Insufficient color contrast on text
Max: no explicit monetary fine
We verify this via Violation ID: nl-accessibility-color-contrast
Forensic Hub
Technical annex
EAA web accessibility checklist (NL enforcement context)
Technical audit guide for EAA/Wbni readiness: WCAG 2.1 checkpoints, high-impact failures, and remediation logic.
Document ref
REF-EAA-2026
Legal basis
Directive (EU) 2019/882 + Dutch implementation pathways
Audit status
VERIFIED BY COMPLIANCE-NU
EAA compliance checklistWbNI auditWCAG 2.1 Dutch law
Scare trigger
Major e-commerce accessibility failures can escalate toward EUR 20,000,000 or 4% turnover exposure profiles.
Injected violations
Under this legal framework, these technical failure patterns are repeatedly observed.
Form inputs missing accessible names/labels
Max: no explicit monetary fine
We verify this via Violation ID: nl-accessibility-missing-labels
Keyboard navigation trap / unreachable controls
Max: no explicit monetary fine
We verify this via Violation ID: nl-accessibility-keyboard-trap
Images missing alt text
Max: no explicit monetary fine
We verify this via Violation ID: nl-accessibility-missing-alt
Calculated risk snippet
EAA / Accessibility exposure model
Maximum = max(fixed ceiling, turnover percentage).
Indicative max exposure
€900k
What auditors check first in 2026
Enforcement has moved from formal declarations to journey-level usability proof. Initial sweeps focus on contrast, keyboard reachability, labels, error feedback, and media alternatives.
Any EAA assessment without critical path testing (login, checkout, support) usually fails evidence quality thresholds.
Forensic implementation workflow
Record which WCAG criteria were tested per release, by whom, and with which regression output. Keep screenshots and issue IDs in the evidence trail.
Map each technical defect to a legal basis so remediation is immediately reviewable by legal and leadership teams.
Master index