the Netherlands is included by default.
The ADA anchor — why you already have most of what you need
If you've handled ADA Title III exposure, you already know WCAG 2.1 Level AA. You know what Perceivable, Operable, Understandable and Robust mean. You've argued about colour contrast with your designer and about skip-to-main-content with your frontend lead. The EAA uses the same WCAG 2.1 AA as its technical target through EN 301 549 V3.2.1 — so the accessibility knowledge is portable. What you don't yet have is the document wrapper: the European legal references, the harmonised statement structure, the country-specific enforcement data. EAA-Report is the wrapper.
What's in the 9-page PDF you'll hand to your customer
Cover page
Global compliance score, country-specific enforcement data, unique verification reference (EAA-XXXXXXXX).
Service owner identification, scope and evaluation method
Under the European harmonised model of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2018/1523, adapted to the scope of Directive (EU) 2019/882.
Compliance status by WCAG principle + criterion-by-criterion evaluation
All 17 WCAG 2.1 AA criteria with Yes / Partial / No / N/A across Perceivable, Operable, Understandable, Robust.
Official W3C remediation guidance
Per failed or partial criterion, extracted from "Understanding WCAG 2.1" — real fixes, not generic advice.
Non-accessible content declaration
Under Annex V, Directive 2019/882.
Feedback mechanism and enforcement procedure
Competent national authority for your service country, applicable national transposition law, exact fine range.
Legal basis
Directive (EU) 2019/882, the European harmonised model of Decision (EU) 2018/1523 (adapted to the scope of Directive 2019/882) and EN 301 549 V3.2.1.
Why a free generator won't close the deal
Free accessibility statement generators produce a one-paragraph marketing declaration. They don't evaluate your service against the 17 WCAG criteria, don't follow the European harmonised model of Decision (EU) 2018/1523 adapted to Directive 2019/882, don't identify the competent national authority, and don't include the enforcement procedure section. The procurement manager reviewing your reply already knows what a generic template looks like — she saw four of them this week. She'll mark the questionnaire incomplete and ask you to try again, losing two more days before go-live. The 9-page PDF is the minimum viable deliverable.
Enforcement reality — why your customer is pushing this hard
Fine upheld by the Audiencia Nacional Contentious-Administrative Chamber Section 8 in February 2024 (sanction originally imposed October 2020), plus a six-month ban on concurring in proceedings for the granting of official aid.
Fine after a CERMI complaint. CENTAC and OADI technical reports confirmed failure to meet WCAG Level AA.
Four supermarket giants summoned before the Tribunal Judiciaire de Paris on 12 November 2025 by ApiDV and Droit Pluriel over inaccessible online grocery services.
Civil penalty for deceptive overlay claims, final consent order 22 April 2025 (Docket C-4817). UsableNet documented 119 defendants with accessibility widgets sued in May 2025 alone. Overlays are not a legal defence in the US or the EU.
"Free templates exist. Why pay €149?"
| Alternative | Cost | What you actually get |
|---|---|---|
| Manual accessibility audit (Deque, Level Access) | €4,000 – €8,000 | Thorough, 3-week lead time |
| Annual SaaS compliance subscription | €500 – €2,000 / year | Recurring cost, US-focused format |
| Accessibility overlay (legally discredited) | €490 – €1,990 / year | Not a defence in US or EU. FTC penalised accessiBe $1M. |
| EAA-Report | €149, one-time | 9-page PDF, 15 min, European harmonised model adapted to Directive 2019/882, yours forever |
Need multiple reports? One PDF per product, per customer, per country.
SaaS compliance teams often need reports per product line, per EU market or per enterprise customer. We offer volume pricing on packs of 10 or more. Tell us how many you need and we'll send a quote within one business day.
Request Volume PricingFrequently asked questions
My customer just asked for an 'EAA accessibility statement'. Is that the same as a VPAT?
The clause in the DPA says 'accessibility statement per Directive 2019/882'. What does 'per' mean in practice?
Can I just publish a one-paragraph statement on our trust center and call it done?
How long does generating the PDF actually take?
We have customers in Germany, France, and Italy. Do we need three separate reports?
Is this report legal advice?
⚠️ Important notice: EAA-Report is a structured self-assessment tool, not legal advice and not an overlay. All enforcement cases cited are sourced from identified public documentation.