Section 508 vs ADA Title II: which standard applies to you

Section 508 vs ADA Title II is a question that comes up in almost every state and local software purchase, usually in the form "the vendor sent a Section 508 VPAT, is that enough?" The two laws overlap, cite different versions of the same guidelines, and apply to different buyers. Mixing them up is how an agency ends up with a report that answers somebody else's question.

The short version: Section 508 governs federal agencies and points to WCAG 2.0 Level AA. The ADA Title II web rule governs state and local governments and requires WCAG 2.1 Level AA. Most of what follows is about the consequences of that one-version difference.

Section 508 vs ADA: who each one applies to

Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act applies to federal departments and agencies. The Access Board's Revised 508 Standards say that information and communication technology "procured, developed, maintained, or used by agencies" must conform. The revised standards took effect on 18 January 2018. A software company is not bound by Section 508 directly; it meets 508 because its federal customers have to buy conforming products.

ADA Title II applies to public entities: states, counties, cities, school districts, special districts and their instrumentalities. The Department of Justice's 2024 rule (28 CFR part 35, subpart H) requires those entities to make their web content and mobile apps conform to WCAG 2.1 Level AA. As extended by the interim final rule of 20 April 2026, entities with a total population of 50,000 or more must comply from 26 April 2027, and those under 50,000 and special district governments from 26 April 2028. The full explainer on the rule covers the detail.

Neither law has a certification behind it, and neither is something a vendor can be "certified" against.

Which standard each one uses

	Section 508 (revised)	ADA Title II web rule
Who must comply	Federal agencies	State and local governments
Web and software standard	WCAG 2.0 Level A and AA	WCAG 2.1 Level A and AA
Level A + AA criteria	38	50
Also covers	Hardware, software platform features, support documentation, functional performance criteria	Web content and mobile apps
VPAT edition that addresses it	508 (or INT)	WCAG (or INT), reporting on 2.1

The Revised 508 Standards incorporate WCAG 2.0 by reference for electronic content (E205.4) and apply the same criteria to software user interfaces (E207.2). They were written in 2017 and have not been updated to WCAG 2.1.

WCAG 2.1 added 17 success criteria to 2.0. Twelve of them are at Level A or AA, which is why the counts differ:

• Level A: 2.1.4 Character Key Shortcuts, 2.5.1 Pointer Gestures, 2.5.2 Pointer Cancellation, 2.5.3 Label in Name, 2.5.4 Motion Actuation.
• Level AA: 1.3.4 Orientation, 1.3.5 Identify Input Purpose, 1.4.10 Reflow, 1.4.11 Non-text Contrast, 1.4.12 Text Spacing, 1.4.13 Content on Hover or Focus, 4.1.3 Status Messages.

Several of these matter a great deal for public-facing services. Reflow is what lets someone with low vision zoom a permit application to 400% without scrolling sideways. Status Messages is what tells a screen reader user that their payment went through.

Section 508 is broader in one direction, narrower in another

It is tempting to treat 508 as the stricter standard, because it covers more ground. It does: Chapter 3 functional performance criteria, Chapter 4 hardware, Chapter 5 software requirements such as interoperability with assistive technology, and Chapter 6 support documentation and services. A Title II solicitation is free to ask for those too.

But on the web content criteria themselves, 508 is the older baseline. A product can conform fully to the Revised 508 Standards and still fail all twelve WCAG 2.1 additions, because 508 never asked about them.

Where state and local buyers meet Section 508 anyway

State and local governments are not federal agencies, but Section 508 reaches them by other routes.

State law. Some states adopt Section 508 for their own agencies. California's Government Code section 7405, for example, requires state government entities developing, procuring, maintaining or using electronic and information technology to comply with Section 508 and its implementing regulations. A California state agency therefore has both a 508 obligation under state law and a Title II obligation under federal law. Our state accessibility laws pages summarize what each state has adopted; see California for this example.

Federal funding. The funding-based obligation is actually Section 504, not Section 508. Section 504 applies to programs that receive federal financial assistance, and agencies write their own 504 rules. HHS's 2024 Section 504 rule, for instance, requires recipients of HHS funding to make web content and mobile apps conform to WCAG 2.1 Level AA; as amended in May 2026, the dates are 11 May 2027 for recipients with fifteen or more employees and 10 May 2028 for those with fewer. Grant agreements or agency policy may separately reference 508. Check the terms of the specific award rather than assuming.

Habit. Many local procurement templates still say "Section 508 compliant" because that was the only widely known standard when they were written. That is worth revisiting before the next solicitation goes out.

What this means for the VPAT you require

The practical consequence sits in the ITI template itself. The VPAT 2.5 Section 508 edition lists WCAG 2.0 and the Revised Section 508 standards as its applicable standards. A report in the 508 edition does not address the twelve WCAG 2.1 Level A and AA criteria the Title II rule requires. It is not wrong; it is answering the federal question.

So, for a state or local buyer:

• If your obligation is Title II, require an Accessibility Conformance Report that reports on WCAG 2.1 Level AA: the WCAG edition, or the INT edition with WCAG 2.1 marked as covered. The edition guide explains the four editions.
• If state law or a funding agreement also requires Section 508, ask for the INT edition, which can cover WCAG 2.1 and Section 508 in one document, or for both a WCAG report and a 508 report on the same product version.
• If a vendor sends a 508-edition report against a Title II requirement, ask how the product performs on the twelve WCAG 2.1 additions. The answer may be good. The report simply does not say.
• Count the rows. 38 Level A and AA criteria means WCAG 2.0. 50 means WCAG 2.1.

Requiring WCAG 2.2 is also reasonable as forward-looking practice, but it goes beyond what the Title II rule requires. Whatever you name, name the version: "WCAG 2.1 Level AA", not "WCAG compliant" or "508 compliant".

For vendors

If you sell to both federal and state and local customers, the INT edition is usually the efficient choice, provided it actually reports on WCAG 2.1 (or 2.2) and not only 2.0. An INT report marked as covering WCAG 2.0 only has the same gap as a 508 report. Say in the report which version was evaluated, and make sure the criteria rows match that claim. If you are unsure whether your current report answers a Title II buyer's question, have it reviewed before you submit it.

---

Sources: 28 CFR part 35, subpart H (the DOJ's 2024 Title II web rule, as amended by the interim final rule of 20 April 2026); the Access Board's Revised 508 Standards (36 CFR part 1194, Appendix A, E205.4 and E207.2); 45 CFR part 84, subpart I (HHS Section 504 rule); California Government Code section 7405 as described in the State Administrative Manual section 4833; W3C, What's New in WCAG 2.1; ITI VPAT 2.5Rev template instructions. This is general guidance, not legal advice.

GOVvpat checks whether a vendor's report covers the standard your solicitation actually names. Request a quote, or if you are a vendor, have your report reviewed.