Services · 15 ways across one gap

All services

Work · proof, not promises

All case studies

Insights · street talk, written down

Magazine

Company · AI in production since 2011

About Voidgap

AI literacy,
as a measure.

What Art. 4 asks of every company that builds or uses AI, what the Omnibus changed, and a planner that turns your roles and tools into measures.

As of
September 2026
Covers
Art. 4 AI Act, as amended by Regulation (EU) 2026/1744
Reading time
about 10 minutes · 8 chapters
Sources
9 linked
Legal review
to decide

01

In one minute

Every provider and every deployer of an AI system has to take measures to support the AI literacy of the people who work with it on their behalf. That has applied since 2 February 2025, in every risk class, including a chat assistant in the browser. Since the Omnibus it is a duty of effort, not of result. National authorities supervise it since 2 August 2026. No certificate is required. What you will be asked for is a record of what you did.

Applies since
2 February 2025To providers and deployers, in every risk class.1
Reworded
27 July 2026“Take measures to support”, with no level to guarantee.2
Supervised since
2 August 2026By national market surveillance authorities, not by the AI Office.3
In Germany
BundesnetzagenturMarket surveillance authority under the KI-MIG, in force since 29 July 2026.4
Certificate
Not requiredAn internal record of trainings and other measures is enough.35
Own fine in the Act
NoneArt. 99 names no amount for Art. 4. Member States set penalties; the Commission says a sanction is more likely where an incident traces back to missing training.63

02

The wording, then and now

· original

“Providers and deployers of AI systems shall take measures to ensure, to their best extent, a sufficient level of AI literacy of their staff and other persons dealing with the operation and use of AI systems on their behalf, taking into account their technical knowledge, experience, education and training and the context the AI systems are to be used in, and considering the persons or groups of persons on whom the AI systems are to be used.”1

· since the Omnibus, para. 1, excerpt

“Providers and deployers of AI systems shall take measures to support the development of AI literacy of their staff and other persons dealing with the operation and use of AI systems on their behalf […]. This obligation does not require providers or deployers to guarantee any specific level of AI literacy of any individual.”275

Three things changed. The duty moved from a result (a sufficient level) to an effort (measures that support). The Commission and the Member States now have to support companies, in particular SMEs, and the Commission publishes practical examples (new para. 2). The AI Board adopts recommendations based on European competence frameworks (new para. 3). What stayed: the same people, the same factors to take into account, the same date.78

In practice: you do not fail Art. 4 because one person still pastes customer data into a chatbot. You fail it by doing nothing, or by doing something that ignores who uses which tool for what.

03

On a timeline, to scale

Art. 4 applied for almost eighteen months in its first wording. The change, the German enforcement law and the start of supervision then landed within six days. The first chart shows the whole period, the second zooms into that week.

Art. 4, August 2024 to December 2026

  1. AI Act in forceReg. (EU) 2024/16891 August 2024
  2. Art. 4 appliesoriginal wording2 Feb 2025 – 26 Jul 2026
  3. New wordingReg. (EU) 2026/1744since 27 Jul 2026
  4. National supervisionmarket surveillance authoritiessince 2 Aug 2026

Zoom: 20 July to 6 August 2026, one day per tick

  1. Published in the Official JournalOJ L, 2026/174424 July 2026
  2. Omnibus in force, Art. 4 rewordedthird day after publication27 July 2026
  3. KI-MIG in force (Germany)Bundesnetzagentur29 July 2026
  4. Supervision startsArt. 50 applies the same day2 August 2026
Both axes linear. Three things happened within six days: the new wording, the German enforcement law and the start of national supervision.243

04

Who counts

The article names “staff and other persons dealing with the operation and use of AI systems on their behalf”. The Commission reads it broadly. The test is not the employment contract but whether someone works with your AI for you.35

Counts

  • Employees who use AI tools at work, including a chat assistant in the browser
  • Managers who decide on AI or sign off its output
  • Contractors, freelancers and service providers who operate or use AI for you
  • Temporary staff, trainees and working students
  • Clients who operate your system on your behalf, depending on the risk

Does not count

  • People who are only affected by the AI, such as applicants it scores. Other articles protect them.
  • The vendor’s own staff. That is the vendor’s duty as provider.
  • Private use at home. That is outside the Act.

05

What measures look like

The Commission names a minimum: a general understanding of AI, your role as provider or deployer, the risks of the systems you use, and measures tailored to people’s knowledge and context, including legal and ethical aspects. The Bundesnetzagentur describes three steps: find the needs, design the measures, keep records and refresh them.35

Measures are more than training. A usage policy people can find, a list of approved tools, a named contact for questions, checklists inside the tools and a way to report problems all count.

GroupWhat they needFormat that works
Everyone who uses AIWhat the tools do and where they fail; which data may go in; your usage policy; how to report a problemShort session or e-learning, plus a policy people can find
ManagementProvider or deployer, risk classes, dates, who decides on new toolsBriefing with your own inventory on the table
Customer-facing teamsChecking output before it reaches customers; when to disclose AI; handing over to a personHands-on with real tickets and emails
HRWhy AI in recruiting, promotion and worker monitoring is high-risk; the works council; Art. 22 GDPRWorkshop together with legal and the works council
Developers and ITSecrets, licences and review for coding assistants; prompt injection; evals and loggingTechnical training on your own stack
Legal, compliance, data protectionClassification, Art. 6(3) documentation, vendor terms, impact assessmentsDeep dive with worked cases
People overseeing a high-risk systemThe specific system: instructions for use, limits, when to override or stop itSystem-specific training with a check of understanding

The formats are our suggestions. The Act prescribes none.

06

Documentation

No certificate, no external audit and no AI officer are required. The Commission expects an internal record of trainings and other measures; the Bundesnetzagentur recommends keeping a good one. Keep it short and current:35

  1. 01
    Inventory

    Which groups use which AI tools, for what.

  2. 02
    Measures

    Per group: what, in which format, with which material and version.

  3. 03
    Participation

    Who took part, and when. An export from your learning tool is enough.

  4. 04
    Policy

    Your AI usage policy, with a date and an owner.

  5. 05
    Review

    A review date, and the triggers for an earlier one: a new tool, a new use, an incident.

07

The planner

Pick who works with AI, which tools they use and how bad a wrong output would be. The planner suggests measures per group and the evidence to keep. Nothing leaves your browser unless you add it to your void.

1Who works with AI
2Which tools
3How bad is a wrong output

Your plan

2 groups · 7 measures
  1. Everyone who uses AI

    • Basics: what your AI tools do and where they fail (invented facts, bias, outdated knowledge)
    • Your AI usage policy: approved tools, data that must not go in, whom to ask
    • How to report a problem or an incident
    • Chat assistants: asking with sources, checking claims, no confidential data in tools that are not approved
    • Office copilots: what the copilot can see through your permissions, and reading drafts before they go out

    FormatA short session or e-learning, once, plus the policy

  2. Management

    • Everything under “Everyone who uses AI”, plus:
    • Your role per system (provider or deployer), the risk classes and the dates; who decides on new AI tools

    FormatA short session or e-learning, once, plus the policy

Keep as evidence

  • Inventory: which group uses which tool, for what
  • Material and version per measure
  • Participants and dates
  • The usage policy, with date and owner
  • Next review date, and what triggers an earlier one
Template

Our suggestions, not a legal checklist. The Act prescribes no format.

08

Questions

We only use ChatGPT or Copilot. Does Art. 4 apply?

Yes. Using an AI system at work makes you a deployer. The Commission is explicit that staff using such tools should at least know the specific risks, such as hallucination.3

Is a one-off e-learning enough?

For low-risk use it can be part of it. The measure has to fit the tools, the people and the context; one generic video for everyone rarely does. Refresh when tools or uses change.

Do we have to test people?

No. The Act requires no test and no level. A short check of understanding is still useful where people oversee systems that affect others.

Does it cover freelancers?

Yes, if they operate or use AI systems on your behalf. Put the briefing into onboarding and the contract.

Who checks this in Germany?

The Bundesnetzagentur, as market surveillance authority under the KI-MIG. It also runs an AI service desk for questions.4

Measures, not slides

Train the
tools you use.

Role-based trainings on the tools your people actually use, with the record your auditor will ask for.