EU Digital Markets Act targets Big Tech with new fines

The European Union's Digital Markets Act is being enforced with renewed intensity, as regulators move to impose significant financial penalties on the world's largest technology platforms for failing to comply with rules designed to open up digital markets and curb the dominance of so-called "gatekeepers." The European Commission has signalled it is prepared to levy fines of up to ten percent of a company's annual global turnover — and up to twenty percent for repeat violations — marking one of the most aggressive regulatory interventions in the history of digital competition policy.

What the Digital Markets Act Actually Does

The Digital Markets Act — which entered into force in May 2023 and began full application in March of the following year — is a piece of EU legislation designed to prevent large online platforms from abusing their market position. Unlike traditional competition law, which requires regulators to prove harm after the fact, the DMA sets out a list of specific obligations and prohibitions that designated gatekeepers must comply with proactively.

Understanding "Gatekeepers"

The term "gatekeeper" refers to companies that operate what the EU calls "core platform services" — these include search engines, social networks, operating systems, online marketplaces, browsers, virtual assistants, and messaging applications. To qualify, a platform must have a significant impact on the EU internal market, operate a service that acts as an important gateway for business users to reach consumers, and hold an entrenched and durable position in the market. In plain terms, a gatekeeper is a platform so dominant that businesses and consumers have little realistic alternative but to use it. (Source: European Commission)

Key Obligations Under the Law

Gatekeepers are now required to, among other things, allow third-party app stores on their platforms, enable users to uninstall pre-installed software, ensure interoperability with competing messaging services, and refrain from ranking their own products and services more favourably than those of competitors. They are also prohibited from combining personal data collected across different services without explicit user consent, a provision with significant consequences for advertising-dependent businesses. According to the Commission, these obligations are intended to create a fairer, more contestable digital environment in which smaller companies can compete without being structurally disadvantaged.

Enforcement Actions and Investigations

The Commission launched its first formal non-compliance proceedings under the DMA earlier this year, opening investigations into several major platforms across multiple service categories. Regulators are examining whether Apple's App Store policies genuinely allow alternative distribution channels, whether Alphabet's self-preferencing practices in Google Search have been adequately addressed, and whether Meta's "pay or consent" advertising model meets the DMA's requirements on user data. Officials said the investigations are ongoing and that preliminary findings will be issued in due course, with formal infringement decisions to follow if breaches are confirmed.

Apple Under Scrutiny

Apple has faced particularly intense scrutiny. The company introduced changes to its iOS operating system and App Store policies in the EU market in response to DMA requirements, but the Commission expressed concern that Apple's so-called "Core Technology Fee" — a charge levied on developers who use alternative distribution channels — may undermine the spirit of the law. Critics argue the fee effectively penalises developers for exercising the very rights the DMA is intended to guarantee. Apple has disputed this characterisation, arguing that its framework complies with the letter of the legislation. (Source: European Commission)

Alphabet and Search Dominance

Regulators are also scrutinising Google's handling of its search results, specifically the extent to which the company continues to favour its own vertical services — such as Google Shopping, Google Maps, and Google Flights — over competing third-party alternatives. This issue predates the DMA; the Commission previously issued multi-billion euro fines against Google under older competition rules. The DMA provides a faster, more prescriptive enforcement mechanism, and officials said they intend to use it. According to data from Gartner, Google accounts for over ninety percent of general search queries in most EU member states, underlining the scale of the competition concern.

The Broader Regulatory Landscape

The DMA does not operate in isolation. It sits alongside the EU's AI Act, the Digital Services Act, and a broader suite of regulations that collectively represent the most comprehensive attempt by any jurisdiction to regulate Big Tech through legislation rather than ad hoc enforcement. As ZenNewsUK has reported, the intersection of competition law and artificial intelligence is becoming increasingly significant, with platforms integrating AI-driven features into core services in ways that may generate new forms of lock-in and self-preferencing. Readers can find detailed coverage of that regulatory thread in our reporting on how EU regulation is expanding to encompass AI-driven platform behaviour, as well as our analysis of the new compliance deadlines facing tech giants under the EU's AI framework.

Comparison With UK Approaches

The United Kingdom, since departing the European Union, has been developing its own parallel framework for digital markets regulation. The UK's Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act introduces a concept of "Strategic Market Status" — broadly analogous to the EU's gatekeeper designation — and empowers the Competition and Markets Authority to impose conduct requirements on firms that hold entrenched positions in digital markets. The UK approach is more case-by-case and less prescriptive than the DMA, granting regulators more discretion but potentially less speed. Coverage of the legislative process behind that framework is available in ZenNewsUK's article on how the UK Digital Markets Bill navigated its final parliamentary stages. More broadly, the UK's evolving position on AI safety and digital regulation is examined in our reporting on tightening AI safety rules under the new digital bill.

Company	Designated Services	Key DMA Obligation	Current Status	Maximum Fine Exposure
Apple	App Store, iOS, Safari, iMessage	Allow third-party app distribution; interoperability	Under formal investigation	10% global turnover (~$38bn)
Alphabet (Google)	Search, Maps, Play Store, Chrome, Android	Prohibit self-preferencing in search results	Under formal investigation	10% global turnover (~$30bn)
Meta	Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, Marketplace	Obtain valid consent for cross-service data combination	Preliminary findings issued	10% global turnover (~$13bn)
Amazon	Amazon Marketplace, Amazon Ads	Non-discriminatory ranking of third-party sellers	Monitoring compliance	10% global turnover (~$57bn)
Microsoft	Windows, LinkedIn, Bing	Interoperability; data portability	Compliance measures submitted	10% global turnover (~$21bn)
ByteDance (TikTok)	TikTok	Transparency in algorithmic recommendation	Compliance under review	10% global turnover (est. ~$8bn)

Note: Fine exposure figures are illustrative estimates based on publicly reported annual revenues. Actual enforcement outcomes depend on Commission findings. (Source: European Commission; company filings)

Industry Response and Legal Challenges

The designated companies have responded to DMA obligations in a variety of ways. Some have introduced compliance frameworks that, critics argue, technically satisfy the letter of the law while preserving the commercial status quo. Others have filed legal challenges before the EU's General Court, seeking to annul their gatekeeper designations or dispute the scope of specific obligations. TikTok, for instance, contested its designation, though that challenge did not succeed in delaying its compliance obligations.

Industry groups have argued that certain DMA provisions risk reducing investment in platform ecosystems and may inadvertently harm consumers who benefit from integrated services. According to research published by IDC, tightly integrated platform ecosystems consistently score higher on user satisfaction metrics, a finding that supporters of the DMA's structural interventions contest as failing to account for the absence of genuine competitive alternatives. MIT Technology Review has noted that the tension between integration and interoperability is likely to define the next decade of digital policy debate, as regulators worldwide look to the EU's experiment as a potential model.

The Self-Preferencing Debate

One of the most contested provisions concerns self-preferencing — the practice by which a platform operator ranks or promotes its own products and services above those of rivals using the same platform. Proponents of the DMA's prohibition argue that this practice uses captive distribution infrastructure to distort competition. Opponents contend that some degree of product integration is both commercially rational and beneficial to end users. Wired has characterised this as the defining battleground of the DMA's enforcement phase, with the outcome likely to set precedents that reshape how digital platforms are designed and monetised globally.

Implications for Global Digital Policy

The Digital Markets Act is being watched closely by regulators in the United States, the United Kingdom, Japan, South Korea, and Australia, all of which are at various stages of developing or implementing their own digital competition frameworks. The EU's willingness to impose enforceable structural requirements on global platforms — and its capacity to do so by virtue of market access — gives the DMA significant extraterritorial influence. Companies cannot simply carve out EU-specific product variants without significant cost, meaning changes made to comply with the DMA often propagate to global products. This dynamic, sometimes called the "Brussels Effect," is increasingly shaping how technology products are designed at source.

The pace and outcome of the Commission's current investigations will be closely monitored not only by the technology industry but by policymakers globally. For those tracking the UK's parallel and related regulatory trajectory, ZenNewsUK's analysis of UK AI regulation in the context of global tech tensions provides important comparative context. As enforcement actions mature and the first formal fines are issued, the DMA's true deterrent effect — and its capacity to structurally reshape dominant digital markets — will begin to become clear. What is not in doubt is that the era of largely self-regulated digital platforms in the European market is over.