comparison
ACA vs RGAA
ACA (Accessible Canada Act, Canada — federally regulated entities, 2019) and RGAA (Référentiel général d'amélioration de l'accessibilité, France, 2009) are two of the most-referenced accessibility frameworks in digital compliance. This guide compares them side by side — jurisdiction, scope, conformance approach, penalties, and how a single audit can cover both simultaneously.
What is ACA?
The Accessible Canada Act (ACA, 2019) requires federally regulated entities — federal government, banks, telecom, broadcasting, transportation — to identify, remove and prevent accessibility barriers, with the explicit goal of "a Canada without barriers by 2040" and detailed regulations layered on top including the ICT regulations referencing EN 301 549.
Maintainer
Accessibility Standards Canada
Jurisdiction and enforcement
Canada — federally regulated entities. Accessibility Commissioner; CRTC for telecom; CTA for transportation.
What is RGAA?
France's Référentiel général d'amélioration de l'accessibilité (RGAA) is the French government's national web accessibility methodology, currently at version 4.1, that operationalises EN 301 549 / WCAG 2.1 AA with 106 control tests and is mandatory for public-sector and (since the EAA transposition) large-private-sector French websites.
Maintainer
DINUM (Direction interministérielle du numérique)
Jurisdiction and enforcement
France. DINUM; ARCOM for audiovisual.
ACA vs RGAA — the key differences
The principal difference is jurisdictional: ACA applies in Canada — federally regulated entities, while RGAA applies in France. ACA is maintained by Accessibility Standards Canada; RGAA is maintained by DINUM (Direction interministérielle du numérique). The standards differ on scope, conformance grading, and penalty structure — but a well-designed accessibility programme can satisfy both simultaneously by adopting the strictest applicable requirement and cross-mapping findings.
Scope
ACA covers: Federally regulated workplaces, Federal services (incl. digital), Federally regulated transportation and telecom. RGAA covers: Public-sector websites, Large private-sector websites (under EAA transposition).
Penalties
ACA: Administrative monetary penalties up to C$250,000 per violation. RGAA: Up to €50,000 administrative fine.
How to comply with both at once
Adopt the stricter applicable conformance level — typically WCAG 2.2 Level AA — as your engineering baseline. Audit against that baseline once, then cross-map findings to both ACA and RGAA specific requirements. A single Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR) using VPAT 2.5 INT can document both.
When you might need just one
If you operate exclusively in Canada — federally regulated entities and have no cross-border procurement exposure, you may only need ACA. The same applies in reverse for RGAA. For organisations selling cross-border, into the EU or US public sector, the safer default is to plan to both simultaneously.
Sources
- Accessible Canada Act — Government of Canada
- RGAA 4.1 — DINUM
FAQ
Frequently asked questions
Cited answers. Sourced. Updated as standards and case law change.
Is ACA stricter than RGAA?
Neither standard is uniformly "stricter" — they cover different regulatory domains. ACA is more prescriptive about federally regulated workplaces; RGAA about public-sector websites. For organisations exposed to both, a unified WCAG 2.2 AA baseline typically satisfies the technical requirements of both.
Can a single audit satisfy ACA and RGAA?
Yes. Both standards ultimately reference WCAG-aligned criteria. A combined audit with cross-mapped findings can produce documentation acceptable to both regulators.
Which jurisdictions enforce ACA?
Canada — federally regulated entities. Accessibility Commissioner; CRTC for telecom; CTA for transportation.
Which jurisdictions enforce RGAA?
France. DINUM; ARCOM for audiovisual.
What happens if I am not compliant with ACA?
Administrative monetary penalties up to C$250,000 per violation
What happens if I am not compliant with RGAA?
Up to €50,000 administrative fine
Stop guessing. Get the audit a Fortune 500 a11y team would have written.
Free audit on your live URL. No sign-up. IAAP-format report. Ready in hours.
founders@accessivepath.com · +977 9851094056