When do we need this ready?
The European line is that member states will have a wallet available by the end of 2026. The acceptance obligation for service providers has its own timeline, which depends on the implementing acts, and that has been adjusted several times recently. What we advise organisations is to steer not by a date but by extensibility: make sure your identity layer can take on an additional method. Then introduction will later be an addition rather than a rebuild under time pressure.
Do we have to switch off our current login methods?
No. The obligation is to accept recognised wallets, not to replace existing methods. For your users, initially nothing changes: a button is added. We deliberately build the new route alongside the existing one and make it separately switchable, so that a change in the standards or in the national implementation does not affect what works today.
What exactly is selective disclosure?
The wallet's ability to share part of a credential without disclosing the rest, and to confirm a derived attribute without revealing the underlying data. You ask not for the date of birth but whether someone is over eighteen, not for the full address but the municipality. For you, that means receiving less data, so less storage and less explaining. For the user, it means seeing what they are sharing and why.
What if a user refuses to share an attribute?
Then your service must be able to handle that. That is exactly why it is worth determining in advance, per attribute, whether it is necessary or desirable: those two should behave differently. A missing necessary attribute means the application cannot proceed; a missing desirable attribute should not block the application. In most existing forms that distinction has not been made and everything is mandatory.
Does this also work for organisations rather than individuals?
Yes, the framework takes this into account: alongside personal wallets, there will be provisions for legal entities, through which, for example, signing authority or representation can be demonstrated. In our design, we account for this by not tying the check to a personal attestation, so you won't need to rebuild later when that part becomes available.
Does this replace DigiD or eHerkenning?
In time, the wallet is expected to sit alongside existing means and partly replace them, but that is a process of years, and it is not something you need to anticipate now. In practical terms, you are adding a route. What you can do now is make sure your application isn't tied to a specific means, because that is where the cost lies with every subsequent change.
Which standards do you build on?
On the open standards designated in the European architecture framework: OpenID for Verifiable Presentations for requesting, with credentials in formats such as SD-JWT and mdoc. This means the integration is not tied to a specific wallet or vendor. We follow the reference implementations, and we keep the parts where the standard is still evolving deliberately small and separate, so a change there does not run through your entire application.
Do we need to register with anyone?
Yes. Parties that request data from a wallet must register as relying parties and state which attributes they request and for what purpose. This is one of the safeguards in the framework: a wallet can check whether a request matches what the requester is permitted to ask. We provide the justification and the overview of requested attributes you need for that registration.
What if the timeline shifts again?
That is a realistic scenario, and it is a reason to build for extensibility rather than for a date. The two things we do first, the overview of requested data and the separation of your identity layer, are valuable regardless of when the wallet arrives. They also shorten the work that lies ahead, so you run no risk of investment becoming worthless.
What about GDPR?
They reinforce each other. The wallet makes data minimisation technically possible where it was previously only an intention: you can genuinely ask for less. What still applies is that for every data point you do receive, you need a lawful basis and a retention period. The overview we produce of requested data, with the reason for each, is exactly what your Data Protection Officer needs, and what most organisations don't have.
What is the difference with an eIDAS integration?
These two are often confused. An
eIDAS integration connects you to the Dutch national gateway, so citizens and businesses from other EU countries can reach you with their own national login – over the same chain as eHerkenning. That exists today and it works. The wallet is the next step under the same regulation: a means the user controls themselves, that can carry attestations, and with which they can share part of them. If you have foreign users now, the integration is what you need; if it concerns the acceptance obligation that is coming, then this page.
Where can we start today?
With two things that are already useful now. The first is the list of data you request, with the reason for each item and the derived attribute that would suffice; you need this anyway, and it will determine what your request looks like later. The second is to set up your identity layer so that a means can be added without changing anything throughout your system. Together, that is a short assignment with returns now, and it removes most of the later work.