# AI use declaration in Italian public tenders: how to complete it

[Original page](https://danilolapegna.com/guides/ai-use-declaration-italian-public-tenders-anac.html)

Language: en. Content updated: 2026-10-12.

Italian tenders built on ANAC templates 1 and 2 ask bidders about AI use: what the declaration says, which option to choose and what evidence to keep.


In Italian public tenders launched from [30 May 2026](https://www.anticorruzione.it/-/news.07.05.26.bandi.tipo) using ANAC's updated templates no. 1 and no. 2, the participation application (domanda di partecipazione) contains a declaration on the use of artificial intelligence. ANAC is Italy's National Anti-Corruption Authority, and its templates, the bandi tipo, are the models contracting authorities base their tender documents on.

To check whether your tender is one of them, look at the application form: if it has the section on artificial intelligence, this guide applies to you.

The form asks two questions. First: did your team use AI systems to prepare the offer, such as a chatbot (ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini) or a machine translator? Second: if the contract is awarded to you, will your company use them to perform the services? Each question has two pre-written options. For example, if someone asked a chatbot for a first draft of the service management plan, the answer to the first question is yes.

Ticking the boxes takes a second, but what you sign is a self-certification. A yes is also an attestation: you declare that the use complied with the EU AI Act, Italy's AI law and data protection rules. A no must be true for everyone who wrote any part of the offer, outside consultants included. In ANAC's model the answer does not affect your score. The real risk is signing a statement you cannot prove.

**Your first step, today.** Ask everyone who worked on the offer which tools they used, and for what. Give examples, because not everyone thinks of them as AI: chatbots, machine translators, automatic meeting transcription, AI features inside Word, Outlook or Gmail. Often the right answer emerges from this alone.

Two conditions should stop you before signing: personal data entered into a tool without an adequate contract, or a use that neither option describes. Both are covered, with what to do, in the sections "A yes is an attestation, not a confession" and "When you are unsure whether a tool counts or which option to choose". At the end of the guide you will find the full sequence, from asking the authors to signing.

## If you have two minutes

| Your situation | First question, on the offer | Second question, on the contract | What to keep |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nobody used AI tools, outside consultants included | Did not use (non si è avvalso) | Will not use (non si avvarrà), unless you plan to use AI to perform the service | Written confirmation from everyone who worked on the offer |
| A chatbot or machine translator helped draft, summarise or translate parts of the technical offer | Used (si è avvalso) | Will use (si avvarrà) if you will use AI to perform the service, otherwise will not use | The usage log described below and the name of the reviewer |
| You bid as a professional (your form has fields for the systems used), or the tender is for architecture and engineering, and you used AI | Used, naming the systems used and, under template no. 1, the parts of the technical offer | Will use only as support, or will not use | Log, reviews and, under template no. 2, the note on activities in the technical offer |
| You used AI only for administrative documents or the price offer | Neither option describes you exactly: see the section "When you are unsure whether a tool counts or which option to choose" | As in the rows above | The clarification request to the contracting authority and the reasons for your choice in the log |
| You are unsure whether a tool counts | See the same section | As in the rows above | A description of the use in the log |

Before signing a yes, check which personal data went into the tools, because a yes also attests compliance with data protection rules. If several rows describe you, start from the one that describes what you did and add the one for professionals.

## What the declaration asks

Under [template no. 1](https://www.anticorruzione.it/-/bando.tipo.n.1.2023-agg.2026), which covers open procedures outside the utilities sectors (settori ordinari) for services and supplies above the EU threshold, awarded on the most economically advantageous tender, the declaration is section 10 of the application form, headed "Dichiarazioni in materia di uso di intelligenza artificiale" (declarations on the use of artificial intelligence).

Under [template no. 2](https://www.anticorruzione.it/-/del.153-15.04.2026-bando.tipo-n.2-2026), for open procedures on architecture and engineering services above the same threshold, it sits among the "Ulteriori dichiarazioni" (further declarations) of the form. In both, paragraph 15.1 of ANAC's tender rules template (disciplinare) states that bidders must make it; your tender's numbering may differ.

The declaration is part of the application form, not of the ESPD (DGUE), the European Single Procurement Document.

In the version for services and supplies, these are the options, in the form's own words.

| The form asks about | No option | Yes option |
|---|---|---|
| "nella predisposizione dell'offerta" (preparing the offer) | "non si è avvalso di sistemi di intelligenza artificiale" (did not use AI systems) | "si è avvalso di sistemi di intelligenza artificiale per la redazione dell'offerta tecnica" (used AI systems to draft the technical offer), attesting compliance with the AI Act, Law 132/2025 and data protection rules |
| If awarded, "ai fini dell'espletamento delle prestazioni oggetto del contratto" (to perform the services under the contract) | "non si avvarrà di sistemi di intelligenza artificiale" (will not use AI systems) | "si avvarrà di sistemi di intelligenza artificiale" (will use AI systems), committing you to comply with the same rules |

This version has no field for the name of the tool, nor one describing human oversight, meaning who checks the output: you choose and you attest. The rules are more specific for professionals and for engineering and architecture tenders, as set out in the section "If you bid as a professional or in an engineering tender".

The declaration is signed by whoever signs the application: the legal representative, an institore (a manager appointed to run the business) or someone holding a power of attorney (procuratore). A sole professional signs personally; in a professional partnership (studio associato), all partners sign or a representative with the necessary powers does.

In a temporary grouping (raggruppamento temporaneo, RTI) that is already formed, the lead member (mandataria) signs; in one still to be formed, every member signs.

It is a self-certification under Presidential Decree 445/2000, Italy's consolidated law on administrative documentation. The form's heading refers to criminal liability for false statements and to the administrative consequences, namely exclusion from tenders, set by the Public Contracts Code (Legislative Decree 36/2023).

## A yes is an attestation, not a confession

In ANAC's model the answer does not affect your score: the declaration sits in the administrative documents and no award criterion refers to it. Under template no. 2, however, the note on supporting activities sits in the technical offer: the evaluation board reads it, even though no criterion in the model scores it.

A yes adds an attestation. By signing, you declare that the use complied with three sets of rules, and for an offer written with a chatbot it pays to check them in this order.

**Data protection almost always matters.** Every time you paste text into an online tool, you hand it to a provider. If the text contains personal data, such as the CVs of the project team, check two facts: that the account is a business account covered by a contract with the provider, and whether the provider may reuse your texts to train its models. If it may, treat texts already entered like the personal-account case below; for the future, switch the option off.

For confidential company information the same check applies, but it protects the company and does not change which box you tick.

**If personal data went into a personal account**, do not sign the attestation until whoever handles data protection in your company, or an adviser, has assessed the case. This is the first of the two stop conditions in this guide.

**Law 132/2025 matters mostly for professionals.** In the intellectual professions it limits AI to a supporting role; the section for professionals explains it.

**For someone using a chatbot to write, the AI Act usually involves few obligations.** Most of its obligations fall on those who develop systems and on those who deploy them in high-risk uses. A company using them to write mainly needs to avoid prohibited practices and adopt measures to develop its staff's AI literacy.

This guide does not check the compliance of individual tools: to work out your role, provider or deployer, start with the [AI Act business guide](https://danilolapegna.com/guides/eu-ai-act-business-guide.html).

What about Article 50 of the AI Act, the labelling rule? For text, it requires disclosure of AI use when the text is published to inform the public on matters of public interest, a purpose a tender offer does not normally have: in a tender, transparency runs through the declaration in the application.

For images, audio and video the deepfake rule applies, covering content generated or edited with AI that looks authentic without being so, and this rule does not depend on publication.

If your design drawings include realistic photo insertions generated or edited with AI (images that place the project in a real photograph), check the [Article 50 guide](https://danilolapegna.com/guides/ai-act-article-50-what-applies-august-2026.html) to see whether a notice is needed and, if in doubt, add one. Those images also count as AI use for the first declaration and, under template no. 2, for the note in the technical offer.

## A worked example, from first draft to signature

Take a facility management company preparing an offer for a tender based on template no. 1. The bid manager uses a company chatbot to summarise an eighty-page specification (capitolato) and to write a first draft of the service management plan. A colleague in the HR office uses it to make the project team's CVs consistent. The technical director reviews the draft plan, rewrites the methodology by hand and checks figures and references.

**The first answer is yes.** The chatbot contributed to writing the technical offer, even though the final text was revised. A no would be untrue for two of the three people involved.

**Before signing, there is a check to make.** The specification is a public document and summarising it raises no data issue, except for annexes with staff data, such as the list of workers to be taken over under a social clause. The CVs, however, contain colleagues' personal data, and whoever pasted them must be able to say which account and which contract they used.

In this example the account is a business account covered by a contract that rules out reusing the texts for training, so, as far as data are concerned, the attestation can be signed.

**The second answer is yes too.** The specification requires monthly reports and the team will write them with the same chatbot, following a few written rules: which data may go in, and who rereads each report before it is sent. If instead AI will play no part in performing the service, a no is accurate only if it stays true for the whole contract.

The result is three lines in the log, filled in under "The usage log in seven columns", and two boxes you can explain.

## The second declaration lasts for the whole contract

Many office tools now include assisted writing, summarising or transcription features, for example Copilot in Microsoft 365 or Gemini in Google Workspace. If your team will use them to perform the service, "non si avvarrà" is hard to keep over a multi-year contract.

The useful question is a single one: will you use AI to perform the services under the contract, whether in the documents and data you deliver or in operational work such as shift planning, data analysis or an assistant for users? The form refers to the services without listing them; operational uses belong here because they serve to perform those services.

If the answer is yes, choose "si avvarrà" and write a few rules: which tools, with which data, who checks the results. Paragraph 15.1 of ANAC's template pairs a yes with a commitment to comply with the AI Act, Law 132/2025 and data protection rules throughout performance. If AI will also be used to organise or monitor the staff working on the contract, there is one more duty: Article 11 of Law 132/2025 requires informing workers in the cases set by employment law.

It makes sense to extend these rules to anyone performing part of the service on your behalf, such as subcontractors: if a subcontractor will use AI for its part, take that use into account in the second answer.

If you choose no, make it true: switch off the AI features of office tools for the people working on the contract, or ban their use in writing.

If things change along the way, distinguish two cases. If you declared "non si avvarrà" and then want to use AI in the service, the model sets no procedure, but in the tender you declared how you would perform the contract: check whether the contract refers to the declaration and agree the change in advance, in writing, with the contracting authority.

If you declared "si avvarrà", the declaration does not list tools, so a new tool does not change it. An extra step is needed in two cases: when the contract requires approval for new tools, or when the contract, or a separate act, appoints you as processor of the contracting authority's personal data and the new provider will receive that data.

In the second case Article 28 of the GDPR requires the contracting authority's written authorisation, specific or general; under a general one, you only need to inform it beforehand so that it can object.

## If you bid as a professional or in an engineering tender

Two cases follow more specific rules: intellectual services provided by a professional in tenders under template no. 1, and every tender under template no. 2, which covers architecture and engineering. You can tell from the form: the professionals' version has fields to fill in with the systems used.

Here the model applies [Article 13 of Law 132/2025](https://www.normattiva.it/uri-res/N2Ls?urn:nir:stato:legge:2025-09-23;132~art13): in the intellectual professions AI may only be used for instrumental and supporting activities, and intellectual work must remain predominant.

If you answer yes to the first question, the form asks for more.

- Name the systems used and, under template no. 1, the parts of the technical offer they contributed to.
- The form already describes the use as "attività meramente strumentali e di supporto" (purely instrumental and supporting activities): tick yes only if that is true. Typical examples are research, summarising documents and checks of form and completeness.
- A first draft written by AI is the most delicate case: it holds only if the approach, technical choices and checks remain yours. If AI did more than that, rework that part before signing, because the form offers no third option.
- Attest that intellectual work prevails and that results were checked and verified.
- Under template no. 2, also state in the technical offer which supporting activities you carried out with AI, as paragraph 16 of ANAC's template requires.

The last point deserves attention. A short note can be enough, for example: "For this technical offer we used [tool] to summarise the tender documents and to check the text for consistency with the specification; content and design choices are the project team's own." The template does not say what happens if the note is missing, but clarifications requested later cannot change the content of the offer (paragraph 14): write it while you prepare the technical offer.

The law sets no percentage for predominance. A practical test, which is not a legal threshold, is to look at the decisions: the approach, technical choices, checks and conclusions must be yours, and you must be able to show where you made them.

For the second question the same supporting-activities test applies: choose "si avvarrà" if during performance you will use AI for summaries, checks or first drafts you then rework, while the professional choices stay yours; if you will not use AI, choose "non si avvarrà". A use that goes beyond support is not allowed by Article 13, and neither option describes it.

Finally, the obligation does not end with the tender. The same Article 13 requires professionals to inform the client about the AI systems they use, in clear, simple and complete language. The log described in the section "The usage log in seven columns", if you keep it during performance too, is the basis for that notice, which you still need to write for the contracting authority in plain words.

## When you are unsure whether a tool counts or which option to choose

The form does not define an "artificial intelligence system". The reference is Article 3 of the AI Act, which Law 132/2025 adopts in its Article 2: a system that infers, from the input it receives, how to generate content, predictions, recommendations or decisions.

The [European Commission guidelines](https://ai-act-service-desk.ec.europa.eu/en/ai-act/resource/guidelines-ai-definition), which are not binding, note that programs executing only rules written by people fall outside.

What follows is a practical reading of the definition, not an official list.

- A chatbot that writes, rewrites, summarises or answers questions about the specification counts.
- A machine translator such as DeepL or Google Translate counts: both run on neural networks.
- Automatic transcription of a meeting counts.
- A spell checker that compares words with a dictionary normally does not count; an editor that suggests rewriting sentences does.
- A spreadsheet with formulas you wrote does not count, nor do charts and descriptive statistics computed with fixed rules; an AI-based feature that proposes formulas, analysis or forecasts from your data does.

If the doubt is about the tool, describe rather than debate: one line in the log saying what the tool did costs little, and a yes documented by that line holds up better than a no that is hard to defend.

If instead the doubt is about the box, send a clarification request (quesito) to the contracting authority through the tender platform, within the deadline set for clarifications (paragraph 2.2 of ANAC's template). Word it in general terms, because questions and answers are published anonymously and apply to every bidder. For example: "Does the declaration on AI use also cover a use limited to translating a certificate included in the administrative documents?"

There is also a case the model does not foresee. Under template no. 1, in both versions of the form, the question refers to "predisposizione dell'offerta" (preparing the offer) and the yes to "redazione dell'offerta tecnica" (drafting the technical offer). If you used AI only for the administrative documents or for the calculations behind the price offer, neither sentence describes you exactly. That case calls for a clarification request.

Paragraph 16 of ANAC's template says which documents form the technical offer: if a translated certificate is one of them, the answer to the first question is yes.

**If AI did not touch the technical offer** and no answer arrives in time (or the clarification deadline has already passed), tick no. Paragraph 15.1 of ANAC's template asks you to declare use "nell'elaborazione dell'offerta tecnica" (in preparing the technical offer): check that your tender rules say the same.

Some risk remains, because the form's no, read literally, covers the whole offer: write your reasons in the log and, if the tender rules or the platform allow it, add a line of explanation.

If you can, have the choice reviewed by your tender adviser or a lawyer. This is the second stop condition: do not sign before sending the clarification request, if you are within the deadline, and writing your reasons in the log.

## The usage log in seven columns

The form does not ask for a log: it is the tool I suggest so that you sign with evidence in hand. It opens on the day you start writing the offer; if the offer is already under way, rebuild it from the authors' answers. Write one line for each part of the offer and each tool, and have the signatory read it before choosing the boxes.

| Date | Who | Tool and account | Part of the offer | What the AI did | Data entered | Who checked what |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 Nov | Bid manager | Chatbot, business account under a contract that rules out reuse of texts | Reading the specification | Summary of the requirements | Public specification, without the annex listing staff | Bid manager: requirements compared with the original specification |
| 3 Nov | Bid manager | Same chatbot and account | Management plan, section 2 | First draft from an internal outline | Specification and a non-confidential internal outline | Technical director: draft rewritten, figures and references to the specification checked |
| 4 Nov | HR office | Same chatbot and account | Project team CVs annex | Format and length made consistent | Colleagues' CVs, personal data | Each colleague checked the dates, qualifications and experience in their own CV |

The three lines are the worked example above, filled in.

Two rules make the log useful rather than a ritual. The first is a stop condition: if a line shows personal data and the tool column does not show a business account with reuse of texts ruled out at the time of use, stop and settle it before signing the attestation. The second concerns the last column: "I reread it" is not enough; record what was checked, for example figures, references to the specification and certifications.

For professionals, the tool and offer-part columns hold what the form asks you to state, and they are the basis for the note in the technical offer under template no. 2. The last column documents the checking and verification of results.

## What to keep as evidence of human oversight

The log is the core, but on its own it is only an account of events. This evidence makes it verifiable.

- The log approved by the person who signs the application, with the date.
- Versions of the offer with tracked changes, showing where a draft was rewritten.
- The name of whoever checked figures, references to the specification, certifications and CVs.
- For the most significant uses, the tool's output next to the final text.
- The instructions given to the people who use the tools, which also show the measures taken on staff AI literacy.

Keep this evidence with the tender records, at least for the duration of the procedure and the contract: a precaution, not a requirement of the model. If the contracting authority asks for explanations, you can answer with documents.

## Mistakes to avoid

- Ticking no out of habit, without asking the people who wrote the offer, consultants included, which tools they used.
- Ticking yes without being able to say how the personal data entered into the tools was handled.
- Declaring "non si avvarrà" and then letting the team use the AI features of office tools for the service.
- Leaving blank, in the professionals' version, the fields for the systems used and the parts of the offer.
- Under template no. 2, declaring the use in the application and forgetting the note in the technical offer.
- In a grouping, signing without asking the other members how they wrote their part.
- Copying the declaration from the previous tender without checking which version of the form the contracting authority uses.

## What happens if you get it wrong

It depends on the error. A missing or incomplete declaration is an irregularity in the application: the contracting authority invites you to correct it through the soccorso istruttorio, with a deadline of five to ten days (paragraph 14 of ANAC's template), and if the deadline passes without an answer you are excluded from the tender.

If you spot an error before the submission deadline, ANAC's template (paragraph 13.1) lets you submit a new offer that replaces the previous one: the contracting authority considers only the last one. After the deadline, talk to a lawyer before writing to the contracting authority.

A false declaration is a different matter: it is an untrue self-certification and carries the liabilities referred to in the form's heading.

## What this guide is and is not

It is a practical guide built on ANAC's models read in full on 12 October 2026: the two templates, the application forms and the explanatory reports in which ANAC explains its choices. It helps you choose the true option and keep the evidence.

It does not replace the tender rules of your procedure, which prevail over the model and may adapt it: if your tender words the section differently, follow it. For a case that could lead to exclusion or a dispute, such as personal data already entered into a tool without a contract or a wrong declaration already submitted, ask your tender adviser or a lawyer.

## The next step

For the tender you are working on now, the sequence is this.

1. Ask every author, consultants included, which tools they used and for what.
2. Write the answers in the log, one line for each part of the offer and each tool.
3. Check the personal data that went into the tools: if it went into a tool without an adequate contract, stop and have the case assessed.
4. The signatory reads the log and chooses the two boxes; if no option describes your case, stop, send the clarification request and follow the route in the section on unclear cases.
5. Keep the log and the evidence with the tender records.

From your next tender, open the log on the first day of writing.

The standard I apply when I bring AI into a work process is that every use leaves a trace another person can reread. In a tender, that trace is also what lets you sign.

If you bid in several tenders a year and AI already runs through many steps of your team's work, the [AI and automation diagnosis](https://danilolapegna.com/services/diagnosi-ai-automazione) is the paid service that reconstructs where your team uses it, with which data and which controls, and leaves you with a written decision map: which uses to keep, regulate or stop. Bring your latest submitted offer, without personal data, and the list of tools the team uses.


## Frequently asked questions

### Is the AI use declaration mandatory in every Italian public tender?

It is mandatory in open procedures that use ANAC's template no. 1 (services and supplies outside the utilities sectors, above the EU threshold, most economically advantageous tender) or template no. 2 (architecture and engineering services above the threshold), in force since 30 May 2026. The clauses of the templates bind contracting authorities unless they justify a departure. For other procedures, follow what the specific tender documents require.

### Does it also apply to tenders published before 30 May 2026?

It applies to tenders whose documents use the new models. For a tender launched with the previous version, follow its own documents: check whether the application form contains the section on artificial intelligence.

### Does declaring AI use cost points?

Not in ANAC's model. The declaration sits in the participation application, among the administrative documents, and no award criterion refers to it. Under template no. 2, the note on activities carried out with AI sits inside the technical offer, which the evaluation board reads, but no criterion in the model scores it. Still check the award criteria in your tender rules.

### Do spell checkers or machine translators count as artificial intelligence?

The form does not say. The AI Act definition excludes programs that only apply rules written by people: in practice a dictionary-based spell checker normally falls outside, while a machine translator such as DeepL or Google Translate, or an editor that rewrites sentences, falls inside. This is a practical reading, not an official list: if in doubt, describe the use in the log and, if the choice of box depends on it, send a clarification request to the contracting authority.

### Do I have to name the AI tool I used?

Not in the version for services and supplies: you choose yes or no, and with a yes you attest compliance. In the version for intellectual services provided by a professional and under template no. 2, yes: you name the systems used. Under template no. 1, professionals' version, you also name the parts of the technical offer. Either way, the usage log is what backs your signature.

### Do I have to attach the usage log to the application?

No, the form does not ask for it. It is an internal tool that lets you sign with evidence in hand. Under template no. 2, a summary of the activities carried out with AI goes into the technical offer instead.

### What happens if I forget to complete the declaration?

It is an irregularity in the application: the contracting authority invites you to correct it through the soccorso istruttorio, with five to ten days to complete it. If the deadline passes without an answer, you are excluded from the tender.

### Who signs the declaration in a temporary grouping of companies?

If the grouping is already formed, the lead member (mandataria) signs; if it is still to be formed, every member signs. There is only one offer, though: before signing, ask the other members how they wrote their part.

### What does predominance of intellectual work mean?

It is the test in Article 13 of Italy's Law 132/2025 for the intellectual professions: AI may only be used for instrumental and supporting activities. The law sets no percentage. A practical test is that the approach, technical choices, checks and conclusions belong to the professional, and that this can be shown.

### Do I have to flag in the technical offer the parts written with AI?

Under template no. 2, yes: the technical offer states the supporting activities carried out with AI. In tenders under template no. 1 the declaration in the application is enough, unless the tender rules ask for more. The Article 50 AI Act labelling duty concerns text published to inform the public on matters of public interest, a purpose a tender offer does not normally have.

### What if I declared I would not use AI in the contract and then change my mind?

The model sets no procedure, but in the tender you declared how you would perform the contract: check whether the contract refers to the declaration and agree the change in advance, in writing, with the contracting authority. If instead you had declared that you would use AI, a new tool does not change the declaration; you still need the approval or notice the contract requires or, if the new provider receives personal data you process on behalf of the contracting authority, the authorisation or notice that Article 28 of the GDPR requires.

## Sources

[ANAC · Delibera n. 148 del 1° aprile 2026, bando tipo n. 1 aggiornato](https://www.anticorruzione.it/-/bando.tipo.n.1.2023-agg.2026)

[ANAC · Delibera n. 153 del 15 aprile 2026, bando tipo n. 2](https://www.anticorruzione.it/-/del.153-15.04.2026-bando.tipo-n.2-2026)

[ANAC · Bando tipo n. 1-2023 e FAQ](https://www.anticorruzione.it/-/bando-tipo-n.-1-2023)

[Normattiva · Legge 23 settembre 2025, n. 132, art. 13](https://www.normattiva.it/uri-res/N2Ls?urn:nir:stato:legge:2025-09-23;132~art13)

[EUR-Lex · Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (AI Act)](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj)

[European Commission · Guidelines on the definition of an AI system, C(2025) 5053](https://ai-act-service-desk.ec.europa.eu/en/ai-act/resource/guidelines-ai-definition)

This guide was prepared with the help of artificial intelligence tools, starting from ANAC's official texts read in full; its publication was approved by the author.