On 28 April, the European Commission released its first formal review of the Digital Markets Act (DMA), concluding that the regulation is “fit for purpose” and has had a positive impact on consumers and competition. The review, based on 450 contributions from public consultations held between July and September 2025, found that the DMA “remains relevant and well-adapted to the evolving digital environment”. Yet the European Parliament is pushing for faster, stronger enforcement amid external pushback from tech giants and industry associations.
The DMA, which entered into force in 2022, aims to make Europe’s digital markets fairer and more accessible by curbing the power of major online platforms designated as “gatekeepers”. These include Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, ByteDance, Meta, Microsoft, and Booking – companies with an annual turnover of at least €7.5 billion, a market value of €75 billion, and at least 45 million monthly end users. Twenty-three of their services are considered gateways.
Mixed Reactions from Brussels and Beyond
Andreas Schwab, the European Parliament’s rapporteur for the DMA and a member of the EPP, broadly agreed with the Commission’s assessment but cautioned that “digital markets evolve rapidly, and the framework should not be seen as static, in particular with regards to AI and cloud”. His comments reflect a growing concern that the DMA may need updating to address emerging technologies.
Critics, however, argue that the DMA is a heavy-handed intervention that creates compliance issues and stifles innovation. Maria Teresa Stecher, Senior Policy Manager at the Computer and Communication Industry Association (CCIA) in Brussels – which represents four of the seven gatekeepers – said the act “lacks a fair procedure of checks and balances” and that competition law could have achieved similar results without targeting specific companies. She also noted that the DMA’s changes are making online navigation more complicated and less user-friendly, with users now forced through intermediaries for search results, leading to less relevant outcomes and higher prices.
On the other hand, consumer advocates see clear benefits. Agustin Reyna, Director General of the consumer rights association BEUC, pointed out that consumers can now choose their preferred browser on iOS through a choice screen, and have more control over their data and how it is used for personalised advertising. Businesses can promote their services on an equal footing with gatekeepers, set their own prices, and access the data they generate while on these platforms.
Enforcement Gaps and Unintended Consequences
Despite early progress, the Commission’s review found that enforcement has been slow and uneven. Some gatekeepers have only partially complied, redesigning apps and settings in ways that technically offer alternatives but dilute the intended effect. The Commission has already fined Apple €500 million and Meta €200 million in 2025, and on 16 April asked Google to grant third-party access to search data.
Schwab acknowledged that “concerns about unintended consequences should be taken seriously, but they are often overstated. There is so far limited evidence of systemic negative spillovers, which is mainly a narrative deployed by the gatekeepers themselves.” However, Stecher countered that smaller companies heavily reliant on gatekeepers are suffering annual losses between €8 billion and €114 billion, a cost the Commission is not adequately considering.
The debate over the DMA’s effectiveness is likely to intensify as the European Parliament pushes for faster enforcement and as the Commission considers updates to address AI and cloud services. For now, the act remains a landmark intervention in Europe’s digital economy, but its long-term impact on innovation, competition, and consumer choice is still unfolding. For more on the broader context, see our earlier analysis Two Years In: Has the EU's Digital Markets Act Tamed Big Tech? and EU's Digital Markets Act: How Brussels Is Curbing Big Tech's Dominance.
