Proposal for a

REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

amending Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 as regards establishing a framework for a European Digital Identity

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 114 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,

After transmission of the draft legislative act to the national parliaments,

Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee[1],

Acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure,

Whereas:

1.The Commission Communication of 19 February 2020, entitled Shaping Europes Digital Future[2] announces a revision of Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council with the aim of improving its effectiveness, extend its benefits to the private sector and promote trusted digital identities for all Europeans.

2.In its conclusions of 1-2 October 2020[3], the European Council called on the Commission to propose the development of a Union-wide framework for secure public electronic identification, including interoperable digital signatures, to provide people with control over their online identity and data as well as to enable access to public, private and cross-border digital services.

3.The Commission Communication of 9 March 2021 entitled 2030 Digital Compass: the European way for the Digital Decade[4] sets the objective of a Union framework which, by 2030, leads to wide deployment of a trusted, user-controlled identity, allowing each user to control their own online interactions and presence.

4.A more harmonised approach to digital identification should reduce the risks and costs of the current fragmentation due to the use of divergent national solutions and will strengthen the Single Market by allowing citizens, other residents as defined by national law and businesses to identify online in a convenient and uniform way across the Union. Everyone should be able to securely access public and private services relying on an improved ecosystem for trust services and on verified proofs of identity and attestations of attributes, such as a university degree legally recognised and accepted everywhere in the Union. The framework for a European Digital Identity aims to achieve a shift from the reliance on national digital identity solutions only, to the provision of electronic attestations of attributes valid at European level. Providers of electronic attestations of attributes should benefit from a clear and uniform set of rules and public administrations should be able to rely on electronic documents in a given format.

5.To support the competitiveness of European businesses, online service providers should be able to rely on digital identity solutions recognised across the Union, irrespective of the Member State in which they have been issued, thus benefiting from a harmonised European approach to trust, security and interoperability. Users and service providers alike should be able to benefit from the same legal value provided to electronic attestations of attributes across the Union.

6.Regulation (EU) No 2016/679[5] applies to the processing of personal data in the implementation of this Regulation. Therefore, this Regulation should lay down specific safeguards to prevent providers of electronic identification means and electronic attestation of attributes from combining personal data from other services with the personal data relating to the services falling within the scope of this Regulation.

7.It is necessary to set out the harmonised conditions for the establishment of a framework for European Digital Identity Wallets to be issued by Member States, which should empower all Union citizens and other residents as defined by national law to share securely data related to their identity in a user friendly and convenient way under the sole control of the user. Technologies used to achieve those objectives should be developed aiming towards the highest level of security, user convenience and wide usability. Member States should ensure equal access to digital identification to all their nationals and residents.

8.In order to ensure compliance within Union law or national law compliant with Union law, service providers should communicate their intent to rely on the European Digital Identity Wallets to Member States. That will allow Member States to protect users from fraud and prevent the unlawful use of identity data and electronic attestations of attributes as well as to ensure that the processing of sensitive data, like health data, can be verified by relying parties in accordance with Union law or national law.

9.All European Digital Identity Wallets should allow users to electronically identify and authenticate online and offline across borders for accessing a wide range of public and private services. Without prejudice to Member States prerogatives as regards the identification of their nationals and residents, Wallets can also serve the institutional needs of public administrations, international organisations and the Unions institutions, bodies, offices and agencies. Offline use would be important in many sectors, including in the health sector where services are often provided through face-to-face interaction and ePrescriptions should be able to rely on QR-codes or similar technologies to verify authenticity. Relying on the level of assurance high, the European Digital Identity Wallets should benefit from the potential offered by tamper-proof solutions such as secure elements, to comply with the security requirements under this Regulation. The European Digital Identity Wallets should also allow users to create and use qualified electronic signatures and seals which are accepted across the EU. To achieve simplification and cost reduction benefits to persons and businesses across the EU, including by enabling powers of representation and e-mandates, Member States should issue European Digital Identity Wallets relying on common standards to ensure seamless interoperability and a high level of security. Only Member States competent authorities can provide a high degree of confidence in establishing the identity of a person and therefore provide assurance that the person claiming or asserting a particular identity is in fact the person he or she claims to be. It is therefore necessary that the European Digital Identity Wallets rely on the legal identity of citizens, other residents or legal entities. Trust in the European Digital Identity Wallets would be enhanced by the fact that issuing parties are required to implement appropriate technical and organisational measures to ensure a level of security commensurate to the risks raised for the rights and freedoms of the natural persons, in line with Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

10.In order to achieve a high level of security and trustworthiness, this Regulation establishes the requirements for European Digital Identity Wallets. The conformity of European Digital Identity Wallets with those requirements should be certified by accredited public or private sector bodies designated by Member States. Relying on a certification scheme based on the availability of commonly agreed standards with Member States should ensure a high level of trust and interoperability. Certification should in particular rely on the relevant European cybersecurity certifications schemes established pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2019/881[6]. Such certification should be without prejudice to certification as regards personal data processing pursuant to Regulation (EC) 2016/679

11.European Digital Identity Wallets should ensure the highest level of security for the personal data used for authentication irrespective of whether such data is stored locally or on cloud-based solutions, taking into account the different levels of risk. Using biometrics to authenticate is one of the identifications methods providing a high level of confidence, in particular when used in combination with other elements of authentication. Since biometrics represents a unique characteristic of a person, the use of biometrics requires organisational and security measures, commensurate to the risk that such processing may entail to the rights and freedoms of natural persons and in accordance with Regulation 2016/679.

12.To ensure that the European Digital Identity framework is open to innovation, technological development and future-proof, Member States should be encouraged to set-up jointly sandboxes to test innovative solutions in a controlled and secure environment in particular to improve the functionality, protection of personal data, security and interoperability of the solutions and to inform future updates of technical references and legal requirements. This environment should foster the inclusion of European Small and Medium Enterprises, start-ups and individual innovators and researchers.

13.Regulation (EU) No 2019/1157[7] strengthens the security of identity cards with enhanced security features by August 2021. Member States should consider the feasibility of notifying them under electronic identification schemes to extend the cross-border availability of electronic identification means.

14.The process of notification of electronic identification schemes should be simplified and accelerated to promote the access to convenient, trusted, secure and innovative authentication and identification solutions and, where relevant, to encourage private identity providers to offer electronic identification schemes to Member States authorities for notification as national electronic identity card schemes under Regulation 910/2014.

15.Streamlining of the current notification and peer-review procedures will prevent heterogeneous approaches to the assessment of various notified electronic identification schemes and facilitate trust-building between Member States. New, simplified, mechanisms should foster Member States cooperation on the security and interoperability of their notified electronic identification schemes.

16.Member States should benefit from new, flexible tools to ensure compliance with the requirements of this Regulation and of the relevant implementing acts. This Regulation should allow Member States to use reports and assessments performed by accredited conformity assessment bodies or voluntary ICT security certification schemes, such as certification schemes to be established at Union level under Regulation (EU) 2019/881, to support their claims on the alignment of the schemes or of parts thereof with the requirements of the Regulation on the interoperability and the security of the notified electronic identification schemes.

17.Service providers use the identity data provided by the set of person identification data available from electronic identification schemes pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 in order to match users from another Member State with the legal identity of that user. However, despite the use of the eIDAS data set, in many cases ensuring an accurate match requires additional information about the user and specific unique identification procedures at national level. To further support the usability of electronic identification means, this Regulation should require Member States to take specific measures to ensure a correct identity match in the process of electronic identification. For the same purpose, this Regulation should also extend the mandatory minimum data set and require the use of a unique and persistent electronic identifier in conformity with Union law in those cases where it is necessary to legally identify the user upon his/her request in a unique and persistent way.

18.In line with Directive (EU) 2019/882[8], persons with disabilities should be able to use the European digital identity wallets, trust services and end-user products used in the provision of those services on an equal basis with other users.

19.This Regulation should not cover aspects related to the conclusion and validity of contracts or other legal obligations where there are requirements as regards form laid down by national or Union law. In addition, it should not affect national form requirements pertaining to public registers, in particular commercial and land registers.

20.The provision and use of trust services are becoming increasingly important for international trade and cooperation. International partners of the EU are establishing trust frameworks inspired by Regulation (EU) No 910/2014. Therefore, in order to facilitate the recognition of such services and their providers, implementing legislation may set the conditions under which trust frameworks of third countries could be considered equivalent to the trust framework for qualified trust services and providers in this Regulation, as a complement to the possibility of the mutual recognition of trust services and providers established in the Union and in third countries in accordance with Article 218 of the Treaty.

21.This Regulation should build on Union acts ensuring contestable and fair markets in the digital sector. In particular, it builds on the Regulation XXX/XXXX [Digital Markets Act], which introduces rules for providers of core platform services designated as gatekeepers and, among others, prohibits gatekeepers to require business users to use, offer or interoperate with an identification service of the gatekeeper in the context of services offered by the business users using the core platform services of that gatekeeper. Article 6(1)(f) of the Regulation XXX/XXXX [Digital Markets Act] requires gatekeepers to allow business users and providers of ancillary services access to and interoperability with the same operating system, hardware or software features that are available or used in the provision by the gatekeeper of any ancillary services. According to Article 2 (15) of [Digital Markets Act] identification services constitute a type of ancillary services. Business users and providers of ancillary services should therefore be able to access such hardware or software features, such as secure elements in smartphones, and to interoperate with them through the European Digital Identity Wallets or Member States notified electronic identification means.

22.In order to streamline the cybersecurity obligations imposed on trust service providers, as well as to enable these providers and their respective competent authorities to benefit from the legal framework established by Directive XXXX/XXXX (NIS2 Directive), trust services are required to take appropriate technical and organisational measures pursuant to Directive XXXX/XXXX (NIS2 Directive), such as measures addressing system failures, human error, malicious actions or natural phenomena in order to manage the risks posed to the security of network and information systems which those providers use in the provision of their services as well as to notify significant incidents and cyber threats in accordance with Directive XXXX/XXXX (NIS2 Directive). With regard to the reporting of incidents, trust service providers should notify any incidents having a significant impact on the provision of their services, including such caused by theft or loss of devices, network cable damages or incidents occurred in the context of identification of persons. The cybersecurity risk management requirements and reporting obligations under Directive XXXXXX [NIS2] should be considered complementary to the requirements imposed on trust service providers under this Regulation. Where appropriate, established national practices or guidance in relation to the implementation of security and reporting requirements and supervision of compliance with such requirements under Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 should continue to be applied by the competent authorities designated under Directive XXXX/XXXX (NIS2 Directive). Any requirements pursuant to this Regulation do not affect the obligation to notify personal data breaches under Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

23.Due consideration should be given to ensure effective cooperation between the NIS and eIDAS authorities. In cases where the supervisory body under this Regulation is different from the competent authorities designated under Directive XXXX/XXXX [NIS2], those authorities should cooperate closely, in a timely manner by exchanging the relevant information in order to ensure effective supervision and compliance of trust service providers with the requirements set out in this Regulation and Directive XXXX/XXXX [NIS2]. In particular, the supervisory bodies under this Regulation should be entitled to request the competent authority under Directive XXXXX/XXXX [NIS2] to provide the relevant information needed to grant the qualified status and to carry out supervisory actions to verify compliance of the trust service providers with the relevant requirements under NIS 2 or require them to remedy non-compliance.

24.It is essential to provide for a legal framework to facilitate cross-border recognition between existing national legal systems related to electronic registered delivery services. That framework could also open new market opportunities for Union trust service providers to offer new pan-European electronic registered delivery services and ensure that the identification of the recipients is ensured with a higher level of confidence than the identification of the sender.

25.In most cases, citizens and other residents cannot digitally exchange, across borders, information related to their identity, such as addresses, age and professional qualifications, driving licenses and other permits and payment data, securely and with a high level of data protection.

26.It should be possible to issue and handle trustworthy digital attributes and contribute to reducing administrative burden, empowering citizens and other residents to use them in their private and public transactions. Citizens and other residents should be able, for instance, to demonstrate ownership of a valid driving license issued by an authority in one Member State, which can be verified and relied upon by the relevant authorities in other Member States, to rely on their social security credentials or on future digital travel documents in a cross border context.

27.Any entity that collects, creates and issues attested attributes such as diplomas, licences, certificates of birth should be able to become a provider of electronic attestation of attributes. Relying parties should use the electronic attestations of attributes as equivalent to attestations in paper format. Therefore, an electronic attestation of attributes should not be denied legal effect on the grounds that it is in an electronic form or that it does not meet the requirements of the qualified electronic attestation of attributes. To that effect, general requirements should be laid down to ensure that a qualified electronic attestation of attributes has the equivalent legal effect of lawfully issued attestations in paper form. However, those requirements should apply without prejudice to Union or national law defining additional sector specific requirements as regards form with underlying legal effects and, in particular, the cross-border recognition of qualified electronic attestation of attributes, where appropriate.

28.Wide availability and usability of the European Digital Identity Wallets require theiracceptance by private service providers. Private relying parties providing services in the areas of transport, energy, banking and financial services, social security, health, drinking water, postal services, digital infrastructure, education or telecommunications should accept the use of European Digital Identity Wallets for the provision of services where strong user authentication for online identification is required by national or Union law or by contractual obligation. Where very large online platforms as defined in Article 25.1. of Regulation [reference DSA Regulation] require users to authenticate to access online services, those platforms should be mandated to accept the use of European Digital Identity Wallets upon voluntary request of the user. Users should be under no obligation to use the wallet to access private services, but if they wish to do so, large online platforms should accept the European Digital Identity Wallet for this purpose while respecting the principle of data minimisation. Given the importance of very large online platforms, due to their reach, in particular as expressed in number of recipients of the service and economic transactions this is necessary to increase the protection of users from fraud and secure a high level of data protection. Self-regulatory codes of conduct at Union level (codes of conduct) should be developed in order to contribute to wide availability and usability of electronic identification means including European Digital Identity Wallets within the scope of this Regulation. The codes of conduct should facilitate wide acceptance of electronic identification means including European Digital Identity Wallets by those service providers which do not qualify as very large platforms and which rely on third party electronic identification services for user authentication. They should be developed within 12 months of the adoption of this Regulation. The Commission should assess the effectiveness of these provisions for the availability and usability for the user of the European Digital Identity Wallets after 18 months of their deployment and revise the provisions to ensure their acceptance by means of delegated acts in the light of this assessment.

29.The European Digital Identity Wallet should technically enable the selective disclosure of attributes to relying parties. This feature should become a basic design feature thereby reinforcing convenience and personal data protection including minimisation of processing of personal data.

30.Attributes provided by the qualified trust service providers as part of the qualified attestation of attributes should be verified against the authentic sources either directly by the qualified trust service provider or via designated intermediaries recognised at national level in accordance with national or Union law for the purpose of secure exchange of attested attributes between identity or attestation of attributes service providers and relying parties.

31.Secure electronic identification and the provision of attestation of attributes should offer additional flexibility and solutions for the financial services sector to allow identification of customers and the exchange of specific attributes necessary to comply with, for example, customer due diligence requirements under the Anti Money Laundering Regulation, [reference to be added after the adoption of the proposal], with suitability requirements stemming from investor protection legislation, or to support the fulfilment of strong customer authentication requirements for account login and initiation of transactions in the field of payment services.

32.Website authentication services provide users with assurance that there is a genuine and legitimate entity standing behind the website. Those services contribute to the building of trust and confidence in conducting business online, as users will have confidence in a website that has been authenticated. The use of website authentication services by websites is voluntary. However, in order for website authentication to become a means to increasing trust, providing a better experience for the user and furthering growth in the internal market, this Regulation lays down minimal security and liability obligations for the providers of website authentication services and their services. To that end, web-browsers should ensure support and interoperability with Qualified certificates for website authentication pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 910/2014. They should recognise and display Qualified certificates for website authentication to provide a high level of assurance, allowing website owners to assert their identity as owners of a website and users to identify the website owners with a high degree of certainty. To further promote their usage, public authorities in Member States should consider incorporating Qualified certificates for website authentication in their websites.

33.Many Member States have introduced national requirements for services providing secure and trustworthy digital archiving in order to allow for the long term preservation of electronic documents and associated trust services. To ensure legal certainty and trust, it is essential to provide a legal framework to facilitate the cross border recognition of qualified electronic archiving services. That framework could also open new market opportunities for Union trust service providers.

34.Qualified electronic ledgers record data in a manner that ensures the uniqueness, authenticity and correct sequencing of data entries in a tamper proof manner. An electronic ledger combines the effect of time stamping of data with certainty about the data originator similar to e-signing and has the additional benefit of enabling more decentralised governance models that are suitable for multi-party co-operations. For example, it creates a reliable audit trail for the provenance of commodities in cross-border trade, supports the protection of intellectual property rights, enables flexibility markets in electricity, provides the basis for advanced solutions for self-sovereign identity and supports more efficient and transformative public services. To prevent fragmentation of the internal market, it is important to define a pan-European legal framework that allows for the cross-border recognition of trust services for the recording of data in electronic ledgers.

35.The certification as qualified trust service providers should provide legal certainty for use cases that build on electronic ledgers. This trust service for electronic ledgers and qualified electronic ledgers and the certification as qualified trust service provider for electronic ledgers should be notwithstanding the need for use cases to comply with Union law or national law in compliance with Union law. Use cases that involve the processing of personal data must comply with Regulation (EU) 2016/679. Use cases that involve crypto assets should be compatible with all applicable financial rules for example with the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive[9], the Payment Services Directive[10] and the future Markets in Crypto Assets Regulation[11].

36.In order to avoid fragmentation and barriers, due to diverging standards and technical restrictions, and to ensure a coordinated process to avoid endangering the implementation of the future European Digital Identity framework, a process for close and structured cooperation between the Commission, Member States and the private sector is needed. To achieve this objective, Member States should cooperate within the framework set out in the Commission Recommendation XXX/XXXX [Toolbox for a coordinated approach towards a European Digital Identity Framework][12] to identify a Toolbox for a European Digital Identity framework. The Toolbox should include a comprehensive technical architecture and reference framework, a set of common standards and technical references and a set of guidelines and descriptions of best practices covering at least all aspects of the functionalities and interoperability of the European Digital Identity Wallets including eSignatures and of the qualified trust service for attestation of attributes as laid out in this regulation. In this context, Member States should also reach agreement on common elements of a business model and fee structure of the European Digital Identity Wallets, to facilitate take up, in particular by small and medium sized companies in a cross-border context. The content of the toolbox should evolve in parallel with and reflect the outcome of the discussion and process of adoption of the European Digital Identity Framework.

37.The European Data Protection Supervisor has been consulted pursuant to Article 42 (1) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1525 of the European Parliament and of the Council[13].

38.Regulation (EU) 910/2014 should therefore be amended accordingly,

1.Building trust in the online environment is key to economic and social development. Lack of trust, in particular because of a perceived lack of legal certainty, makes consumers, businesses and public authorities hesitate to carry out transactions electronically and to adopt new services.

2.This Regulation seeks to enhance trust in electronic transactions in the internal market by providing a common foundation for secure electronic interaction between citizens, businesses and public authorities, thereby increasing the effectiveness of public and private online services, electronic business and electronic commerce in the Union.

3.Directive 1999/93/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (3), dealt with electronic signatures without delivering a comprehensive cross-border and cross-sector framework for secure, trustworthy and easy-to-use electronic transactions. This Regulation enhances and expands the acquis of that Directive.

4.The Commission communication of 26 August 2010 entitled A Digital Agenda for Europe identified the fragmentation of the digital market, the lack of interoperability and the rise in cybercrime as major obstacles to the virtuous cycle of the digital economy. In its EU Citizenship Report 2010, entitled Dismantling the obstacles to EU citizens rights, the Commission further highlighted the need to solve the main problems that prevent Union citizens from enjoying the benefits of a digital single market and cross-border digital services.

5.In its conclusions of 4 February 2011 and of 23 October 2011, the European Council invited the Commission to create a digital single market by 2015, to make rapid progress in key areas of the digital economy and to promote a fully integrated digital single market by facilitating the cross-border use of online services, with particular attention to facilitating secure electronic identification and authentication.

6.In its conclusions of 27 May 2011, the Council invited the Commission to contribute to the digital single market by creating appropriate conditions for the mutual recognition of key enablers across borders, such as electronic identification, electronic documents, electronic signatures and electronic delivery services, and for interoperable e-government services across the European Union.

7.The European Parliament, in its resolution of 21 September 2010 on completing the internal market for e-commerce (4), stressed the importance of the security of electronic services, especially of electronic signatures, and of the need to create a public key infrastructure at pan-European level, and called on the Commission to set up a European validation authorities gateway to ensure the cross-border interoperability of electronic signatures and to increase the security of transactions carried out using the internet.

8.Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (5) requires Member States to establish points of single contact (PSCs) to ensure that all procedures and formalities relating to access to a service activity and to the exercise thereof can be easily completed, at a distance and by electronic means, through the appropriate PSC with the appropriate authorities. Many online services accessible through PSCs require electronic identification, authentication and signature.

9.In most cases, citizens cannot use their electronic identification to authenticate themselves in another Member State because the national electronic identification schemes in their country are not recognised in other Member States. That electronic barrier excludes service providers from enjoying the full benefits of the internal market. Mutually recognised electronic identification means will facilitate cross-border provision of numerous services in the internal market and enable businesses to operate on a cross-border basis without facing many obstacles in interactions with public authorities.

10.Directive 2011/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (6) set up a network of national authorities responsible for e-health. To enhance the safety and the continuity of cross-border healthcare, the network is required to produce guidelines on cross-border access to electronic health data and services, including by supporting common identification and authentication measures to facilitate transferability of data in cross-border healthcare. Mutual recognition of electronic identification and authentication is key to making cross-border healthcare for European citizens a reality. When people travel for treatment, their medical data need to be accessible in the country of treatment. That requires a solid, safe and trusted electronic identification framework.

11.This Regulation should be applied in full compliance with the principles relating to the protection of personal data provided for in Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (7). In this respect, having regard to the principle of mutual recognition established by this Regulation, authentication for an online service should concern processing of only those identification data that are adequate, relevant and not excessive to grant access to that service online. Furthermore, requirements under Directive 95/46/EC concerning confidentiality and security of processing should be respected by trust service providers and supervisory bodies.

12.One of the objectives of this Regulation is to remove existing barriers to the cross-border use of electronic identification means used in the Member States to authenticate, for at least public services. This Regulation does not aim to intervene with regard to electronic identity management systems and related infrastructures established in Member States. The aim of this Regulation is to ensure that for access to cross-border online services offered by Member States, secure electronic identification and authentication is possible.

13.Member States should remain free to use or to introduce means for the purposes of electronic identification for accessing online services. They should also be able to decide whether to involve the private sector in the provision of those means. Member States should not be obliged to notify their electronic identification schemes to the Commission. The choice to notify the Commission of all, some or none of the electronic identification schemes used at national level to access at least public online services or specific services is up to Member States.

14.Some conditions need to be set out in this Regulation with regard to which electronic identification means have to be recognised and how the electronic identification schemes should be notified. Those conditions should help Member States to build the necessary trust in each others electronic identification schemes and to mutually recognise electronic identification means falling under their notified schemes. The principle of mutual recognition should apply if the notifying Member States electronic identification scheme meets the conditions of notification and the notification was published in the Official Journal of the European Union. However, the principle of mutual recognition should only relate to authentication for an online service. The access to those online services and their final delivery to the applicant should be closely linked to the right to receive such services under the conditions set out in national legislation.

15.The obligation to recognise electronic identification means should relate only to those means the identity assurance level of which corresponds to the level equal to or higher than the level required for the online service in question. In addition, that obligation should only apply when the public sector body in question uses the assurance level substantial or high in relation to accessing that service online. Member States should remain free, in accordance with Union law, to recognise electronic identification means having lower identity assurance levels.

16.Assurance levels should characterise the degree of confidence in electronic identification means in establishing the identity of a person, thus providing assurance that the person claiming a particular identity is in fact the person to which that identity was assigned. The assurance level depends on the degree of confidence that electronic identification means provides in claimed or asserted identity of a person taking into account processes (for example, identity proofing and verification, and authentication), management activities (for example, the entity issuing electronic identification means and the procedure to issue such means) and technical controls implemented. Various technical definitions and descriptions of assurance levels exist as the result of Union-funded Large-Scale Pilots, standardisation and international activities. In particular, the Large-Scale Pilot STORK and ISO 29115 refer, inter alia, to levels 2, 3 and 4, which should be taken into utmost account in establishing minimum technical requirements, standards and procedures for the assurances levels low, substantial and high within the meaning of this Regulation, while ensuring consistent application of this Regulation in particular with regard to assurance level high related to identity proofing for issuing qualified certificates. The requirements established should be technology-neutral. It should be possible to achieve the necessary security requirements through different technologies.

17.Member States should encourage the private sector to voluntarily use electronic identification means under a notified scheme for identification purposes when needed for online services or electronic transactions. The possibility to use such electronic identification means would enable the private sector to rely on electronic identification and authentication already largely used in many Member States at least for public services and to make it easier for businesses and citizens to access their online services across borders. In order to facilitate the use of such electronic identification means across borders by the private sector, the authentication possibility provided by any Member State should be available to private sector relying parties established outside of the territory of that Member State under the same conditions as applied to private sector relying parties established within that Member State. Consequently, with regard to private sector relying parties, the notifying Member State may define terms of access to the authentication means. Such terms of access may inform whether the authentication means related to the notified scheme is presently available to private sector relying parties.

18.This Regulation should provide for the liability of the notifying Member State, the party issuing the electronic identification means and the party operating the authentication procedure for failure to comply with the relevant obligations under this Regulation. However, this Regulation should be applied in accordance with national rules on liability. Therefore, it does not affect those national rules on, for example, definition of damages or relevant applicable procedural rules, including the burden of proof.

19.The security of electronic identification schemes is key to trustworthy cross-border mutual recognition of electronic identification means. In this context, Member States should cooperate with regard to the security and interoperability of the electronic identification schemes at Union level. Whenever electronic identification schemes require specific hardware or software to be used by relying parties at the national level, cross-border interoperability calls for those Member States not to impose such requirements and related costs on relying parties established outside of their territory. In that case appropriate solutions should be discussed and developed within the scope of the interoperability framework. Nevertheless technical requirements stemming from the inherent specifications of national electronic identification means and likely to affect the holders of such electronic means (e.g. smartcards), are unavoidable.

20.Cooperation by Member States should facilitate the technical interoperability of the notified electronic identification schemes with a view to fostering a high level of trust and security appropriate to the degree of risk. The exchange of information and the sharing of best practices between Member States with a view to their mutual recognition should help such cooperation.

21.This Regulation should also establish a general legal framework for the use of trust services. However, it should not create a general obligation to use them or to install an access point for all existing trust services. In particular, it should not cover the provision of services used exclusively within closed systems between a defined set of participants, which have no effect on third parties. For example, systems set up in businesses or public administrations to manage internal procedures making use of trust services should not be subject to the requirements of this Regulation. Only trust services provided to the public having effects on third parties should meet the requirements laid down in the Regulation. Neither should this Regulation cover aspects related to the conclusion and validity of contracts or other legal obligations where there are requirements as regards form laid down by national or Union law. In addition, it should not affect national form requirements pertaining to public registers, in particular commercial and land registers.

22.In order to contribute to their general cross-border use, it should be possible to use trust services as evidence in legal proceedings in all Member States. It is for the national law to define the legal effect of trust services, except if otherwise provided in this Regulation.

23.To the extent that this Regulation creates an obligation to recognise a trust service, such a trust service may only be rejected if the addressee of the obligation is unable to read or verify it due to technical reasons lying outside the immediate control of the addressee. However, that obligation should not in itself require a public body to obtain the hardware and software necessary for the technical readability of all existing trust services.

24.Member States may maintain or introduce national provisions, in conformity with Union law, relating to trust services as far as those services are not fully harmonised by this Regulation. However, trust services that comply with this Regulation should circulate freely in the internal market.

25.Member States should remain free to define other types of trust services in addition to those making part of the closed list of trust services provided for in this Regulation, for the purpose of recognition at national level as qualified trust services.

26.Because of the pace of technological change, this Regulation should adopt an approach which is open to innovation.

27.This Regulation should be technology-neutral. The legal effects it grants should be achievable by any technical means provided that the requirements of this Regulation are met.

28.To enhance in particular the trust of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and consumers in the internal market and to promote the use of trust services and products, the notions of qualified trust services and qualified trust service provider should be introduced with a view to indicating requirements and obligations that ensure high-level security of whatever qualified trust services and products are used or provided.

29.In line with the obligations under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, approved by Council Decision 2010/48/EC (8), in particular Article 9 of the Convention, persons with disabilities should be able to use trust services and end-user products used in the provision of those services on an equal basis with other consumers. Therefore, where feasible, trust services provided and end-user products used in the provision of those services should be made accessible for persons with disabilities. The feasibility assessment should include, inter alia, technical and economic considerations.

30.Member States should designate a supervisory body or supervisory bodies to carry out the supervisory activities under this Regulation. Member States should also be able to decide, upon a mutual agreement with another Member State, to designate a supervisory body in the territory of that other Member State.

31.Supervisory bodies should cooperate with data protection authorities, for example, by informing them about the results of audits of qualified trust service providers, where personal data protection rules appear to have been breached. The provision of information should in particular cover security incidents and personal data breaches.

32.It should be incumbent on all trust service providers to apply good security practice appropriate to the risks related to their activities so as to boost users trust in the single market.

33.Provisions on the use of pseudonyms in certificates should not prevent Member States from requiring identification of persons pursuant to Union or national law.

34.All Member States should follow common essential supervision requirements to ensure a comparable security level of qualified trust services. To ease the consistent application of those requirements across the Union, Member States should adopt comparable procedures and should exchange information on their supervision activities and best practices in the field.

35.All trust service providers should be subject to the requirements of this Regulation, in particular those on security and liability to ensure due diligence, transparency and accountability of their operations and services. However, taking into account the type of services provided by trust service providers, it is appropriate to distinguish as far as those requirements are concerned between qualified and non-qualified trust service providers.

36.Establishing a supervisory regime for all trust service providers should ensure a level playing field for the security and accountability of their operations and services, thus contributing to the protection of users and to the functioning of the internal market. Non-qualified trust service providers should be subject to a light touch and reactive ex post supervisory activities justified by the nature of their services and operations. The supervisory body should therefore have no general obligation to supervise non-qualified service providers. The supervisory body should only take action when it is informed (for example, by the non-qualified trust service provider itself, by another supervisory body, by a notification from a user or a business partner or on the basis of its own investigation) that a non-qualified trust service provider does not comply with the requirements of this Regulation.

37.This Regulation should provide for the liability of all trust service providers. In particular, it establishes the liability regime under which all trust service providers should be liable for damage caused to any natural or legal person due to failure to comply with the obligations under this Regulation. In order to facilitate the assessment of financial risk that trust service providers might have to bear or that they should cover by insurance policies, this Regulation allows trust service providers to set limitations, under certain conditions, on the use of the services they provide and not to be liable for damages arising from the use of services exceeding such limitations. Customers should be duly informed about the limitations in advance. Those limitations should be recognisable by a third party, for example by including information about the limitations in the terms and conditions of the service provided or through other recognisable means. For the purposes of giving effect to those principles, this Regulation should be applied in accordance with national rules on liability. Therefore, this Regulation does not affect those national rules on, for example, definition of damages, intention, negligence, or relevant applicable procedural rules.

38.Notification of security breaches and security risk assessments is essential with a view to providing adequate information to concerned parties in the event of a breach of security or loss of integrity.

39.To enable the Commission and the Member States to assess the effectiveness of the breach notification mechanism introduced by this Regulation, supervisory bodies should be requested to provide summary information to the Commission and to European Union Agency for Network and Information Security (ENISA).

40.To enable the Commission and the Member States to assess the effectiveness of the enhanced supervision mechanism introduced by this Regulation, supervisory bodies should be requested to report on their activities. This would be instrumental in facilitating the exchange of good practice between supervisory bodies and would ensure the verification of the consistent and efficient implementation of the essential supervision requirements in all Member States.

41.To ensure sustainability and durability of qualified trust services and to boost users confidence in the continuity of qualified trust services, supervisory bodies should verify the existence and the correct application of provisions on termination plans in cases where qualified trust service providers cease their activities.

42.To facilitate the supervision of qualified trust service providers, for example, when a provider is providing its services in the territory of another Member State and is not subject to supervision there, or when the computers of a provider are located in the territory of a Member State other than the one where it is established, a mutual assistance system between supervisory bodies in the Member States should be established.

43.In order to ensure the compliance of qualified trust service providers and the services they provide with the requirements set out in this Regulation, a conformity assessment should be carried out by a conformity assessment body and the resulting conformity assessment reports should be submitted by the qualified trust service providers to the supervisory body. Whenever the supervisory body requires a qualified trust service provider to submit an ad hoc conformity assessment report, the supervisory body should respect, in particular, the principles of good administration, including the obligation to give reasons for its decisions, as well as the principle of proportionality. Therefore, the supervisory body should duly justify its decision to require an ad hoc conformity assessment.

44.This Regulation aims to ensure a coherent framework with a view to providing a high level of security and legal certainty of trust services. In this regard, when addressing the conformity assessment of products and services, the Commission should, where appropriate, seek synergies with existing relevant European and international schemes such as the Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council (9) which sets out the requirements for accreditation of conformity assessment bodies and market surveillance of products.

45.In order to allow an efficient initiation process, which should lead to the inclusion of qualified trust service providers and the qualified trust services they provide into trusted lists, preliminary interactions between prospective qualified trust service providers and the competent supervisory body should be encouraged with a view to facilitating the due diligence leading to the provisioning of qualified trust services.

46.Trusted lists are essential elements in the building of trust among market operators as they indicate the qualified status of the service provider at the time of supervision.

47.Confidence in and convenience of online services are essential for users to fully benefit and consciously rely on electronic services. To this end, an EU trust mark should be created to identify the qualified trust services provided by qualified trust service providers. Such an EU trust mark for qualified trust services would clearly differentiate qualified trust services from other trust services thus contributing to transparency in the market. The use of an EU trust mark by qualified trust service providers should be voluntary and should not lead to any requirement other than those provided for in this Regulation.

48.While a high level of security is needed to ensure mutual recognition of electronic signatures, in specific cases, such as in the context of Commission Decision 2009/767/EC (10), electronic signatures with a lower security assurance should also be accepted.

49.This Regulation should establish the principle that an electronic signature should not be denied legal effect on the grounds that it is in an electronic form or that it does not meet the requirements of the qualified electronic signature. However, it is for national law to define the legal effect of electronic signatures, except for the requirements provided for in this Regulation according to which a qualified electronic signature should have the equivalent legal effect of a handwritten signature.

50.As competent authorities in the Member States currently use different formats of advanced electronic signatures to sign their documents electronically, it is necessary to ensure that at least a number of advanced electronic signature formats can be technically supported by Member States when they receive documents signed electronically. Similarly, when competent authorities in the Member States use advanced electronic seals, it would be necessary to ensure that they support at least a number of advanced electronic seal formats.

51.It should be possible for the signatory to entrust qualified electronic signature creation devices to the care of a third party, provided that appropriate mechanisms and procedures are implemented to ensure that the signatory has sole control over the use of his electronic signature creation data, and the qualified electronic signature requirements are met by the use of the device.

52.The creation of remote electronic signatures, where the electronic signature creation environment is managed by a trust service provider on behalf of the signatory, is set to increase in the light of its multiple economic benefits. However, in order to ensure that such electronic signatures receive the same legal recognition as electronic signatures created in an entirely user-managed environment, remote electronic signature service providers should apply specific management and administrative security procedures and use trustworthy systems and products, including secure electronic communication channels, in order to guarantee that the electronic signature creation environment is reliable and is used under the sole control of the signatory. Where a qualified electronic signature has been created using a remote electronic signature creation device, the requirements applicable to qualified trust service providers set out in this Regulation should apply.

53.The suspension of qualified certificates is an established operational practice of trust service providers in a number of Member States, which is different from revocation and entails the temporary loss of validity of a certificate. Legal certainty calls for the suspension status of a certificate to always be clearly indicated. To that end, trust service providers should have the responsibility to clearly indicate the status of the certificate and, if suspended, the precise period of time during which the certificate has been suspended. This Regulation should not impose the use of suspension on trust service providers or Member States, but should provide for transparency rules when and where such a practice is available.

54.Cross-border interoperability and recognition of qualified certificates is a precondition for cross-border recognition of qualified electronic signatures. Therefore, qualified certificates should not be subject to any mandatory requirements exceeding the requirements laid down in this Regulation. However, at national level, the inclusion of specific attributes, such as unique identifiers, in qualified certificates should be allowed, provided that such specific attributes do not hamper cross-border interoperability and recognition of qualified certificates and electronic signatures.

55.IT security certification based on international standards such as ISO 15408 and related evaluation methods and mutual recognition arrangements is an important tool for verifying the security of qualified electronic signature creation devices and should be promoted. However, innovative solutions and services such as mobile signing and cloud signing rely on technical and organisational solutions for qualified electronic signature creation devices for which security standards may not yet be available or for which the first IT security certification is ongoing. The level of security of such qualified electronic signature creation devices could be evaluated by using alternative processes only where such security standards are not available or where the first IT security certification is ongoing. Those processes should be comparable to the standards for IT security certification insofar as their security levels are equivalent. Those processes could be facilitated by a peer review.

56.This Regulation should lay down requirements for qualified electronic signature creation devices to ensure the functionality of advanced electronic signatures. This Regulation should not cover the entire system environment in which such devices operate. Therefore, the scope of the certification of qualified signature creation devices should be limited to the hardware and system software used to manage and protect the signature creation data created, stored or processed in the signature creation device. As detailed in relevant standards, the scope of the certification obligation should exclude signature creation applications.

57.To ensure legal certainty as regards the validity of the signature, it is essential to specify the components of a qualified electronic signature, which should be assessed by the relying party carrying out the validation. Moreover, specifying the requirements for qualified trust service providers that can provide a qualified validation service to relying parties unwilling or unable to carry out the validation of qualified electronic signatures themselves, should stimulate the private and public sector to invest in such services. Both elements should make qualified electronic signature validation easy and convenient for all parties at Union level.

58.When a transaction requires a qualified electronic seal from a legal person, a qualified electronic signature from the authorised representative of the legal person should be equally acceptable.

59.Electronic seals should serve as evidence that an electronic document was issued by a legal person, ensuring certainty of the documents origin and integrity.

60.Trust service providers issuing qualified certificates for electronic seals should implement the necessary measures in order to be able to establish the identity of the natural person representing the legal person to whom the qualified certificate for the electronic seal is provided, when such identification is necessary at national level in the context of judicial or administrative proceedings.

61.This Regulation should ensure the long-term preservation of information, in order to ensure the legal validity of electronic signatures and electronic seals over extended periods of time and guarantee that they can be validated irrespective of future technological changes.

62.In order to ensure the security of qualified electronic time stamps, this Regulation should require the use of an advanced electronic seal or an advanced electronic signature or of other equivalent methods. It is foreseeable that innovation may lead to new technologies that may ensure an equivalent level of security for time stamps. Whenever a method other than an advanced electronic seal or an advanced electronic signature is used, it should be up to the qualified trust service provider to demonstrate, in the conformity assessment report, that such a method ensures an equivalent level of security and complies with the obligations set out in this Regulation.

63.Electronic documents are important for further development of cross-border electronic transactions in the internal market. This Regulation should establish the principle that an electronic document should not be denied legal effect on the grounds that it is in an electronic form in order to ensure that an electronic transaction will not be rejected only on the grounds that a document is in electronic form.

64.When addressing formats of advanced electronic signatures and seals, the Commission should build on existing practices, standards and legislation, in particular Commission Decision 2011/130/EU (11).

65.In addition to authenticating the document issued by the legal person, electronic seals can be used to authenticate any digital asset of the legal person, such as software code or servers.

66.It is essential to provide for a legal framework to facilitate cross-border recognition between existing national legal systems related to electronic registered delivery services. That framework could also open new market opportunities for Union trust service providers to offer new pan-European electronic registered delivery services.

67.Website authentication services provide a means by which a visitor to a website can be assured that there is a genuine and legitimate entity standing behind the website. Those services contribute to the building of trust and confidence in conducting business online, as users will have confidence in a website that has been authenticated. The provision and the use of website authentication services are entirely voluntary. However, in order for website authentication to become a means to boosting trust, providing a better experience for the user and furthering growth in the internal market, this Regulation should lay down minimal security and liability obligations for the providers and their services. To that end, the results of existing industry-led initiatives, for example the Certification Authorities/Browsers Forum CA/B Forum, have been taken into account. In addition, this Regulation should not impede the use of other means or methods to authenticate a website not falling under this Regulation nor should it prevent third country providers of website authentication services from providing their services to customers in the Union. However, a third country provider should only have its website authentication services recognised as qualified in accordance with this Regulation, if an international agreement between the Union and the country of establishment of the provider has been concluded.

68.The concept of legal persons, according to the provisions of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) on establishment, leaves operators free to choose the legal form which they deem suitable for carrying out their activity. Accordingly, legal persons, within the meaning of the TFEU, means all entities constituted under, or governed by, the law of a Member State, irrespective of their legal form.

69.The Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies are encouraged to recognise electronic identification and trust services covered by this Regulation for the purpose of administrative cooperation capitalising, in particular, on existing good practices and the results of ongoing projects in the areas covered by this Regulation.

70.In order to complement certain detailed technical aspects of this Regulation in a flexible and rapid manner, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 TFEU should be delegated to the Commission in respect of criteria to be met by the bodies responsible for the certification of qualified electronic signature creation devices. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level. The Commission, when preparing and drawing up delegated acts, should ensure a simultaneous, timely and appropriate transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and to the Council.

71.In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission, in particular for specifying reference numbers of standards the use of which would raise a presumption of compliance with certain requirements laid down in this Regulation. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council (12).

72.When adopting delegated or implementing acts, the Commission should take due account of the standards and technical specifications drawn up by European and international standardisation organisations and bodies, in particular the European Committee for Standardisation (CEN), the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI), the International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) and the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), with a view to ensuring a high level of security and interoperability of electronic identification and trust services.

73.For reasons of legal certainty and clarity, Directive 1999/93/EC should be repealed.

74.To ensure legal certainty for market operators already using qualified certificates issued to natural persons in compliance with Directive 1999/93/EC, it is necessary to provide for a sufficient period of time for transitional purposes. Similarly, transitional measures should be established for secure signature creation devices, the conformity of which has been determined in accordance with Directive 1999/93/EC, as well as for certification service providers issuing qualified certificates before 1 July 2016. Finally, it is also necessary to provide the Commission with the means to adopt the implementing acts and delegated acts before that date.

75.The application dates set out in this Regulation do not affect existing obligations that Member States already have under Union law, in particular under Directive 2006/123/EC.

76.Since the objectives of this Regulation cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States but can rather, by reason of the scale of the action, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives.

77.The European Data Protection Supervisor was consulted in accordance with Article 28(2) of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council (13) and delivered an opinion on 27 September 2012 (14),

HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

This Regulations aims at ensuring the proper functioning of the internal market and providing an adequate level of security of electronic identification means and trust services. For these purposes, this Regulation:

(a)lays down the conditions under which Member States shall provide and recognise electronic identification means of natural and legal persons, falling under a notified electronic identification scheme of another Member State;

(b)lays down rules for trust services, in particular for electronic transactions;

(c)establishes a legal framework for electronic signatures, electronic seals, electronic time stamps, electronic documents, electronic registered delivery services, certificate services for website authentication, electronic archiving and electronic attestation of attributes, the management of remote electronic signature and seal creation devices, and electronic ledgers;

(d)lays down the conditions for the issuing of European Digital Identity Wallets by Member States.

1.This Regulation applies to electronic identification schemes that have been notified by a Member State, European Digital Identity Wallets issued by Member States and to trust service providers that are established in the Union.

2.This Regulation does not apply to the provision of trust services that are used exclusively within closed systems resulting from national law or from agreements between a defined set of participants.

3.This Regulation does not affect national or Union law related to the conclusion and validity of contracts or other legal or procedural obligations relating to sector specific requirements as regards form with underlying legal effects.

For the purposes of this Regulation, the following definitions apply:

(1)electronic identification means the process of using person identification data in electronic form uniquely representing either a natural or legal person, or a natural person representing a legal person;

(2)electronic identification means means a material and/or immaterial unit, including European Digital Identity Wallets or ID cards following Regulation 2019/1157, containing person identification data and which is used for authentication for an online or offline service;

(3)person identification data means a set of data enabling the identity of a natural or legal person, or a natural person representing a legal person to be established;

(4)electronic identification scheme means a system for electronic identification under which electronic identification means, are issued to natural or legal persons or natural persons representing legal persons;

(5)authentication means an electronic process that enables the electronic identification of a natural or legal person, or the origin and integrity of data in electronic form to be confirmed;

(6)relying party means a natural or legal person that relies upon an electronic identification or a trust service;

(7)public sector body means a state, regional or local authority, a body governed by public law or an association formed by one or several such authorities or one or several such bodies governed by public law, or a private entity mandated by at least one of those authorities, bodies or associations to provide public services, when acting under such a mandate;

(8)body governed by public law means a body defined in point (4) of Article 2(1) of Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (15);

(9)signatory means a natural person who creates an electronic signature;

(10)electronic signature means data in electronic form which is attached to or logically associated with other data in electronic form and which is used by the signatory to sign;

(11)advanced electronic signature means an electronic signature which meets the requirements set out in Article 26;

(12)qualified electronic signature means an advanced electronic signature that is created by a qualified electronic signature creation device, and which is based on a qualified certificate for electronic signatures;

(13)electronic signature creation data means unique data which is used by the signatory to create an electronic signature;

(14)certificate for electronic signature means an electronic attestation or set of attestations which links electronic signature validation data to a natural person and confirms at least the name or the pseudonym of that person;

(15)qualified certificate for electronic signature means a certificate for electronic signatures, that is issued by a qualified trust service provider and meets the requirements laid down in Annex I;

(16)trust service means an electronic service normally provided against payment which consists of:

(a)the creation, verification, and validation of electronic signatures, electronic seals or electronic time stamps, electronic registered delivery services, electronic attestation of attributes and certificates related to those services;

(b)the creation, verification and validation of certificates for website authentication;

(c)the preservation of electronic signatures, seals or certificates related to those services;

(d)the electronic archiving of electronic documents;

(e)the management of remote electronic signature and seal creation devices;

(17)qualified trust service means a trust service that meets the applicable requirements laid down in this Regulation;

(18)conformity assessment body means a body defined in point 13 of Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 765/2008, which is accredited in accordance with that Regulation as competent to carry out conformity assessment of a qualified trust service provider and the qualified trust services it provides;

(19)trust service provider means a natural or a legal person who provides one or more trust services either as a qualified or as a non-qualified trust service provider;

(20)qualified trust service provider means a trust service provider who provides one or more qualified trust services and is granted the qualified status by the supervisory body;

(21)product means hardware or software, or relevant components of hardware and / or software, which are intended to be used for the provision of electronic identification and trust services;

(22)electronic signature creation device means configured software or hardware used to create an electronic signature;

(23)qualified electronic signature creation device means an electronic signature creation device that meets the requirements laid down in Annex II;

(23a)remote qualified signature creation device means a qualified electronic signature creation device where a qualified trust service provider generates, manages or duplicates the electronic signature creation data on behalf of a signatory;

(23b)remote qualified seal creation device means a qualified electronic seal creation device where a qualified trust service provider generates, manages or duplicates the electronic signature creation data on behalf of a seal creator;

(24)creator of a seal means a legal person who creates an electronic seal;

(25)electronic seal means data in electronic form, which is attached to or logically associated with other data in electronic form to ensure the latters origin and integrity;

(26)advanced electronic seal means an electronic seal, which meets the requirements set out in Article 36;

(27)qualified electronic seal means an advanced electronic seal, which is created by a qualified electronic seal creation device, and that is based on a qualified certificate for electronic seal;

(28)electronic seal creation data means unique data, which is used by the creator of the electronic seal to create an electronic seal;

(29)certificate for electronic seal means an electronic attestation or set of attestations that links electronic seal validation data to a legal person and confirms the name of that person;

(30)qualified certificate for electronic seal means a certificate for an electronic seal, that is issued by a qualified trust service provider and meets the requirements laid down in Annex III;

(31)electronic seal creation device means configured software or hardware used to create an electronic seal;

(32)qualified electronic seal creation device means an electronic seal creation device that meets mutatis mutandis the requirements laid down in Annex II;

(33)electronic time stamp means data in electronic form which binds other data in electronic form to a particular time establishing evidence that the latter data existed at that time;

(34)qualified electronic time stamp means an electronic time stamp which meets the requirements laid down in Article 42;

(35)electronic document means any content stored in electronic form, in particular text or sound, visual or audiovisual recording;

(36)electronic registered delivery service means a service that makes it possible to transmit data between third parties by electronic means and provides evidence relating to the handling of the transmitted data, including proof of sending and receiving the data, and that protects transmitted data against the risk of loss, theft, damage or any unauthorised alterations;

(37)qualified electronic registered delivery service means an electronic registered delivery service which meets the requirements laid down in Article 44;

(38)certificate for website authentication means an attestation that makes it possible to authenticate a website and links the website to the natural or legal person to whom the certificate is issued;

(39)qualified certificate for website authentication means a certificate for website authentication, which is issued by a qualified trust service provider and meets the requirements laid down in Annex IV;

(40)validation data means data that is used to validate an electronic signature or an electronic seal;

(41)validation means the process of verifying and confirming that an electronic signature or a seal or person identification data or an electronic attestation of attributes is valid;

(42)European Digital Identity Wallet is a product and service that allows the user to store identity data, credentials and attributes linked to her/his identity, to provide them to relying parties on request and to use them for authentication, online and offline, for a service in accordance with Article 6a; and to create qualified electronic signatures and seals;

(43)attribute is a feature, characteristic or quality of a natural or legal person or of an entity, in electronic form;

(44)electronic attestation of attributes means an attestation in electronic form that allows the authentication of attributes;

(45)qualified electronic attestation of attributes means an electronic attestation of attributes, which is issued by a qualified trust service provider and meets the requirements laid down in Annex V;

(46)authentic source is a repository or system, held under the responsibility of a public sector body or private entity, that contains attributes about a natural or legal person and is considered to be the primary source of that information or recognised as authentic in national law;

(47)electronic archiving means a service ensuring the receipt, storage, deletion and transmission of electronic data or documents in order to guarantee their integrity, the accuracy of their origin and legal features throughout the conservation period;

(48)qualified electronic archiving service means a service that meets the requirements laid down in Article 45g;

(49)EU Digital Identity Wallet Trust Mark means an indication in a simple, recognisable and clear manner that a Digital Identity Wallet has been issued in accordance with this Regulation;

(50)strong user authentication means an authentication based on the use of two or more elements categorised as user knowledge , possession and inherence that are independent, in such a way that the breach of one does not compromise the reliability of the others, and is designed in such a way to protect the confidentiality of the authentication data;

(51)user account means a mechanism that allows a user to access public or private services on the terms and conditions established by the service provider;

(52)credential means a proof of a persons abilities, experience, right or permission;

(53)electronic ledger means a tamper proof electronic record of data, providing authenticity and integrity of the data it contains, accuracy of their date and time, and of their chronological ordering;

(54)Personal data means any information as defined in point 1 of Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679.;

(55)unique identification means a process where person identification data or person identification means are matched with or linked to an existing account belonging to the same person.

1.There shall be no restriction on the provision of trust services in the territory of a Member State by a trust service provider established in another Member State for reasons that fall within the fields covered by this Regulation.

2.Products and trust services that comply with this Regulation shall be permitted to circulate freely in the internal market.

Without prejudice to the legal effect given to pseudonyms under national law, the use of pseudonyms in electronic transactions shall not be prohibited.

1.For the purpose of ensuring that all natural and legal persons in the Union have secure, trusted and seamless access to cross-border public and private services, each Member State shall issue a European Digital Identity Wallet within 12 months after the entry into force of this Regulation.

2.European Digital Identity Wallets shall be issued:

(a)by a Member State;

(b)under a mandate from a Member State;

(c)independently but recognised by a Member State.

3.European Digital Identity Wallets shall enable the user to:

(a)securely request and obtain, store, select, combine and share, in a manner that is transparent to and traceable by the user, the necessary legal person identification data and electronic attestation of attributes to authenticate online and offline in order to use online public and private services;

(b)sign by means of qualified electronic signatures.

4.Digital Identity Wallets shall, in particular:

(a)provide a common interface:

(i)to qualified and non-qualified trust service providers issuing qualified and non-qualified electronic attestations of attributes or other qualified and non-qualified certificates for the purpose of issuing such attestations and certificates to the European Digital Identity Wallet;

(ii)for relying parties to request and validate person identification data and electronic attestations of attributes;

(iii)for the presentation to relying parties of person identification data, electronic attestation of attributes or other data such as credentials, in local mode not requiring internet access for the wallet;

(iv)for the user to allow interaction with the European Digital Identity Wallet and display an EU Digital Identity Wallet Trust Mark;

(b)ensure that trust service providers of qualified attestations of attributes cannot receive any information about the use of these attributes;

(c)meet the requirements set out in Article 8 with regards to assurance level high, in particular as applied to the requirements for identity proofing and verification, and electronic identification means management and authentication;

(d)provide a mechanism to ensure that the relying party is able to authenticate the user and to receive electronic attestations of attributes;

(e)ensure that the person identification data referred to in Article 12(4), point (d) uniquely and persistently represent the natural or legal person is associated with it.

5.Member States shall provide validation mechanisms for the European Digital Identity Wallets:

(a)to ensure that its authenticity and validity can be verified;

(b)to allow relying parties to verify that the attestations of attributes are valid;

(c)to allow relying parties and qualified trust service providers to verify the authenticity and validity of attributed person identification data.

6.The European Digital Identity Wallets shall be issued under a notified electronic identification scheme of level of assurance high. The use of the European Digital Identity Wallets shall be free of charge to natural persons.

7.The user shall be in full control of the European Digital Identity Wallet. The issuer of the European Digital Identity Wallet shall not collect information about the use of the wallet which are not necessary for the provision of the wallet services, nor shall it combine person identification data and any other personal data stored or relating to the use of the European Digital Identity Wallet with personal data from any other services offered by this issuer or from third-party services which are not necessary for the provision of the wallet services, unless the user has expressly requested it. Personal data relating to the provision of European Digital Identity Wallets shall be kept physically and logically separate from any other data held. If the European Digital Identity Wallet is provided by private parties in accordance to paragraph 1 (b) and (c), the provisions of article 45f paragraph 4 shall apply mutatis mutandis.

8.Article 11 shall apply mutatis mutandis to the European Digital Identity Wallet.

9.Article 24(2), points (b), (e), (g), and (h) shall apply mutatis mutandis to Member States issuing the European Digital Identity Wallets.

10.The European Digital Identity Wallet shall be made accessible for persons with disabilities in accordance with the accessibility requirements of Annex I to Directive 2019/882.

11.Within 6 months of the entering into force of this Regulation, the Commission shall establish technical and operational specifications and reference standards for the requirements referred to in paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 by means of an implementing act on the implementation of the European Digital Identity Wallet. This implementing act shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 48(2).

1.Where relying parties intend to rely upon European Digital Identity Wallets issued in accordance with this Regulation, they shall communicate it to the Member State where the relying party is established to ensure compliance with requirements set out in Union law or national law for the provision of specific services. When communicating their intention to rely on European Digital Identity wallets, they shall also inform about the intended use of the European Digital Identity Wallet.

2.Member States shall implement a common mechanism for the authentication of relying parties

3.Relying parties shall be responsible for carrying out the procedure for authenticating person identification data and electronic attestation of attributes originating from European Digital Identity Wallets.

4.Within 6 months of the entering into force of this Regulation, the Commission shall establish technical and operational specifications for the requirements referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 by means of an implementing act on the implementation of the European Digital Identity Wallets as referred to in Article 6a(10).

1.European Digital Identity Wallets that have been certified or for which a statement of conformity has been issued under a cybersecurity scheme pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2019/881 and the references of which have been published in the Official Journal of the European Union shall be presumed to be compliant with the cybersecurity relevant requirements set out in Article 6a paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 in so far as the cybersecurity certificate or statement of conformity or parts thereof cover those requirements.

2.Compliance with the requirements set out in paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 of Article 6a related to the personal data processing operations carried out by the issuer of the European Digital Identity Wallets shall be certified pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2016/679.

3.The conformity of European Digital Identity Wallets with the requirements laid down in article 6a paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 shall be certified by accredited public or private bodies designated by Member States.

4.Within 6 months of the entering into force of this Regulation, the Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, establish a list of standards for the certification of the European Digital Identity Wallets referred to in paragraph 3.

5.Member States shall communicate to the Commission the names and addresses of the public or private bodies referred to in paragraph 3. The Commission shall make that information available to Member States.

6.The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 47 concerning the establishment of specific criteria to be met by the designated bodies referred to in paragraph 3.

1.Member States shall inform the Commission without undue delay of the European Digital Identity Wallets that have been issued pursuant to Article 6a and certified by the bodies referred to in Article 6c paragraph 3 They shall also inform the Commission, without undue delay where the certification is cancelled.

2.On the basis of the information received, the Commission shall establish, publish and maintain a list of certified European Digital Identity Wallets.

3.Within 6 months of the entering into force of this Regulation, the Commission shall define formats and procedures applicable for the purposes of paragraph 1. by means of an implementing act on the implementation of the European Digital Identity Wallets as referred to in Article 6a(10).

Pursuant to Article 9(1) Member States shall notify, within 12 months after the entry into force of this Regulation at least one electronic identification scheme including at least one identification means:

(a)the electronic identification means under the electronic identification scheme are issued:

(i)by the notifying Member State;

(ii)under a mandate from the notifying Member State; or

(iii)independently of the notifying Member State and are recognised by that Member State;

(b)the electronic identification means under the electronic identification scheme can be used to access at least one service which is provided by a public sector body and which requires electronic identification in the notifying Member State;

(c)the electronic identification scheme and the electronic identification means issued thereunder meet the requirements of at least one of the assurance levels set out in the implementing act referred to in Article 8(3);

(d)the notifying Member State ensures that the person identification data uniquely representing the person in question is attributed, in accordance with the technical specifications, standards and procedures for the relevant assurance level set out in the implementing act referred to in Article 8(3), to the natural or legal person referred to in point 1 of Article 3 at the time the electronic identification means under that scheme is issued;

(e)the party issuing the electronic identification means under that scheme ensures that the electronic identification means is attributed to the person referred to in point (d) of this Article in accordance with the technical specifications, standards and procedures for the relevant assurance level set out in the implementing act referred to in Article 8(3);

(f)the notifying Member State ensures the availability of authentication online, so that any relying party established in the territory of another Member State is able to confirm the person identification data received in electronic form.

For relying parties other than public sector bodies the notifying Member State may define terms of access to that authentication. The cross-border authentication shall be provided free of charge when it is carried out in relation to a service online provided by a public sector body.

Member States shall not impose any specific disproportionate technical requirements on relying parties intending to carry out such authentication, where such requirements prevent or significantly impede the interoperability of the notified electronic identification schemes;

(g)at least six months prior to the notification pursuant to Article 9(1), the notifying Member State provides the other Member States for the purposes of the obligation under Article 12(5) a description of that scheme in accordance with the procedural arrangements established by the implementing acts referred to in Article 12(7);

(h)the electronic identification scheme meets the requirements set out in the implementing act referred to in Article 12(8).

1.An electronic identification scheme notified pursuant to Article 9(1) shall specify assurance levels low, substantial and/or high for electronic identification means issued under that scheme.

2.The assurance levels low, substantial and high shall meet respectively the following criteria:

(a)assurance level low shall refer to an electronic identification means in the context of an electronic identification scheme, which provides a limited degree of confidence in the claimed or asserted identity of a person, and is characterised with reference to technical specifications, standards and procedures related thereto, including technical controls, the purpose of which is to decrease the risk of misuse or alteration of the identity;

(b)assurance level substantial shall refer to an electronic identification means in the context of an electronic identification scheme, which provides a substantial degree of confidence in the claimed or asserted identity of a person, and is characterised with reference to technical specifications, standards and procedures related thereto, including technical controls, the purpose of which is to decrease substantially the risk of misuse or alteration of the identity;

(c)assurance level high shall refer to an electronic identification means in the context of an electronic identification scheme, which provides a higher degree of confidence in the claimed or asserted identity of a person than electronic identification means with the assurance level substantial, and is characterised with reference to technical specifications, standards and procedures related thereto, including technical controls, the purpose of which is to prevent misuse or alteration of the identity.

3.By 18 September 2015, taking into account relevant international standards and subject to paragraph 2, the Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, set out minimum technical specifications, standards and procedures with reference to which assurance levels low, substantial and high are specified for electronic identification means for the purposes of paragraph 1.

Those minimum technical specifications, standards and procedures shall be set out by reference to the reliability and quality of the following elements:

(a)the procedure to prove and verify the identity of natural or legal persons applying for the issuance of electronic identification means;

(b)the procedure for the issuance of the requested electronic identification means;

(c)the authentication mechanism, through which the natural or legal person uses the electronic identification means to confirm its identity to a relying party;

(d)the entity issuing the electronic identification means;

(e)any other body involved in the application for the issuance of the electronic identification means; and

(f)the technical and security specifications of the issued electronic identification means.

Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 48(2).

1.The notifying Member State shall notify to the Commission the following information and, without undue delay, any subsequent changes thereto:

(a)a description of the electronic identification scheme, including its assurance levels and the issuer or issuers of electronic identification means under the scheme;

(b)the applicable supervisory regime and information on the liability regime with respect to the following:

(i)the party issuing the electronic identification means; and

(ii)the party operating the authentication procedure;

(c)the authority or authorities responsible for the electronic identification scheme;

(d)information on the entity or entities which manage the registration of the unique person identification data;

(e)a description of how the requirements set out in the implementing acts referred to in Article 12(8) are met;

(f)a description of the authentication referred to in point (f) of Article 7;

(g)arrangements for suspension or revocation of either the notified electronic identification scheme or authentication or the compromised parts concerned.

2.The Commission shall publish in the Official Journal of the European Union a list of the electronic identification schemes which were notified pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article and the basic information thereon.

3.The Commission shall publish in the Official Journal of the European Union the amendments to the list referred to in paragraph 2 within one month from the date of receipt of that notification.

4.A Member State may submit to the Commission a request to remove an electronic identification scheme notified by that Member State from the list referred to in paragraph 2. The Commission shall publish in the Official Journal of the European Union the corresponding amendments to the list within one month from the date of receipt of the Member States request.

5.The Commission may, by means of implementing acts, define the circumstances, formats and procedures of notifications under paragraph 1. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 48(2).

1.Where either the electronic identification scheme notified pursuant to Article 9(1) or the authentication referred to in point (f) of Article 7 is breached or partly compromised in a manner that affects the reliability of the cross-border authentication of that scheme, the notifying Member State shall, without delay, suspend or revoke that cross-border authentication or the compromised parts concerned, and shall inform other Member States and the Commission.

2.When the breach or compromise referred to in paragraph 1 is remedied, the notifying Member State shall re-establish the cross-border authentication and shall inform other Member States and the Commission without undue delay.

3.If the breach or compromise referred to in paragraph 1 is not remedied within three months of the suspension or revocation, the notifying Member State shall notify other Member States and the Commission of the withdrawal of the electronic identification scheme.

The Commission shall publish in the Official Journal of the European Union the corresponding amendments to the list referred to in Article 9(2) without undue delay.

1.Where European Digital Wallets issued pursuant to Article 6a and the validation mechanisms referred to in Article 6a(5) points (a), (b) and (c) are breached or partly compromised in a manner that affects their reliability or the reliability of the other European Digital Identity Wallets, the issuing Member State shall, without delay, suspend the issuance and revoke the validity of the European Digital Identity Wallet and inform the other Member States and the Commission accordingly.

2.Where the breach or compromise referred to in paragraph 1 is remedied, the issuing Member State shall re-establish the issuance and the use of the European Digital Identity Wallet and inform other Member States and the Commission without undue delay.

3.If the breach or compromise referred to in paragraph 1 is not remedied within three months of the suspension or revocation, the Member State concerned shall withdraw the European Digital Wallet concerned and inform the other Member States and the Commission on the withdrawal accordingly. Where it is justified by the severity of the breach, the European Digital Identity Wallet concerned shall be withdrawn without delay.

4.The Commission shall publish in the Official Journal of the European Union the corresponding amendments to the list referred to in Article 6d without undue delay.

5.Within 6 months of the entering into force of this Regulation, the Commission shall further specify the measures referred to in paragraphs 1 and 3 by means of an implementing act on the implementation of the European Digital Identity Wallets as referred to in Article 6a(10).

1.The notifying Member State shall be liable for damage caused intentionally or negligently to any natural or legal person due to a failure to comply with its obligations under points (d) and (f) of Article 7 in a cross-border transaction.

2.The party issuing the electronic identification means shall be liable for damage caused intentionally or negligently to any natural or legal person due to a failure to comply with the obligation referred to in point (e) of Article 7 in a cross-border transaction.

3.The party operating the authentication procedure shall be liable for damage caused intentionally or negligently to any natural or legal person due to a failure to ensure the correct operation of the authentication referred to in point (f) of Article 7 in a cross-border transaction.

4.Paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 shall be applied in accordance with national rules on liability.

5.Paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 are without prejudice to the liability under national law of parties to a transaction in which electronic identification means falling under the electronic identification scheme notified pursuant to Article 9(1) are used.

1.When notified electronic identification means and the European Digital Identity Wallets are used for authentication, Member States shall ensure unique identification.

2.Member States shall, for the purposes of this Regulation, include in the minimum set of person identification data referred to in Article 12.4.(d), a unique and persistent identifier in conformity with Union law, to identify the user upon their request in those cases where identification of the user is required by law.

3.Within 6 months of the entering into force of this Regulation, the Commission shall further specify the measures referred to in paragraph 1 and 2 by means of an implementing act on the implementation of the European Digital Identity Wallets as referred to in Article 6a(10).

1.The national electronic identification schemes notified pursuant to Article 9(1) shall be interoperable.

2.For the purposes of paragraph 1, an interoperability framework shall be established.

3.The interoperability framework shall meet the following criteria:

(a)it aims to be technology neutral and does not discriminate between any specific national technical solutions for electronic identification within a Member State;

(b)it follows European and international standards, where possible;

4.The interoperability framework shall consist of:

(a)a reference to minimum technical requirements related to the assurance levels under Article 8;

(b)a mapping of national assurance levels of notified electronic identification schemes to the assurance levels under Article 8;

(c)a reference to minimum technical requirements for interoperability;

(d)a reference to a minimum set of person identification data necessary to uniquely and persistently represent a natural or legal person;

(e)rules of procedure

(f)arrangements for dispute resolution; and

(g)common operational security standards.

5.Member States shall cooperate with regard to the following:

(a)the interoperability of the electronic identification schemes notified pursuant to Article 9(1) and the electronic identification schemes which Member States intend to notify; and

(b)the security of the electronic identification schemes.

6.The cooperation between Member States shall consist of:

(a)the exchange of information, experience and good practice as regards electronic identification schemes and in particular technical requirements related to interoperability, unique identification and assurance levels;

(b)the exchange of information, experience and good practice as regards working with assurance levels of electronic identification schemes under Article 8;

(c)peer review of electronic identification schemes falling under this Regulation; and

(d)examination of relevant developments in the electronic identification sector.

7.By 18 March 2015, the Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, establish the necessary procedural arrangements to facilitate the cooperation between the Member States referred to in paragraphs 5 and 6 with a view to fostering a high level of trust and security appropriate to the degree of risk.

8.By 18 September 2015, for the purpose of setting uniform conditions for the implementation of the requirement under paragraph 1, the Commission shall, subject to the criteria set out in paragraph 3 and taking into account the results of the cooperation between Member States, adopt implementing acts on the interoperability framework as set out in paragraph 4.

9.The implementing acts referred to in paragraphs 7 and 8 of this Article shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 48(2).

1.Conformity of notified electronic identification schemes with the requirements laid down in Article 6a, Article 8 and Article 10 may be certified by public or private bodies designated by Member States.

2.The peer-review of electronic identification schemes referred to in Article 12(6), point (c) shall not apply to electronic identification schemes or part of such schemes certified in accordance with paragraph 1. Member States may use a certificate or a Union statement of conformity issued in accordance with a relevant European cybersecurity certification scheme established pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2019/881 to demonstrate compliance of such schemes with the requirements set out in Article 8(2) regarding the assurance levels of electronic identification schemes.

3.Member States shall notify to the Commission with the names and addresses of the public or private body referred to in paragraph 1. The Commission shall make that information available to Member States.

1.Where Member States require an electronic identification using an electronic identification means and authentication under national law or by administrative practice to access an online service provided by a public sector body, they shall also accept European Digital Identity Wallets issued in compliance with this Regulation.

2.Where private relying parties providing services are required by national or Union law, to use strong user authentication for online identification, or where strong user authentication is required by contractual obligation, including in the areas of transport, energy, banking and financial services, social security, health, drinking water, postal services, digital infrastructure, education or telecommunications, private relying parties shall also accept the use of European Digital Identity Wallets issued in accordance with Article 6a.

3.Where very large online platforms as defined in Regulation [reference DSA Regulation] Article 25.1. require users to authenticate to access online services, they shall also accept the use of European Digital Identity Wallets issued in accordance with Article 6a strictly upon voluntary request of the user and in respect of the minimum attributes necessary for the specific online service for which authentication is requested, such as proof of age.

4.The Commission shall encourage and facilitate the development of self-regulatory codes of conduct at Union level (codes of conduct), in order to contribute to wide availability and usability of European Digital Identity Wallets within the scope of this Regulation. These codes of conduct shall ensure acceptance of electronic identification means including European Digital Identity Wallets within the scope of this Regulation in particular by service providers relying on third party electronic identification services for user authentication. The Commission will facilitate the development of such codes of conduct in close cooperation with all relevant stakeholders and encourage service providers to complete the development of codes of conduct within 12 months of the adoption of this Regulation and effectively implement them within 18 months of the adoption of the Regulation.

5.The Commission shall make an assessment within 18 months after deployment of the European Digital Identity Wallets whether on the basis of evidence showing availability and usability of the European Digital Identity Wallet, additional private online service providers shall be mandated to accept the use of the European Digital identity Wallet strictly upon voluntary request of the user. Criteria of assessment may include extent of user base, cross-border presence of service providers, technological development, evolution in usage patterns. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts based on this assessment, regarding a revision of the requirements for recognition of the European Digital Identity wallet under points 1 to 4 of this article.

6.For the purposes of this Article, European Digital Identity Wallets shall not be subject to the requirements referred to in articles 7 and 9.

1.Where electronic identification using an electronic identification means and authentication is required under national law or by administrative practice to access an online service provided by a public sector body in a Member State, the electronic identification means, issued in another Member State shall be recognised in the first Member State for the purposes of cross-border authentication for that online service, provided that the following conditions are met:

(a)the electronic identification means is issued under an electronic identification scheme that is included in the list referred to in Article 9;

(b)the assurance level of the electronic identification means corresponds to an assurance level equal to or higher than the assurance level required by the relevant public sector body to access that online service in the Member State concerned, and in any case not lower than an assurance level substantial;

(c)the relevant public sector body in the Member State concerned uses the assurance level substantial or high in relation to accessing that online service.

Such recognition shall take place no later than 6 months after the Commission publishes the list referred to in point (a) of the first subparagraph.

2.An electronic identification means which is issued within the scope of an electronic identification scheme included in the list referred to in Article 9 and which corresponds to the assurance level low may be recognised by public sector bodies for the purposes of cross-border authentication for the online service provided by those bodies.

1.Notwithstanding paragraph 2 of this Article, trust service providers shall be liable for damage caused intentionally or negligently to any natural or legal person due to a failure to comply with the obligations under this Regulation and with the cybersecurity risk management obligations under Article 18 of the Directive XXXX/XXXX [NIS2].

2.Where trust service providers duly inform their customers in advance of the limitations on the use of the services they provide and where those limitations are recognisable to third parties, trust service providers shall not be liable for damages arising from the use of services exceeding the indicated limitations.

3.Paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be applied in accordance with national rules on liability.

1.The Commission may adopt implementing acts, in accordance with Article 48(2), setting out the conditions under which the requirements of a third country applicable to the trust service providers established in its territory and to the trust services they provide can be considered equivalent to the requirements applicable to qualified trust service providers established in the Union and to the qualified trust services they provide.

2.Where the Commission has adopted an implementing act pursuant to paragraph 1 or concluded an international agreement on the mutual recognition of trust services in accordance with Article 218 of the Treaty, trust services provided by providers established in the third country concerned shall be considered equivalent to qualified trust services provided by qualified trust service providers established in the Union.

The provision of Trust services and end-user products used in the provision of those services shall be made accessible for persons with disabilities in accordance with the accessibility requirements of Annex I of Directive 2019/882 on the accessibility requirements for products and services.

Member States shall lay down the rules on penalties applicable to infringements of this Regulation. The penalties provided for shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive.

1.Member States shall designate a supervisory body established in their territory or, upon mutual agreement with another Member State, a supervisory body established in that other Member State. That body shall be responsible for supervisory tasks in the designating Member State.

Supervisory bodies shall be given the necessary powers and adequate resources for the exercise of their tasks.

2.Member States shall notify to the Commission the names and the addresses of their respective designated supervisory bodies.

3.The role of the supervisory body shall be the following:

(a)to supervise qualified trust service providers established in the territory of the designating Member State to ensure, through ex ante and ex post supervisory activities, that those qualified trust service providers and the qualified trust services that they provide meet the requirements laid down in this Regulation;

(b)to take action if necessary, in relation to non-qualified trust service providers established in the territory of the designating Member State, through ex post supervisory activities, when informed that those non-qualified trust service providers or the trust services they provide allegedly do not meet the requirements laid down in this Regulation.

4.For the purposes of paragraph 3 and subject to the limitations provided therein, the tasks of the supervisory body shall include in particular:

(a)to cooperate with other supervisory bodies and provide them with assistance in accordance with Article 18;

(b)to analyse the conformity assessment reports referred to in Articles 20(1) and 21(1);

(c)to inform the relevant national competent authorities of the Member States concerned, designated pursuant to Directive (EU) XXXX/XXXX [NIS2], of any significant breaches of security or loss of integrity they become aware of in the performance of their tasks. where the significant breach of security or loss of integrity concerns other Member States, the supervisory body shall inform the single point of contact of the Member State concerned designated pursuant to Directive (EU) XXXX/XXXX (NIS2);

(d)to report to the Commission about its main activities in accordance with paragraph 6 of this Article;

(e)to carry out audits or request a conformity assessment body to perform a conformity assessment of the qualified trust service providers in accordance with Article 20(2);

(f)to cooperate with supervisory authorities established under Regulation (EU) 2016/679, in particular, by informing them without undue delay, about the results of audits of qualified trust service providers, where personal data protection rules have been breached and about security breaches which constitute personal data breaches;

(g)to grant qualified status to trust service providers and to the services they provide and to withdraw this status in accordance with Articles 20 and 21;

(h)to inform the body responsible for the national trusted list referred to in Article 22(3) about its decisions to grant or to withdraw qualified status, unless that body is also the supervisory body;

(i)to verify the existence and correct application of provisions on termination plans in cases where the qualified trust service provider ceases its activities, including how information is kept accessible in accordance with point (h) of Article 24(2);

(j)to require that trust service providers remedy any failure to fulfil the requirements laid down in this Regulation.

5.Member States may require the supervisory body to establish, maintain and update a trust infrastructure in accordance with the conditions under national law.

6.By 31 March each year, each supervisory body shall submit to the Commission a report on its main activities during the previous calendar year.

7.The Commission shall make the annual report referred to in paragraph 6 available to Member States.

8.Within 12 months of the entering into force of this Regulation, the Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, further specify the tasks of the Supervisory Authorities referred to in paragraph 4 and define the formats and procedures for the report referred to in paragraph 6. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 48(2).

1.Supervisory bodies shall cooperate with a view to exchanging good practice and information regarding the provision of trust services.

2.A supervisory body to which a request for assistance is addressed may refuse that request on any of the following grounds:

(a)the supervisory body is not competent to provide the requested assistance;

(b)the requested assistance is not proportionate to supervisory activities of the supervisory body carried out in accordance with Article 17;

(c)providing the requested assistance would be incompatible with this Regulation.

3.Where appropriate, Member States may authorise their respective supervisory bodies to carry out joint investigations in which staff from other Member States supervisory bodies is involved. The arrangements and procedures for such joint actions shall be agreed upon and established by the Member States concerned in accordance with their national law.

4.Supervisory bodies and national competent authorities under Directive (EU) XXXX/XXXX of the European Parliament and of the Council [NIS2] shall cooperate and assist each other to ensure that trust service providers comply with the requirements laid down in this Regulation and in Directive (EU) XXXX/XXXX [NIS2]. The supervisory body shall request the national competent authority under Directive XXXX/XXXX [NIS2] to carry out supervisory actions to verify compliance of the trust service providers with the requirements under Directive XXXX/XXXX (NIS2), to require the trust service providers to remedy any failure to comply with those requirements, to provide timely the results of any supervisory activities linked to trust service providers and to inform the supervisory bodies about relevant incidents notified in accordance with Directive XXXX/XXXX [NIS2].

5.Within 12 months of the entering into force of this Regulation, the Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, establish the necessary procedural arrangements to facilitate the cooperation between the Supervisory Authorities referred to in paragraph 1.

1.Qualified trust service providers shall be audited at their own expense at least every 24 months by a conformity assessment body. the audit shall confirm that the qualified trust service providers and the qualified trust services provided by them fulfil the requirements laid down in this Regulation and in Article 18 of Directive (EU) XXXX/XXXX [NIS2]. qualified trust service providers shall submit the resulting conformity assessment report to the supervisory body within three working days of receipt.

2.Without prejudice to paragraph 1, the supervisory body may at any time audit or request a conformity assessment body to perform a conformity assessment of the qualified trust service providers, at the expense of those trust service providers, to confirm that they and the qualified trust services provided by them fulfil the requirements laid down in this Regulation. Where personal data protection rules appear to have been breached, the supervisory body shall inform the supervisory authorities under Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the results of its audits.

3.Where the qualified trust service provider fails to fulfil any of the requirements set out by this Regulation, the supervisory body shall require it to provide a remedy within a set time limit, if applicable.

where that provider does not provide a remedy and, where applicable within the time limit set by the supervisory body, the supervisory body, taking into account in particular, the extent, duration and consequences of that failure, may withdraw the qualified status of that provider or of the service concerned which it provides and, request it, where applicable within a set time limit, to comply with the requirements of Directive XXXX/XXXX[NIS2]. The supervisory body shall inform the body referred to in Article 22(3) for the purposes of updating the trusted lists referred to in Article 22(1).

The supervisory body shall inform the qualified trust service provider of the withdrawal of its qualified status or of the qualified status of the service concerned.

4.Within 12 months of the entering into force of this regulation, the Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, establish reference number for the following standards:

(a)the accreditation of the conformity assessment bodies and for the conformity assessment report referred to in paragraph 1;

(b)the auditing requirements for the conformity assessment bodies to carry out their conformity assessment of the qualified trust service providers as referred to in paragraph 1, carried out by the conformity assessment bodies;

(c)the conformity assessment schemes for carrying out the conformity assessment of the qualified trust service providers by the conformity assessment bodies and for the provision of the conformity assessment report referred to in paragraph 1.

Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 48(2).

1.Where trust service providers, without qualified status, intend to start providing qualified trust services, they shall submit to the supervisory body a notification of their intention together with a conformity assessment report issued by a conformity assessment body.

2.The supervisory body shall verify whether the trust service provider and the trust services provided by it comply with the requirements laid down in this Regulation, and in particular, with the requirements for qualified trust service providers and for the qualified trust services they provide.

In order to verify the compliance of the trust service provider with the requirements laid down in Article 18 of Dir XXXX [NIS2], the supervisory body shall request the competent authorities referred to in Dir XXXX [NIS2] to carry out supervisory actions in that regard and to provide information about the outcome within three days from their completion.

Where the supervisory body concludes that the trust service provider and the trust services provided by it comply with the requirements referred to in the first subparagraph, the supervisory body shall grant qualified status to the trust service provider and the trust services it provides and inform the body referred to in Article 22(3) for the purposes of updating the trusted lists referred to in Article 22(1), not later than three months after notification in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article.

Where the verification is not concluded within three months of notification, the supervisory body shall inform the trust service provider specifying the reasons for the delay and the period within which the verification is to be concluded.

3.Qualified trust service providers may begin to provide the qualified trust service after the qualified status has been indicated in the trusted lists referred to in Article 22(1).

4.Within 12 months of the entering into force of this Regulation, the Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, define the formats and procedures of the notification and verification for the purposes of paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 48(2).

1.Each Member State shall establish, maintain and publish trusted lists, including information related to the qualified trust service providers for which it is responsible, together with information related to the qualified trust services provided by them.

2.Member States shall establish, maintain and publish, in a secured manner, the electronically signed or sealed trusted lists referred to in paragraph 1 in a form suitable for automated processing.

3.Member States shall notify to the Commission, without undue delay, information on the body responsible for establishing, maintaining and publishing national trusted lists, and details of where such lists are published, the certificates used to sign or seal the trusted lists and any changes thereto.

4.The Commission shall make available to the public, through a secure channel, the information referred to in paragraph 3 in electronically signed or sealed form suitable for automated processing.

5.By 18 September 2015 the Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, specify the information referred to in paragraph 1 and define the technical specifications and formats for trusted lists applicable for the purposes of paragraphs 1 to 4. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 48(2).

1.After the qualified status referred to in the second subparagraph of Article 21(2) has been indicated in the trusted list referred to in Article 22(1), qualified trust service providers may use the EU trust mark to indicate in a simple, recognisable and clear manner the qualified trust services they provide.

2.When using the EU trust mark for the qualified trust services referred to in paragraph 1, qualified trust service providers shall ensure that a link to the relevant trusted list is made available on their website.

2a.Paragraph 1. and 2. shall also apply to trust service providers established in third countries and to the services they provide, provided that they have been recognised in the Union in accordance with Article 14.

3.By 1 July 2015 the Commission shall, by means of implementing acts, provide for specifications with regard to the form, and in particular the presentation, composition, size and design of the EU trust mark for qualified trust services. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 48(2).

1.When issuing a qualified certificate or a qualified electronic attestation of attributes for a trust service, a qualified trust service provider shall verify the identity and, if applicable, any specific attributes of the natural or legal person to whom the qualified certificate or the qualified electronic attestation of attribute is issued.

The information referred to in the first subparagraph shall be verified by the qualified trust service provider, either directly or by relying on a third party, in any of the following ways: