{"id":32584,"date":"2026-07-19T08:00:00","date_gmt":"2026-07-19T06:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pegamento.nl\/niet-gecategoriseerd\/what-transparency-requirements-apply-to-ai-that-responds-to-customer-emails\/"},"modified":"2026-07-19T10:00:34","modified_gmt":"2026-07-19T08:00:34","slug":"what-transparency-requirements-apply-to-ai-that-responds-to-customer-emails","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/pegamento.nl\/en\/contact-center\/what-transparency-requirements-apply-to-ai-that-responds-to-customer-emails\/","title":{"rendered":"What transparency requirements apply to AI that responds to customer emails?"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>If you use an <a href=\"https:\/\/pegamento.nl\/en\/ai-powered-intelligence\/\">AI email assistant<\/a> to respond to customer emails, specific transparency requirements apply. Under the EU AI Act and the GDPR, in most cases you must inform customers that they are communicating with an AI system, and you must be able to explain how that system makes decisions. In this article, we answer the most frequently asked questions about transparency in AI-powered email processing.  <\/p>\n<h2>What laws impose transparency requirements on AI email systems?<\/h2>\n<p>AI systems that respond to customer emails are primarily governed by two European laws: the EU AI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024\/1689) and the GDPR. The AI Act imposes transparency obligations on both providers and users of AI systems, depending on the risk level. The GDPR applies as soon as the system processes personal data, which is almost always the case with customer emails.  <\/p>\n<p>The EU AI Act took effect on August 1, 2024, but the requirements will be phased in. As of February 2, 2025, the prohibitions on manipulative AI practices and the requirement for AI literacy within your organization will already apply. Most of the requirements for high-risk systems will become enforceable as of August 2, 2026. This means that, as an organization, you must take action now to ensure you are compliant in a timely manner.   <\/p>\n<p>In addition to the AI Act and the GDPR, sector-specific regulations may apply, such as the Telecommunications Act, Wft regulations in the financial sector, or Wmo guidelines in the healthcare sector. These laws may impose additional disclosure requirements on top of the European frameworks. <\/p>\n<h2>Should customers know that an AI is responding to their emails?<\/h2>\n<p>Yes, in most cases, customers need to know that an AI is responding to their email. The EU AI Act requires providers and users of low- and high-risk AI systems to inform people when they are interacting with an AI. This certainly applies when the AI\u2019s response is phrased in a way that mimics human communication.  <\/p>\n<p>This obligation does not apply only when the AI responds completely on its own. Even if an AI drafts a message that an employee sends with minimal changes, there may be a situation in which transparency is appropriate or even required. The line is drawn at systems that are deliberately designed to appear human without the recipient\u2019s knowledge.  <\/p>\n<p>Exceptions may apply when the AI nature of the communication is obvious to the recipient, or when the messages are purely administrative, such as a confirmation of receipt. In cases of doubt, it is wise to make transparency the default. This protects you legally and strengthens customer trust.  <\/p>\n<h2>What should a transparency statement for AI-based email processing include?<\/h2>\n<p>A transparency statement for AI-based email processing must clearly inform customers about the use of AI, the nature of the processing, and their rights. The statement does not need to be technical, but it must be understandable and comprehensive enough to meet the obligation to provide information. <\/p>\n<p>Based on the AI Act and the GDPR, a good transparency statement must include at least the following elements:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Identification of the AI system:<\/strong> a clear description of what the system does and what it is used for<\/li>\n<li><strong>Purpose of the processing:<\/strong> Why AI is used to respond to customer emails<\/li>\n<li><strong>Human oversight:<\/strong> whether and how an employee reviews the AI responses before they are sent<\/li>\n<li><strong>Processing of Personal Data:<\/strong> What Data Is Processed, on What Legal Basis, and How Long It Is Retained<\/li>\n<li><strong>Rights of the data subject:<\/strong> the right to access, correct, and delete data, and, in the case of high-risk AI, the right to an explanation of the factors determining a decision (Article 86 of the AI Act)<\/li>\n<li><strong>Contact Information:<\/strong> How Customers Can Contact Us with Questions or Concerns<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Make sure the transparency statement is easy to find, for example, in your privacy policy and in the footer of automated emails. A brief note in the email itself, such as \u201cThis message was generated using AI and reviewed by a staff member,\u201d is a simple and effective addition. <\/p>\n<h2>What are the risks of non-compliance with AI transparency rules?<\/h2>\n<p>Failure to comply with AI transparency rules can result in significant fines, reputational damage, and a loss of customer trust. The AI Act features a tiered fine structure: non-compliance with most obligations can result in fines of up to 15 million euros or 3% of global annual revenue, whichever is higher. <\/p>\n<p>In addition to financial risks, there are also operational and reputational risks. Customers who discover that they were communicating with AI without realizing it may perceive this as misleading. This can lead to complaints, negative publicity, and customer churn. Especially in sectors where trust is paramount\u2014such as healthcare, finance, and government\u2014transparency is not an option but a prerequisite.   <\/p>\n<p>Supervision and enforcement are the responsibility of national market surveillance authorities. In January 2026, Finland became the first Member State to officially grant enforcement powers to its authority. Other countries are following suit. It is therefore realistic to expect that enforcement will become increasingly active in 2026 and beyond.   <\/p>\n<h2>How does the transparency requirement vary by sector?<\/h2>\n<p>The basic obligations under the AI Act and the GDPR apply to all sectors, but the level of compliance and additional requirements vary significantly. In regulated sectors, transparency requirements are stricter and are sometimes supplemented by sector-specific legislation. <\/p>\n<h3>Financial Services and Insurance<\/h3>\n<p>In the financial sector, in addition to the AI Act, the Wft and European regulations such as MiFID II also apply. When an AI-based email system is involved in decisions regarding creditworthiness, insurance, or investments, it quickly falls under the high-risk category of the AI Act (Annex III). In such cases, customers have an explicit right to an explanation of the factors that determined the decision.  <\/p>\n<h3>Health Care and Government<\/h3>\n<p>In the healthcare sector and within government agencies, the sensitivity of personal data is particularly high. A DPIA (Data Protection Impact Assessment) is almost always required when implementing AI-powered email systems. In addition, patients and citizens have higher expectations regarding the transparency and traceability of automated communications.  <\/p>\n<h2>How do you implement AI transparency in an existing email system?<\/h2>\n<p>You can implement AI transparency step by step by first identifying which AI systems you\u2019re already using, then updating your documentation and customer communications, and finally setting up processes for human oversight and logging. This doesn\u2019t have to be a major undertaking if you approach it in a structured way. <\/p>\n<p>A practical approach consists of the following steps:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li><strong>Take inventory of your AI systems:<\/strong> document which systems you use, what their role is (provider or deployer), and what risk level applies<\/li>\n<li><strong>Update your privacy policy:<\/strong> Add a clear description of how AI is used in customer communications<\/li>\n<li><strong>Add an AI notice to emails:<\/strong> In many cases, a short sentence in the footer is sufficient<\/li>\n<li><strong>Establish human oversight:<\/strong> assign qualified staff to monitor AI responses and ensure they are properly trained<\/li>\n<li><strong>Retain logs:<\/strong> As a deployer, you are required to retain logs for at least six months<\/li>\n<li><strong>Train your employees:<\/strong> the AI literacy requirement (Article 4 of the AI Act) has been in effect since February 2025<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>Also verify that your AI email system provider is fulfilling its obligations as a service provider. This includes technical documentation, a user manual, and a design that allows for human oversight. As the deployer, you share responsibility for ensuring the system is used correctly in accordance with those instructions.  <\/p>\n<h2>How Pegamento Helps Ensure AI Transparency in Customer Communications<\/h2>\n<p>We understand that navigating AI regulations can be complex, especially when you\u2019re also looking to improve the quality of your customer interactions. Our <a href=\"https:\/\/pegamento.nl\/en\/agentic-ai-for-customer-service\/\">Agentic AI for customer service<\/a> was developed with transparency and human oversight as its guiding principles. Agentic AI is the evolution of traditional RPA: whereas executive bots follow instructions, self-thinking AI assistants take the initiative independently and act proactively, while human oversight remains guaranteed.  <\/p>\n<p>Here\u2019s what we specifically offer to organizations that want to implement transparent AI-powered email processing:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Customized solutions using standard building blocks, without costly customization<\/li>\n<li>Built-in logging and audit trails that comply with the retention requirement of at least six months<\/li>\n<li>Assistance with drafting transparency statements and privacy documentation<\/li>\n<li>Human oversight as a standard part of the process, not an afterthought<\/li>\n<li>Everything under one roof: from implementation to management and support, without complex supplier structures<\/li>\n<li>ISO 27001-certified information security as a foundation, supplemented by ISO 9001 and ISO 26000<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Would you like to know how to set up AI-powered email processing in a compliant and effective way within your organization? <a href=\"https:\/\/pegamento.nl\/en\/contact-2\/\">Contact us<\/a>, and we\u2019d be happy to help you figure it out.<\/p>\n<div class=\"wp-block-seoaic-faq-block\">\n    <h2 class=\"seoaic-faq-section-title\">Frequently Asked Questions<\/h2>\n            <div class=\"seoaic-faq-item\">\n            <h3 class=\"seoaic-question\">\n                Geldt de transparantieplicht ook als de AI alleen intern wordt gebruikt voor het sorteren of prioriteren van klantemails?            <\/h3>\n            <p class=\"seoaic-answer\">\n                Als de AI uitsluitend intern e-mails sorteert of prioriteert zonder zelfstandig te antwoorden, is de directe informatieplicht richting klanten minder strikt. Toch kan de AVG van toepassing zijn zodra het systeem persoonsgegevens verwerkt, wat bij het analyseren van klantemails vrijwel altijd het geval is. Je bent dan verplicht om in je privacyverklaring te vermelden dat je AI inzet voor interne mailverwerking. Raadpleeg bij twijfel een juridisch adviseur, zeker als het systeem invloed heeft op de afhandeltijd of prioriteit van klantverzoeken.            <\/p>\n        <\/div>\n                <div class=\"seoaic-faq-item\">\n            <h3 class=\"seoaic-question\">\n                Wat is het verschil tussen een &#039;aanbieder&#039; en een &#039;deployer&#039; onder de AI Act, en welke verplichtingen gelden voor mij?            <\/h3>\n            <p class=\"seoaic-answer\">\n                Een aanbieder (provider) is de partij die het AI-systeem ontwikkelt en op de markt brengt, terwijl een deployer de organisatie is die het systeem in de praktijk inzet voor een specifiek doel, zoals het beantwoorden van klantemails. Als jouw organisatie een kant-en-klaar AI-mailsysteem van een leverancier gebruikt, ben jij de deployer. Als deployer ben je verantwoordelijk voor correct gebruik conform de gebruiksaanwijzing van de aanbieder, het inrichten van menselijk toezicht, het bewaren van logs en het informeren van klanten. Controleer dus altijd of jouw AI-leverancier zijn verplichtingen als aanbieder nakomt, want als deployer ben je mede aansprakelijk bij incorrect gebruik.            <\/p>\n        <\/div>\n                <div class=\"seoaic-faq-item\">\n            <h3 class=\"seoaic-question\">\n                Hoe specifiek moet de AI-melding in een e-mail zijn? Volstaat een korte zin in de voettekst?            <\/h3>\n            <p class=\"seoaic-answer\">\n                In veel gevallen volstaat een korte, duidelijke zin in de voettekst, zoals: &#8216;Dit bericht is opgesteld met behulp van AI en gecontroleerd door een medewerker.&#8217; De melding moet begrijpelijk zijn voor de gemiddelde ontvanger en mag niet verstopt zitten in kleine lettertjes. Voor hoog-risico toepassingen, zoals AI-systemen die betrokken zijn bij krediet- of zorgbeslissingen, zijn uitgebreidere verklaringen en het actief wijzen op het recht op uitleg verplicht. Combineer de voettekstmelding altijd met een uitgebreidere beschrijving in je privacyverklaring voor volledige compliance.            <\/p>\n        <\/div>\n                <div class=\"seoaic-faq-item\">\n            <h3 class=\"seoaic-question\">\n                Wat moet ik doen als een klant vraagt om uitleg over hoe de AI tot een bepaald antwoord of beslissing is gekomen?            <\/h3>\n            <p class=\"seoaic-answer\">\n                Onder Artikel 86 van de AI Act hebben betrokkenen bij hoog-risico AI-systemen het recht op een begrijpelijke uitleg over de voornaamste factoren die tot een beslissing hebben geleid. Je moet als deployer in staat zijn om dit verzoek te beantwoorden, wat betekent dat je toegang moet hebben tot logs en dat je medewerkers voldoende AI-geletterd zijn om de uitleg te geven. Zorg daarom dat je AI-leverancier transparantie over beslissingslogica standaard aanbiedt en dat dit is vastgelegd in je verwerkersovereenkomst. Stel intern een procedure op voor het afhandelen van dergelijke verzoeken, vergelijkbaar met hoe je AVG-inzageverzoeken behandelt.            <\/p>\n        <\/div>\n                <div class=\"seoaic-faq-item\">\n            <h3 class=\"seoaic-question\">\n                Hoe lang moet ik logs van AI-mailverwerking bewaren, en wat moet er precies in die logs staan?            <\/h3>\n            <p class=\"seoaic-answer\">\n                De AI Act verplicht deployers om logs van hoog-risico AI-systemen minimaal zes maanden te bewaren, tenzij andere wetgeving een langere bewaartermijn voorschrijft. De logs moeten voldoende informatie bevatten om achteraf te kunnen reconstrueren welke AI-beslissingen zijn genomen, wanneer menselijk toezicht heeft plaatsgevonden en welke gegevens zijn verwerkt. Zorg dat je verwerkersovereenkomst met je AI-leverancier expliciet regelt wie verantwoordelijk is voor het aanmaken en bewaren van deze logs. Combineer dit met je AVG-verplichtingen rondom bewaartermijnen van persoonsgegevens om tegenstrijdige termijnen te voorkomen.            <\/p>\n        <\/div>\n                <div class=\"seoaic-faq-item\">\n            <h3 class=\"seoaic-question\">\n                Moet ik een DPIA uitvoeren voordat ik een AI-mailsysteem in gebruik neem?            <\/h3>\n            <p class=\"seoaic-answer\">\n                Een DPIA (gegevensbeschermingseffectbeoordeling) is verplicht onder de AVG wanneer een verwerking waarschijnlijk een hoog risico inhoudt voor de rechten en vrijheden van betrokkenen. AI-systemen die op grote schaal persoonsgegevens verwerken of die geautomatiseerde beslissingen nemen met aanzienlijke gevolgen voor klanten, vallen hier vrijwel altijd onder. In de zorg en bij overheidsinstanties is een DPIA bij AI-mailsystemen praktisch altijd verplicht. Voer de DPIA uit v\u00f3\u00f3r de livegang van het systeem, betrek je Functionaris Gegevensbescherming (FG) en leg de uitkomsten en genomen maatregelen schriftelijk vast.            <\/p>\n        <\/div>\n                <div class=\"seoaic-faq-item\">\n            <h3 class=\"seoaic-question\">\n                Wat zijn de meest voorkomende fouten die organisaties maken bij het implementeren van AI-transparantie in klantcommunicatie?            <\/h3>\n            <p class=\"seoaic-answer\">\n                De meest voorkomende fouten zijn: de transparantieverklaring alleen opnemen in de privacyverklaring zonder klanten daar actief op te wijzen, menselijk toezicht op papier regelen maar in de praktijk niet uitvoeren, en vergeten om medewerkers te trainen op AI-geletterdheid terwijl dit al verplicht is sinds februari 2025. Een andere veelgemaakte fout is het niet controleren of de AI-leverancier zelf aan zijn verplichtingen als aanbieder voldoet, zoals het opstellen van technische documentatie. Begin met een eerlijke inventarisatie van je huidige situatie en pak de meest zichtbare risico&#8217;s, zoals ontbrekende meldingen in e-mails en onvoldoende logging, als eerste aan.            <\/p>\n        <\/div>\n        <\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The EU AI Act Requires Transparency in AI-Powered Email Systems \u2014 Find Out What Customers Need to Know and How to Stay Compliant.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":32585,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[500],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-32584","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-contact-center"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/pegamento.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/32584","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/pegamento.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/pegamento.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pegamento.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pegamento.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=32584"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/pegamento.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/32584\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":32587,"href":"https:\/\/pegamento.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/32584\/revisions\/32587"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pegamento.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/32585"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/pegamento.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=32584"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pegamento.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=32584"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pegamento.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=32584"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}