Artificial Intelligence in Austria: Between Love and Hate
Plans are afoot to bring an international AI centre to Vienna, whilst at the same time bans on smart glasses are being considered. However, the authorities responsible for implementing the European AI Act domestically have still not been fully designated.
Austria wishes to have a say in global AI governance. An international AI cooperation centre under the auspices of the UN is to be established in Vienna. The federal government aims to create a venue where the potential and risks of powerful AI models can be addressed at an international level. This remains an Austrian initiative at this stage; no decision has yet been taken on its establishment.
At the same time, policymakers are already seeking new national regulations: State Secretary for Digitalisation Alexander Pröll has presented a three-tier model for smart glasses: no use in particularly sensitive areas, restrictions in protected spaces, and a requirement for recordings in public spaces to be clearly identifiable. It appears that policymakers are interpreting the so-called ‘household exception’ in the General Data Protection Regulation (‘exclusively for personal or family activities’) too broadly, as this model already applies under the GDPR: the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled in Ryneš, C-212/13, that a private surveillance camera which also captures public spaces no longer falls under the household exception.
AI glasses that perceive, record or analyse their ‘not purely private environment’ are therefore fully subject to the GDPR and must therefore comply with all ‘10 data protection principles’, in particular the legal basis and the duty to provide information.
However, the Austrian contradiction regarding the scope of AI goes even further:
Global policy in Vienna, implementation unclear
The AI Act has long been in force. Since 2 August 2026, its transparency obligations for certain AI interactions and synthetic or manipulated content have essentially also applied. Nevertheless, the Austrian Data Protection Authority notes in its Newsletter 1/2026 that Austria is ‘lagging behind’ in implementing the AI Regulation. The market surveillance authorities to be designated have not yet been identified.
The DPA itself has already been notified as a fundamental rights authority under Article 77 of the AI Act. For certain high-risk AI systems, it must also be designated as a sectoral market surveillance authority.
However, a comprehensive national market surveillance framework for the AI Act is still lacking.
A service centre is not a supervisory body
Austria already has the RTR’s AI Service Centre. Its statutory role is to serve as a point of contact and information hub and to provide support in the implementation of the AI Act. To this end, it offers information, overviews and its own AI Act chatbot: https://chat.ki.rtr.at/de/
This makes sense. However, providing advice is not the same as market surveillance. Parliament has also highlighted this delay: the motion ‘Finally appoint an AI authority’ was tabled on 15 October 2025. The relevant committee adjourned it in November 2025 and again on 3 June 2026.
No authority does not mean no law
It would nevertheless be risky for businesses to wait for the Austrian regulatory framework to be established. The AI Act applies regardless. The GDPR also remains applicable in parallel as soon as personal data is processed. The Data Protection Authority expressly clarifies that the AI Regulation does not supersede the GDPR.
Since 2 August 2026, the transparency obligations set out in Article 50 have been of particular practical relevance. These relate, amongst other things, to certain chatbots, synthetic content, deepfakes, emotion recognition and biometric categorisation. The applicable obligation in each case depends on the system, the content and the role of the company.
The correct corporate response is therefore not: ‘We will wait until Austria has appointed its AI authority.’ Rather: ‘Which AI systems do we use, in what capacity, with what data and for which decisions?’