comparison
RGAA vs ADA
RGAA (Référentiel général d'amélioration de l'accessibilité, France, 2009) and ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act, United States, 1990) 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 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.
What is ADA?
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is a 1990 US federal civil rights law prohibiting discrimination against people with disabilities in employment, public services, transportation, and 'public accommodations' — a category that US courts and the DOJ have repeatedly interpreted to include websites and mobile apps.
Maintainer
United States Department of Justice (DOJ)
Jurisdiction and enforcement
United States. DOJ civil-rights division; private right of action under Title III.
RGAA vs ADA — the key differences
The principal difference is jurisdictional: RGAA applies in France, while ADA applies in United States. RGAA is maintained by DINUM (Direction interministérielle du numérique); ADA is maintained by United States Department of Justice (DOJ). 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
RGAA covers: Public-sector websites, Large private-sector websites (under EAA transposition). ADA covers: Employment (Title I), State/local government (Title II), Public accommodations and commercial facilities (Title III), Telecommunications (Title IV).
Penalties
RGAA: Up to €50,000 administrative fine. ADA: Title III: civil penalties up to $75,000 (first violation) and $150,000 (subsequent); plaintiff attorney fees awarded.
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 RGAA and ADA 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 France and have no cross-border procurement exposure, you may only need RGAA. The same applies in reverse for ADA. For organisations selling cross-border, into the EU or US public sector, the safer default is to plan to both simultaneously.
Sources
- RGAA 4.1 — DINUM
- ADA.gov — US Department of Justice
- Final Rule: Web and Mobile App Accessibility (Title II) — US DOJ
- ADA Title III Lawsuit Tracker — Seyfarth Shaw
FAQ
Frequently asked questions
Cited answers. Sourced. Updated as standards and case law change.
Is RGAA stricter than ADA?
Neither standard is uniformly "stricter" — they cover different regulatory domains. RGAA is more prescriptive about public-sector websites; ADA about employment (title i). For organisations exposed to both, a unified WCAG 2.2 AA baseline typically satisfies the technical requirements of both.
Can a single audit satisfy RGAA and ADA?
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 RGAA?
France. DINUM; ARCOM for audiovisual.
Which jurisdictions enforce ADA?
United States. DOJ civil-rights division; private right of action under Title III.
What happens if I am not compliant with RGAA?
Up to €50,000 administrative fine
What happens if I am not compliant with ADA?
Title III: civil penalties up to $75,000 (first violation) and $150,000 (subsequent); plaintiff attorney fees awarded Settlement averages: $3,000–$25,000 for demand letters; $20,000–$100,000+ for litigated cases Title II (governments): injunctive relief, compensatory damages, attorney fees
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