Disproportionate Burden
An EAA exemption a service provider can invoke if conformance would impose a disproportionate burden. Not a blanket opt-out: requires a written, documented assessment weighing cost, organisation size, and benefit to users with disabilities. Reviewed and renewed at least every 3 years.
A limited exemption for when a fix would cost a business far more than it could reasonably bear — but it must be justified in writing, not just claimed.
Set out in Article 14 and Annex VI of the EAA (Directive 2019/882). The assessment must weigh: (a) the ratio of net costs of compliance to overall costs of providing the service, (b) the estimated costs and benefits for the operator vs. the benefit to persons with disabilities (frequency, duration, and importance of use). Microenterprises providing services are out of scope of the directive entirely — they do not need to invoke disproportionate burden.
A disproportionate-burden claim must be re-assessed at least every 5 years, when the service is modified, or when requested by the market surveillance authority. The operator must keep the assessment for the authority's review and inform users.
Why this matters
Disproportionate burden is the most-asked-about EAA exemption and the most-misunderstood. It is not 'too expensive,' it is a formal assessment the operator must produce, retain, and re-evaluate. Market surveillance authorities can demand the assessment on request, and an unsupported claim is non-conformance.
How to detect
Ask the operator: is there a written disproportionate-burden assessment on file? Does it cite Annex VI criteria (net costs vs. estimated benefit to persons with disabilities)? When was it last reviewed? If any answer is missing, the claim is unsupported.