
Is Your Website EAA Compliant? Six Web Accessibility Questions To Ask
Ran Ronen, Founder and CEO of Equally AI , the solution that helps teams create, test and ship better accessibility from start to finish. getty
Digital leaders across industries are racing to meet the European Accessibility Act (EAA) requirements before the June 2025 deadline. Many organizations rely on basic web content accessibility guidelines (WCAG) audits and accessibility plug-ins, and with that, assume their websites are "compliant enough." In reality, surface-level fixes may create the appearance of compliance but mask critical gaps that expose your business to serious non-compliance risks.
Building on my previous articles about preparing for the EAA, including a checklist to meet EAA requirements, I would like to dive deeper into six strategic questions business leaders can ask to uncover hidden compliance gaps and build sustainable accessibility practices beyond the June 2025 deadline.
If you're offering digital products or services in the EU, chances are you're covered. Even if your company is outside the EU, if EU consumers use your product or service, the EAA applies to you. Only true microenterprises (with fewer than 10 employees and under €2 million in annual turnover) may qualify for exemption, but even then, regulators expect documented justification, and I'd still strongly recommend voluntary compliance.
Make sure to map out your products and services against the EAA's scope and requirements and understand your obligations. If you're claiming an exemption, back it with documentation that clearly outlines your eligibility, cost-benefit analysis and evidence that alternatives were explored. Also, ensure third-party vendors (e.g., digital agencies) provide accessibility-compliant components, backed by VPATs, to avoid liability. 2. What are the penalties for non-compliance with the EAA?
Fines for EAA violations vary across countries, with amounts spanning from €5,000 up to more than €500,000, influenced by factors such as the seriousness of the breach and the scale of the business and how long the issue remains unresolved. Countries like Ireland may even impose both fines and jail time of up to 18 months for serious, ongoing non-compliance.
But fines are only part of the penalties. Non-compliance can also trigger other penalties like market suspensions and public disclosure by regulations, which can disrupt operations and revenue streams, leading to long-term loss of market share and damaged customer trust.
To mitigate these risks, I'd advise business leaders to prioritize compliance for high-risk assets like websites, apps and digital customer touchpoints. Ensure you keep full documentation of your accessibility efforts, even partial ones, to demonstrate good faith if audited. 3. How will the EAA impact small businesses?
The EAA presents a dilemma for small businesses. While true microenterprises may be exempt, most small companies are expected to comply, and accessibility audits, remediation and staff training all demand serious investment. But the opportunity is equally real. Over 101 million people with disabilities across Europe remain underserved, and EAA compliance can open up new markets and strengthen your brand.
My advice? Stay lean, but be strategic. Use free or low-cost accessibility audit tools like WAVE or Lighthouse to catch high-priority issues early, but pair them with expert-led manual audits and build accessibility into your core product development cycles to stay scalable. Partnering with industry peers or accessibility consultants can also stretch your resources further and reduce long-term risk. 4. Have we localized our compliance for each EU market we serve?
While the EAA sets a unified standard, enforcement varies by member state, with each country setting its own timelines, documentation formats, complaint-handling processes and penalties. A compliance strategy that passes in one country might fall short in another, so if your business operates in multiple EU markets, you must account for these local variations to avoid compliance gaps.
My recommendation: Assign regional compliance leads or cross-functional teams to track country-specific updates, adapt enforcement expectations into your operating procedures and ensure continuous alignment across jurisdictions. If your team lacks in-house oversight, consider partnering with legal or compliance teams who actively monitor these changes to ensure you're covering all the bases. 5. Do we have a clear role for who owns accessibility in our organization?
In many organizations, accessibility responsibilities are distributed across multiple teams without clear ownership. Product leads may focus on features, legal on policies, designers on user interface (UI) patterns, etc. Under the EAA, accessibility spans all of these areas, and without a defined owner overseeing how they connect, it is almost inevitable that there will be compliance gaps.
Along with the earlier-mentioned regional compliance leads or cross-functional teams, you also want to assign someone with decision-making authority to be accountable for aligning accessibility across teams and enforcing standards that tie to EN 301 549.
That person (or team) should control priorities, sign off on risk and ensure decisions are followed through. If this structure doesn't already exist in your organization, your compliance efforts will be fragmented, putting your business at higher risk. 6. Are we prepared to maintain compliance post-June 2025?
Many businesses are racing toward June 2025 with short-term checklists, but few are building systems to stay compliant after that. Accessibility requirements won't stop evolving once the deadline passes. New features, team turnover and tech stack changes can all break compliance if there's no plan to maintain accessibility over time.
Make sure to build accessibility into your product and content teams' daily operations. That includes setting clear review cycles (my prescribed rule of thumb is monthly for new releases, quarterly for regressions and annually for full audits), using version-controlled design systems, and budgeting for ongoing accessibility updates. Conclusion
The EAA deadline is now closer than ever, and organizations must understand that beyond demanding compliance, the law will fundamentally restructure what it means to operate in the European digital economy. As such, if your business treats accessibility as a late-stage checklist, you will always be reacting—patching gaps under pressure, losing ground to faster competitors and exposing yourself to regulatory risk you didn't plan for.
The smarter path is to operationalize accessibility now: Embed it into product, engineering, customer experience and legal, and assign real accountability at the leadership level. The businesses that start asking hard questions today and build systems that hold up after 2025 won't just avoid penalties. They'll be the ones that define market leadership and accountability in the next phase of digital growth.
Forbes Business Council is the foremost growth and networking organization for business owners and leaders. Do I qualify?
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
5 top FTSE 100 stocks offering plenty of global growth for an ISA
The FTSE 100 is made up of the largest companies listed in London. But this doesn't mean that most stocks are UK-focused, far from it. In fact, it's quite straightforward to build a Stocks and Shares ISA portfolio of FTSE 100 shares that offer truly global exposure. Here are five that would certainly do the job. Let's start with the largest stock by market cap in the Footsie today: AstraZeneca (LSE: AZN). This healthcare giant has truly global operations, spanning the areas of oncology, respiratory and immunology, rare diseases, and more. This year, the firm is expected to rake in $57.5bn in revenue, with a net profit of about $14bn. And it generates this from nearly everywhere, including China and Japan. Region % of total revenue (2024) US 40% Europe 16% China 12% UK 9% Japan 6% Rest of world 17% As we can see, investors in AstraZeneca are getting diversified exposure to the whole of the developed world. The reason the US is such a sizeable part is because it has the largest healthcare system of them all. The stock has fallen 17.5% since the end of August, putting it on a forward price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio of 15.5. For a profitable firm of this calibre, which also offers a 2.3% dividend yield, I think that's very attractive. Turning to another FTSE 100 giant now, we have HSBC (LSE: HSBA). The bank is increasingly focused on Asia these days, as that's where most of the world's growth is expected to come from in future. Indeed, according to the Asian Development Bank, Asia's middle class is set to swell to roughly 3bn people by 2050. With HSBC increasingly focused on wealth management in the region, the long-term growth story looks very promising. This year, the bank is expected to earn around $23bn on revenue of almost $67bn. The stock is offering an attractive 5.8% dividend yield. The third stock is Airtel Africa. As the name implies, the firm's operations extend across Africa. Specifically, Airtel is a provider of telecommunications and mobile money services to 166m people in 14 countries in sub-Saharan Africa. The share price has been on a tear, surging 55% this year alone. However, it still looks decent value to me, trading at 12.5 times next year's forecast earnings. There's also a well-supported 2.8% dividend yield. Finally, for even more global portfolio exposure, investors could consider Coca Cola HBC and Coca-Cola Europacific Partners. These are both bottling partners for the US beverage giant, selling brands like Coca-Cola, Fanta, Sprite, and Monster. The former's markets include Western Europe and the Asia-Pacific region, including Australia, New Zealand, and the Philippines. The other's portfolio is more weighted toward emerging and developing markets, including Poland, Romania, Nigeria, and Egypt. Naturally, none of these five stocks are totally risk-free. The Coca-Cola bottlers could suffer during a severe global economic downturn, as this would put pressure on consumer spending. Meanwhile, HSBC and AstraZeneca may fall foul of regulatory changes in China, especially if trade tensions with the US worsen at some point. Finally, most of Airtel Africa's revenue is collected in local African currencies, but it's reported in US dollars, exposing the company to currency risk. Nevertheless, adding these stocks to an ISA would make it truly global, with vast exposure to Europe, America, Africa, and Asia. The post 5 top FTSE 100 stocks offering plenty of global growth for an ISA appeared first on The Motley Fool UK. More reading 5 Stocks For Trying To Build Wealth After 50 One Top Growth Stock from the Motley Fool HSBC Holdings is an advertising partner of Motley Fool Money. Ben McPoland has positions in AstraZeneca Plc, Coca-Cola Hbc Ag, and HSBC Holdings. The Motley Fool UK has recommended Airtel Africa Plc, AstraZeneca Plc, and HSBC Holdings. Views expressed on the companies mentioned in this article are those of the writer and therefore may differ from the official recommendations we make in our subscription services such as Share Advisor, Hidden Winners and Pro. Here at The Motley Fool we believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. Motley Fool UK 2025 Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data


New York Times
2 hours ago
- New York Times
How can Liverpool afford Florian Wirtz?
The signing of Florian Wirtz comprises a new club-record deal for Liverpool. Wirtz will join from Bayer Leverkusen on a five-year contract. In exchange, Liverpool have agreed to pay the German club £100million ($135.9m) in guaranteed fees, with a potential £16m due in add-ons. The deal, even without those add-ons, eclipses Liverpool's previous transfer record by a distance. That record is generally seen as having been in place since January 2018, when they parted with £75m to buy Virgil van Dijk from Southampton. Advertisement In fact, the Van Dijk fee may already have been topped prior to this agreement. Darwin Nunez was signed from Benfica in June 2022 for an initial £64m that could rise to £85m. To the end of last December, according to the Portuguese side's financial disclosures, Liverpool had paid a further €10m (around £8.5m) of a potential €25m in add-ons, so any more conditions being met in the last six months could mean Nunez's transfer fee went past Van Dijk's. Either way, Wirtz's signing tops both of them, and makes him one of only a dozen or so footballers in history to command a £100m-plus fee. How, then, can his new side afford him? Wirtz's club-record arrival comes at a time when Liverpool are enjoying record revenues. They cleared £600m for the first time in 2023-24, a year in which they had to make do with Europa League football and finishing third in the Premier League. Last season, with a return to the Champions League and a twentieth domestic title secured, alongside a full season of the extended Anfield Road End being open and continued commercial growth, Liverpool should have topped £700m in turnover, a feat only previously managed by Manchester City in England. A further record in 2025-26 looks likely. The Athletic estimates Liverpool earned £181.5m through winning the Premier League and, even if they don't retain the title in 2025-26, they will still benefit from an uptick in the league's overall income. A new TV rights cycle starts this season, with the Premier League expecting to earn £12.25bn over the next three years — a 17 per cent increase on the 2022-25 cycle. Liverpool's commercial growth is well-placed to continue. August will see them begin a new kit deal with Adidas. The agreement, while incentive-based, represents a significant potential increase on the club's already lucrative arrangement with Nike. The latter secured Liverpool a base payment of £30million a season, but garnered around double that in reality. Booming revenues are all well and good but of little use if your expenditure is through the roof. Liverpool lost £57.1million pre-tax in 2023-24, the worst financial result both of the Fenway Sports Group (FSG) era and in the club's history, so are costs are swallowing their income whole? Not really. That big loss a year ago was very much out of the ordinary for a club who, across FSG's near-15 years at the helm, have broken even. In fact they've most likely done better than that: as detailed in The Athletic's BookKeeper series, published in March, we expect Liverpool to have returned to profitability in 2024-25, and healthy profitability too. Even if the club's wage bill crept up to the £400m mark — not a guarantee by any stretch, but possible once league-winning bonuses were handed out — we project Liverpool could still have booked a £30m profit. Advertisement The club are big wage-payers, as evidenced by their 2023-24 wage bill only trailing Manchester City domestically. The Athletic understands Wirtz will earn around £200,000 per week at Anfield, before any bonuses which may accrue to him. From Liverpool's perspective, inclusive of employer-related costs on top of his basic salary, Wirtz will cost them at least £12m a year to employ. Liverpool have some world-class players and pay them accordingly, but they'll benefit from the departure of Trent Alexander-Arnold, who also cost them £12m a year in employment-related costs (again before bonuses). One of the reasons the signings of Van Dijk and goalkeeper Alisson are often pointed to as examples of Liverpool not skimping on fees is they were pretty much outliers; they did spend big on the pair, but their transfer spending has generally trailed domestic rivals. At the end of 2023-24 the cost of assembling Liverpool's squad, across transfer and agent fees, was £749.4m, the seventh most expensive squad in the world but well behind Chelsea (£1.4bn), Manchester City (£1.1bn), Manchester United (£943.9m) and Arsenal (£882.4m). Correspondingly, annual amortisation costs hitting the club's books were well below domestic peers; Liverpool's amortisation bill of £114.5m last year was over £20m behind Spurs and £75m less than Chelsea. After a quiet summer in 2024, amortisation won't have ticked up much, if at all. Assuming his signing completes on June 16, when the transfer window reopens, Wirtz's £100m fee, plus assumed agent fees on top of around 10 per cent, will add £20.9m to Liverpool's 2025-26 amortisation bill, with a further £21.8m per season following thereafter until 2029-30 (a small sliver, £1.8m, will fall into 2030-31 as a result of the club's 31 May accounting date). Alongside the recent signing of Jeremie Frimpong, they'll have added around £28m a season onto their amortisation costs, but they'll still trail all the rest of the 'Big Six' clubs, with the potential exception of Spurs. Advertisement No. We recently explained how Liverpool could have lost £75m last season without breaking any Premier League rules. Across wages and transfer fee amortisation, signing Wirtz will add an extra £34m or so in annual costs — but the club have the headroom to handle it. That's not to say that outgoings are not likely this summer. They aren't needed to satisfy Profit and Sustainability Rules (PSR) — the profitability of 2024-25 and growing revenues will ensure no issues there — but they will help balance both the squad and the books. FSG has long sought to run Liverpool sustainably and, while they can splurge this summer without fear of bankruptcy or rule-breaking, and lose a chunk of money in 2025-26 if they wish to, that doesn't mean they'll do it for the sake of it. A big money departure, likely Nunez, would be no surprise. Cash worries are different from PSR ones, but Liverpool have little concern there either. Access to funds is no problem. Even if FSG was reluctant to loan money in (something they've generally preferred to do for infrastructure spend rather than operational costs), the ownership refinanced a revolving credit facility in September last year, lifting its limit from £200m to £350m. At the end of May 2024, it had only drawn down £116m of the original £200m, so there's plenty to be dipped into if the need arises. Liverpool may not need to increase borrowings anyway. Operating cash flow was positive at £83.7m in 2023-24 even without Champions League revenue, while cash spent on infrastructure has reduced following the completion of the revamped Anfield Road End. As well, their relatively low spending on transfers — and keenness to pay more of deals up front if they can — means Liverpool owe far less than peers in outstanding fee instalments. At the end of May 2024, they owed a net £69.9m, an amount which is expected to have dropped even lower in the past year. The previous figure was already lower than seven other Premier League clubs at the time and nowhere near the £308.9m Manchester United owed at the end of March 2025. Signing Wirtz is a significant undertaking for Liverpool. Combining the transfer fee, assumed agent fees and five years of his basic salary puts the total cost to Liverpool of signing and employing him at an estimated £170.5m. With potential add-ons and bonuses that sum could feasibly reach £200m. All parties concerned will hope it does — it will mean Wirtz and Liverpool have enjoyed plenty of success together. Those are big sums, but then Liverpool are a wealthy club. FSG's ownership has not been to every fan's taste, but it is precisely because of its frugality that Liverpool are able to make these deals when opportunities arise.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Europe's most valuable boss? How Christian Klein went from a 15-year-old intern to SAP's savior
May has been quite a month for Christian Klein, the baby-faced boss of Europe's most valuable company, SAP. He has just finished off his opening keynote at SAP's Sapphire event in Madrid, a summit attended by more than 6,000 people, when he finds time to squeeze in a putt-off on the main stage with Team Europe's 2014 Ryder Cup captain, Paul McGinley. A hole in one (on his second attempt) seems a fitting celebration. The false start nature of his foray on the putting green is reflective of his time at the helm of SAP, with his latest landmark the culmination of a tumultuous introduction, several false starts, and an overhaul of the company's organizational structure. Boasting a market value of $350 billion as of the end of May, SAP outpaced a struggling Novo Nordisk and a stunted luxury retail sector in March to confirm the unusual sighting of a German tech group atop Europe's public markets. Novo Nordisk reclaimed the mantle on the morning of June 13. The feat tops off a remarkable rise for the enterprise resource planning group, which is toasting record revenues and profits after a bet on cloud computing coincided with a global AI pivot that has seen demand for the company's business processes suite skyrocket. Fortune spoke with members of SAP's C-suite and leadership team to understand how Klein approached the mammoth task of turning a disparate SAP into Europe's most valuable company. Klein, just 45 years old, knows SAP better than most of the 120,000 people working at the company today. He first joined as a 15-year-old summer intern, ferrying clunky monitors around SAP's Walldorf headquarters with one eye on a professional football career. 'I can still remember, I tested them all, and one out of 10 didn't work,' Klein told Fortune in Madrid. 'In our area, SAP is a logical choice,' Klein says of the fateful application to the company he would run decades later. Indeed, former classmates of his continue to work at the company, though he's not as close to them as he was then. SAP offers software packages that help businesses deal with all sorts of admin, like HR, supply-chain management, and procurement, also known as enterprise resource planning (ERP). Klein throws his head back with laughter as this reporter suggests it's not the most exciting subject matter for the layperson to try to care about. His time at the helm of the company, though, has betrayed the dull, bureaucratic principles on which SAP has made its billions. Following the departure of its previous boss, ServiceNow's American CEO, Bill McDermott, the software as a service (SaaS) provider faced criticism that it was a bloated amalgam of various acquisitions with no obvious plans to align them. McDermott and SAP got it in the neck on more than one occasion from executives at one of its main competitors, Oracle. The late former Oracle co-CEO, Mark Hurd, was critical of the company's acquisition strategy in 2019 after SAP's $8 billion move for experience management platform Qualtrics. 'We're not buying somebody to just buy them. We're buying companies that fit into our portfolio,' Hurd said at the time. It was under this cloud of uncertainty that Klein took on the role of co-CEO alongside Jennifer Morgan in 2019. In April 2020, Klein assumed the mantle of CEO alone, a month into global lockdowns, after Morgan abruptly stepped down. Sebastian Steinhaeuser, SAP's chief operating officer, first worked with Klein in 2020 as a consultant at Boston Consulting Group, ironing out a presidency-style plan for Klein's first 100 days in charge. Something about that time with Klein persuaded Steinhaeuser to jump on board, even if it raised eyebrows among his confidants. 'I think the general perception when I joined SAP, many friends and colleagues looked at me like, 'What are you doing? Like, are you sure?'' said Steinhaeuser. 'I think there was a time where instead of executing, [SAP] just defined a new strategy every two years. Every year, customers would sit here at Sapphire, we talked about the year before, if we had delivered it or not delivered it, and just pulled a new rabbit out of the hat.' Within a few months of taking sole charge of the company, Klein had to abandon a medium-term profitability forecast as the worst economic effects of the coronavirus kicked in. 'I think the stock got a hit of 20% or 25%, and everybody thought, 'It's crazy. Why would you do that?'' recalls Jan Gilg, SAP's chief revenue officer, of reactions to the guidance call. 'But then, in retrospect, you see that it was the only option he had.' Some of Klein's other big calls have been met with frustration from within his own ranks. SAP announced plans for a 10,000-strong headcount reduction in January last year. The company faced €3.1 billion in 'restructuring expenses' as a result of the deal, and retrained thousands of workers to adjust to its AI-first approach. An internal company survey released the following September, reported by Bloomberg, revealed more than half of SAP's employees were ready to join a competitor. Klein's proponents would argue his experience demonstrates what a CEO can achieve with the proper mandate for revolution. In that regard, it's not hyperbolic to compare Klein to Satya Nadella, the Microsoft CEO who increased the value of the company 10-fold in his first decade in charge by pivoting the firm first from PCs to cloud computing, then to the AI era. Just ask Muhammad Alam, a man who has worked with both CEOs, about the comparison. Alam heads up SAP's product and engineering board and is a member of the company's executive board. A 17-year Microsoft veteran, Alam left a cushy role as corporate vice president at the company's Dynamics 365 ERP (enterprise resource planning) division to join a then-uncertain SAP project. One of the reasons Alam took the leap of faith was Klein. 'I felt three years ago when I joined—and having seen Satya sort of transform Microsoft beginning in 2014—I felt the same level of energy, vision, and commitment from Christian and the leadership team here,' Alam said of the parallels between Klein and Nadella. 'I felt like he had both the ability to make the hard decisions and the energy and the commitment to see them through; because some of them aren't going to be popular with employees and others, if you will, but they're needed for the transformation.' Unlike Nadella's journey of being parachuted into Microsoft, it must have been a challenge for Klein to diagnose the strategy shift required at a company he had known intimately since his teens. Examples of long-running CEOs at Fortune 500 companies are rare. Burnout, a lack of experience, or boardroom preference for an outsider mean the onetime graduate rarely progresses to the boardroom. BMW's Oliver Zipse and General Motors' Mary Barra are two rare examples of CEOs who have worked at the same company for their entire careers. When that happens, Klein, unsurprisingly, sees it as an advantage. 'In the early days of becoming a CEO, it was of extreme value to understand who my stakeholders are. Because the transformation is not only about, 'Oh, we are now developing all software in the cloud,' it's a transformation for everyone. Everything is changing. And that's why I would say, in this situation, it was definitely a big plus,' Klein says on the advantages of being a lifer at SAP. 'I had to make sure that I communicated extremely often. All hands, investor meetings, customer meetings, because you have to explain more than once why this change is needed.' The rewards have been lucrative. In February, Klein secured a record $19.8 million payday for his efforts turning around SAP in 2024, a 165% increase on the year before. SAP stock surged to make it Europe's most valuable company weeks later. After an aggressive five-year overhaul, the outside observer would be pretty confident in declaring Klein had afforded himself the space to relax. Instead, though, Klein appears emboldened to go further, and look to the U.S.'s dominant tech sector. 'I would say I'm a bit more demanding than at the beginning, where there was sheer uncertainty. And I just had to make sure, as a leader, that everyone believes that the strategy is the right one. Now everyone believes in the strategy. Now it's about, 'How can we raise the bar and compete with the biggest tech companies in the world?'' This story was originally featured on Sign in to access your portfolio