The European Union built a reputation as the world's most aggressive tech regulator. Between the Digital Markets Act (DMA) and the Digital Services Act (DSA), Brussels spent years crafting laws designed to keep Silicon Valley giants under control. But now that the heavy artillery is in place, a internal turf war inside the European Commission threatens to derail the next phase of digital policy.
The clash centers on the proposed Digital Fairness Act, a piece of legislation aimed at tackling dark patterns, addictive app designs, subscription traps, and hidden digital tricks that drain consumer wallets. While everyone agrees that deceptive user interfaces are a problem, top officials inside the EU executive body can't agree on who should police them or how far the rules should go.
On one side stands Justice Commissioner Michael McGrath, who wants broad powers to penalize companies of all sizes. On the other side is Digital Chief Henna Virkkunen, who is urging caution to avoid piling duplicate regulations on top of rules that passed only recently.
It’s a classic case of bureaucratic overreach meeting regulatory fatigue, and it reveals a deep fracture in how Europe plans to handle tech in 2026 and beyond.
The Inner Turf War inside the European Commission
At its core, this argument isn't just about fine print. It's about authority, enforcement power, and avoiding administrative chaos.
Michael McGrath has pushed hard for consumer protection mechanisms that give Brussels direct power to slap fines on offenders. Under his vision, enforcement shouldn't be limited to massive gatekeepers like Meta or Google. Smaller online stores, app developers, and video game studios using manipulative design tactics to keep users scrolling or buying loot boxes would fall directly under the Commission's crosshairs.
Henna Virkkunen sees a massive red flag with that approach. Her focus is on clarity and compliance. She points out that the Commission is already engaged in a massive effort to simplify rules and cut red tape. Creating overlapping mandates where two different EU departments enforce similar rules on the same platforms creates legal uncertainty.
When multiple directives govern the exact same online feature, platforms spend more time in court arguing over jurisdiction than fixing their products.
Dark Patterns and Addictive Design in the Crosshairs
What actually counts as a digital fairness violation? The new proposals aim to outlaw subtle interface tricks that exploit human psychology.
- Subscription traps: Making it seamless to join a service in one click, but requiring three emails, a phone call, or hidden cancellation menus to leave.
- Addictive loops: Infinite scrolling, autoplay features, and variable reward mechanics designed specifically to trigger dopamine hits and maximize time-on-app.
- Fake scarcity counters: Countdown timers or "only 2 rooms left" warnings that aren't tied to real-time inventory.
- Aggressive microtransactions: Exploitative monetization schemes in video games targeted at younger audiences.
The EU already polices some of these behaviors under general consumer protection directives and the DSA's ban on deceptive interfaces for large platforms. That's precisely why critics inside the EU argue a whole new law might be redundant.
Member states like Poland have voiced strong concerns that introducing yet another rulebook creates friction without providing extra protection. If the Digital Services Act already forbids deceptive design on major platforms, layering the Digital Fairness Act on top risks cluttering the enforcement landscape.
The Real Problem Isn't More Rules, It's Enforcement
Europe doesn't lack legislation. It lacks enforcement bandwidth.
When the DMA and DSA were passed, tech policy experts warned that the European Commission was taking on a mountain of oversight without enough staff to handle the caseload. Regulators are currently managing active investigations, legal appeals, and geopolitical pushback from Washington over tech enforcement.
Adding thousands of smaller companies and app makers to the direct regulatory workload of Brussels risks stretching oversight teams to a breaking point.
"It is very important that when we are looking at our digital rule book, we keep it clear and don't duplicate things," Virkkunen noted, highlighting that enforcing existing obligations must take priority over writing new ones.
If Brussels spends all its energy writing overlapping frameworks, Big Tech legal teams will simply exploit the regulatory confusion to stall enforcement in court for years.
Geopolitical Pressure and the Trump Factor
Internal infighting isn't happening in a vacuum. External pressure on European tech policy has reached an all-time high.
The US administration has repeatedly criticized European tech rules, calling frameworks like the DMA and DSA discriminatory against American firms. Washington has pressed Brussels to ease off on aggressive enforcement and avoid introducing fresh restrictions.
At the same time, European business leaders have argued that excessive regulation is stifling local innovation, making it harder for European AI startups to scale compared to competitors in the US and Asia.
Virkkunen has maintained that Europe won't trade away its regulatory sovereignty or negotiate its digital laws in foreign trade talks. However, the economic reality forces Brussels to walk a tightrope. Pushing another aggressive rulebook onto the tech sector while existing laws are still being tested in court risks sparking further diplomatic friction while achieving very little on the ground.
What Happens Next for Digital Rules in Europe
The clash between McGrath and Virkkunen shows that the era of passing massive tech frameworks without internal scrutiny is over inside the European Union. The Commission has to prove that its existing rules actually work before piling on more obligations.
If you manage a digital platform, run an e-commerce business, or build apps for the European market, here is how to prepare for what's coming:
- Audit your user flows immediately: Review your sign-up, checkout, and cancellation paths. Eliminate dark patterns like hidden fees or confusing cancellation steps now, because existing consumer laws already target them.
- Review engagement features: If your app relies on infinite scroll or aggressive push notifications, start exploring opt-in design models, especially for younger users.
- Streamline compliance strategy: Focus primary compliance efforts on the core requirements of the DSA and regional consumer protection frameworks rather than worrying about drafted proposals that remain stuck in internal debates.
Brussels will eventually publish its proposal, but expect a much leaner, more targeted text than originally pitched. Quality enforcement of existing laws will always beat a stack of unworkable new regulations.
