Brussels, BELGIUM – A new study highlights critical procedural flaws in the Digital Markets Act (DMA) that are undermining the regulation’s effectiveness, while offering practical recommendations to help make the law work in practice.
As the European Commission’s public consultation on the DMA review closes next week, the Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA Europe) – which commissioned the study – believes these clear findings should inform the Commission’s assessment.
While CCIA Europe and its Members have consistently raised concerns about the DMA’s design and its asymmetrical obligations, the focus is now on effective implementation.
The DMA compliance study, the first of its kind, reflects this pragmatic approach. Even with tech firms’ strong commitment to compliance, DMA procedural mechanisms remain opaque, overly complex, and heavily dependent on the Commission’s broad discretion.
The analysis by law firm King & Spalding finds that current procedures, including informal dialogue, are hindered by tight timelines and legal uncertainty. This creates challenges not only for gatekeepers, but also for third parties seeking access under the DMA. Moreover, it exposes the Commission to potential annulments by the EU Court of Justice.
This lack of clarity and transparency, the study warns, creates significant practical difficulties for all parties, with knock-on effects for business users and consumers.
To ensure DMA processes become simpler and more predictable, the study sets out eight recommendations ahead of the law’s three-year review in 2026. For instance, the Commission could set a time limit after which a company’s practice is automatically deemed compliant, if no further action has been taken.
The following can be attributed to CCIA Europe’s Senior Vice President & Head of Office, Daniel Friedlaender:
“While we have fundamental concerns with the DMA’s flawed and asymmetrical nature, it is EU law, and our Members are fully committed to compliance. In practice, however, compliance has proven to be a guessing game. Expectations are vague from the start.”
”The back-and-forth between gatekeepers and access seekers, as well as subsequent arbitration by the European Commission, is noticeably opaque. The Commission’s goalposts also keep shifting, making effective compliance extremely difficult.”
“We want to help make the DMA work effectively, and this study offers a constructive roadmap to make it more legally robust and enforceable for the benefit of all stakeholders.”
