On 24 March 2022, the European Parliament and the Council reached an agreement on the Digital Markets Act (“DMA”), a pioneering initiative to regulate digital markets and endorse the European digital strategy. The DMA would include a set of obligations for “designated gatekeepers”, namely companies whose digital services would be determined as an important gateway for businesses to reach consumers.

The DMA has been negotiated for more than a year, with discussions centering around: (i) the criteria for determining “designed gatekeepers”, (ii) content of specific obligations, and (iii) enforcement mechanisms. The final agreed text has not yet been released, but we share our understanding of the developments in these three areas.

1. Criteria for designating “gatekeepers

The DMA would apply to companies providing so-called “core platform services”. Browsers and virtual assistants have been now added to the list of “core platform services”, which also includes online intermediation services, online search engines, online social networking services, video sharing platform services, certain messaging services, operating systems, cloud services and advertising services.

To be designated as a “gatekeeper”, the company would need to meet three cumulative criteria: (i) have a significant impact on the internal market, (ii) operate one or more important gateways to customers and (iii) enjoy, or are expected to enjoy, an entrenched and durable position in their operations. These criteria would be presumed to be met by the providers of “core platform services” with a market capitalisation of at least EUR 75 billion or an annual turnover of EUR 7.5 billion, at least 45 million monthly end users and 10,000 annual business users in the EU. These quantitative criteria have been heatedly discussed and the thresholds have increased in comparison to those suggested by the European Commission (“Commission”) (a market capitalisation of at least EUR 65 billion and an annual turnover of EUR 6.5 billion).

2. Obligations and prohibitions

Consistent with some of the findings of the European Commission’s consumer Internet of Things sector inquiry, the European Parliament and the Council have confirmed and extended the dos and don’ts, for the “designated gatekeepers”.

By way of example, the DMA would include a new interoperability obligation for the messaging services, requiring them to enable communication across apps. In addition, browsers, search engines and virtual assistants would be required to display a consumer choice screen upon a user’s first use. The law-makers have also extended the requirement to provide fair access conditions, which now concerns not only app stores but also search engines and social networks. It was also agreed that combining personal data for targeted advertising would only be allowed with explicit user consent.

The revised obligations would supplement those proposed by the Commission in the DMA proposal. For example, the DMA would prohibit companies from favouring their own services over those provided by third parties in specified circumstances, such as in “rankings” or by imposing price parity (also referred to as most-favoured-nation) clauses. It would also impose a number of obligations related to interoperability, data handling and digital advertising (see our analysis of the Commission’s DMA proposal). Overall, most of the obligations are designed to limit types of conduct that the proponents believe can extend market power in one market into related markets, but some provisions (e.g., the search engine obligation and the messaging interoperability) are aimed at strengthening competition in the particular “core platform service” market.

3. Enforcement mechanisms

The DMA would enable the Commission to conduct investigations to identify “designated gatekeepers”, their “core platform services” and to ensure their compliance with the DMA.

In case of non-compliance, the Commission would be able to impose fines of up to 10% of the company’s total world-wide turnover. More severe penalties, including structural remedies, bans on further acquisitions and fines up to 20% of the total world-wide turnover would be for “systematic non-compliance”. These sanctions — and especially the fine for systematic non-compliance that has been bumped up to 20% — demonstrate the drive to increase the DMA’s likelihood of compelling compliance. According to Andreas Schwab, a lead MEP on the DMA, the threshold for “systematic non-compliance” would be three decisions in eight years which find a violation of similar obligations with the same “core platform services”. The decisions on fines and penalties can be appealed before the Court of Justice of the European Union.

The DMA would apply alongside and without prejudice to EU and national competition laws. While the competence to enforce the DMA would be vested in the Commission, the EU Member State would play a supporting role.

4. Next steps

After formal approval by the Council and the European Parliament, the DMA is expected to be entered into the EU’s official journal in October. It will enter into force twenty days later and most of its provisions would start to apply in April 2023.

The designation process would take another few months. The companies that meet the designation criteria would have two months to notify the Commission that they come under the scope of the DMA; the Commission will itself have two months for formally designating a company as a “gatekeeper”.

From that moment, the “gatekeeper” will in general have six months to bring its products and services in compliance with the DMA, with some obligations having an extended period for compliance (e.g., the group messaging interoperability requirement has a period for compliance of four years). As a result, it is likely that the regulation will bring first tangible effects late 2023.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Johan Ysewyn Johan Ysewyn

Johan is widely respected as a highly skilled European competition lawyer, advising on complex competition issues, including on merger control, anti-cartel enforcement, monopolisation cases and other conduct investigations. He acts as co-head of the firm’s Global Competition group and as managing partner of…

Johan is widely respected as a highly skilled European competition lawyer, advising on complex competition issues, including on merger control, anti-cartel enforcement, monopolisation cases and other conduct investigations. He acts as co-head of the firm’s Global Competition group and as managing partner of the Brussels office.

Clients turn to Johan when they need cutting-edge competition and regulatory advice. He has been advising some of the world’s leading companies for over 30 years on their most complex competition issues. Johan is “an exceptional lawyer who is solution-oriented, has a remarkable ability to rapidly understand our business and has excellent reactivity” (Chambers Global).  Johan “attracts considerable praise for his reliable practice, as well as his great energy and insight into cartel proceedings” (Who’s Who Legal). “Johan Ysewyn has a unique understanding of the EC and a very helpful network of connections across Brussels. (…) One of the best European competition lawyers” (Legal 500).

Johan represents clients from around the world in dealings with competition authorities as well as in court litigation. He has in-depth knowledge of regulatory procedures and best practices as well as longstanding relationships with key regulators, in particular at the European Commission. He has also an active advisory practice covering a range of areas of interest to corporates, including the interplay between ESG goals and competition law, the impact of competition law enforcement on digital markets and broad strategic compliance issues.

Johan’s experience spans many industry sectors, with recent experience in telecoms and information technology, media, healthcare, consumer goods, retail, energy and transport. He has advised on several of the most major merger investigations in recent years. In addition, he has represented clients in many conduct investigations.

Johan’s practice also has a strong focus on global and European cartel investigations. He has acted for the immunity applicants in the bitumen and marine hose cartels, and acted for defendants in alleged cartels in financial services, consumer goods, pharmaceuticals, chemicals, consumer electronics and price benchmarking in the oil sector. He has acted for the European Payments Council in the first European Commission investigation into standardisation agreements in the e-payments sector. Johan has written and lectured extensively on international cartel and leniency-related issues. He co-authors the loose-leaf European Cartel Digest and lectures on cartel law and economics at the Brussels School of Competition.

Johan is also one of the leading experts on EU State aid issues, working both for beneficiaries and governments. He has advised a number of leading banks and governments, as well as represented major European airlines. From the cases that can be publicly disclosed, he has been involved in the Fortis, KBC, Dexia, Arco, Citadele, airBaltic and Riga Airport State aid cases.

Photo of Kevin Coates Kevin Coates

Kevin Coates advises clients on strategic antitrust and other government investigation issues drawing on twenty years of public sector experience in the Directorate-General for Competition of the European Commission (“DG COMP”) and ten years of private sector experience as in-house counsel and in…

Kevin Coates advises clients on strategic antitrust and other government investigation issues drawing on twenty years of public sector experience in the Directorate-General for Competition of the European Commission (“DG COMP”) and ten years of private sector experience as in-house counsel and in private practice.

Kevin advises on all aspects of EU, UK and international competition law, including abuse of dominance, cartels and leniency, mergers and compliance, as well as related EU regulations such as the Digital Markets Act (DMA) and Digital Services Act (DSA). He has extensive experience in technology, software and e-commerce sectors.

Kevin worked in the Directorate General for Competition (DG COMP) of the European Commission for twenty years, including seven years reporting directly to the Director General, and nearly ten years as a head of unit, latterly as Head of a Cartel Unit. While working for the Director General he advised on case, policy and communications issues, worked closely with the Competition Commissioner and their Cabinet, and was one of the team that produced the Guidance on Enforcement Priorities under Article 102.

Kevin also served as in-house Counsel at AOL Europe where he was responsible for antitrust and regulatory issues for AOL subsidiary companies in the UK, Germany, France and the Netherlands.

He co-wrote the IP and the telecoms and media chapters in Faull & Nikpay’s “EC Law of Competition,” and is the author of “Competition Law and Regulation of Technology Markets” published by Oxford University Press in 2011. He was a Hauser Global Fellow at NYU School of Law in 2009/2010.

Drawing on his substantive antitrust experience in government and private practice, Kevin counsels clients on business-critical issues. He is known for combining a deep knowledge of the law with an ability to communicate clearly and convincingly.