The European Parliament has called for faster and more consistent enforcement of the Digital Markets Act, with closer scrutiny of AI-driven search, cloud services and gatekeeper compliance.
The European Parliament has urged the Commission to strengthen enforcement of the Digital Markets Act, warning that the EU’s digital-market rules must be applied consistently and without delay.
In a resolution adopted on 30 April, Parliament called for the Commission to make full use of its enforcement powers under the Digital Markets Act. The resolution focuses on the practical effect of the rules on competition, market access and user choice, rather than on formal compliance alone.
The Digital Markets Act was introduced to regulate the conduct of large online platforms designated as “gatekeepers”. These companies operate core platform services, such as app stores, search engines, social networks, online marketplaces, operating systems, advertising services and browsers. The law is intended to prevent those firms from using their position to restrict competition or impose unfair conditions on businesses and users.
Parliament’s latest position follows the Commission’s first review of the DMA, published on 28 April. That review concluded that the regulation remains fit for purpose and does not need immediate revision. It also identified areas requiring closer attention, including artificial intelligence, cloud computing and the need for rigorous supervision.
The resolution adopted by Parliament reflects that assessment but applies additional political pressure. It says enforcement should be timely, effective and consistent, and that the Commission should use the instruments available to it, including regulatory dialogue, investigations, non-compliance proceedings and fines.
The focus on enforcement is significant because the DMA’s substantive obligations have applied to designated gatekeepers only since March 2024. The Commission’s own review notes that the practical assessment period has therefore been relatively short. Even so, Parliament argues that delays or weak penalties risk reducing the deterrent effect of the law.
The resolution places particular emphasis on AI-driven search tools and cloud computing services. Both areas are becoming more important to the digital economy and may affect how users access information, how businesses reach customers, and how smaller companies depend on large infrastructure providers.
AI search is relevant because it may alter the way information is ranked, displayed and monetised. If dominant platforms use AI-generated results to keep users within their own services, or to reduce visibility for competing businesses, the same competition concerns that motivated the DMA could arise in a new form. Parliament has therefore called for closer scrutiny of these tools under the existing framework.
Cloud services raise a different set of issues. Many companies rely on cloud providers for computing, storage, data processing and software infrastructure. In November 2025, the Commission opened market investigations into Amazon Web Services and Microsoft Azure to assess whether they should be designated as gatekeepers for cloud computing services. Parliament’s resolution points to the growing strategic importance of this market.
The resolution also addresses external pressure on EU digital rules. Parliament states that political pressure from third countries should not compromise the EU’s ability to define and enforce its own regulatory framework. The point is likely to remain sensitive, given that several designated gatekeepers are headquartered outside the EU and that digital regulation has become part of broader trade and diplomatic exchanges.
The Commission has already taken enforcement action under the DMA. In April 2025, it adopted non-compliance decisions against Apple and Meta. Apple was fined over restrictions linked to anti-steering obligations, while Meta was fined in relation to its advertising model. Parliament’s resolution refers to those fines as modest and argues that effective and proportionate penalties are needed to preserve deterrence.
The resolution also highlights continuing concerns about market practices involving self-preferencing, consent screens, default settings, access to competing services and parity clauses. Parliament says smaller businesses continue to face restrictions that may slow innovation and reduce consumer choice, despite the legal obligations already in force.
The wider issue is whether the DMA is producing visible market changes. Parliament’s position is that compliance should be assessed according to real-world results: whether markets become more open, whether businesses can compete on fairer terms, and whether users can exercise meaningful choice. That approach places pressure on the Commission to examine the practical consequences of gatekeeper conduct, not only the formal measures companies put in place.
For businesses operating in digital markets, the resolution signals continued regulatory scrutiny. App developers, online traders, media services, advertisers, software providers and cloud-dependent companies may all be affected by how the Commission interprets and enforces the DMA. The next phase is therefore likely to focus less on the existence of the rules and more on whether they change commercial behaviour.
For the Commission, the challenge is to enforce the DMA firmly while maintaining legal certainty and procedural fairness. The regulation is still relatively new, and enforcement decisions are likely to be contested by affected companies. However, Parliament’s resolution makes clear that a significant part of the EU legislature expects more visible results.
The resolution does not amend the law. Its importance lies in the political signal it sends. Parliament is asking the Commission to treat the DMA as an active enforcement instrument, particularly in areas where technology is moving quickly and where market power may be reinforced before regulators complete lengthy procedures.
