{"id":1853,"date":"2026-07-12T23:48:42","date_gmt":"2026-07-12T22:48:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/swedishpost.org\/?p=1853"},"modified":"2026-07-12T23:48:42","modified_gmt":"2026-07-12T22:48:42","slug":"eu-plans-direct-fining-powers-against-big-tech-over-addictive-design-and-digital","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/swedishpost.org\/?p=1853","title":{"rendered":"EU Plans Direct Fining Powers Against Big Tech Over Addictive Design and Digital Consumer Traps"},"content":{"rendered":"

BRUSSELS \u2014 The European Union is preparing legislation that would give Brussels stronger powers to penalise technology companies for addictive design, subscription traps and other online practices that manipulate consumers, opening a new front in the bloc\u2019s effort to regulate the commercial architecture of digital services.<\/p>\n

European Commissioner for Democracy, Justice, the Rule of Law and Consumer Protection Michael McGrath said the Commission intends to strengthen safeguards for people using websites, social-media platforms, applications, online games and digital marketplaces. The planned measures would focus particularly on children and other users considered vulnerable to designs intended to prolong engagement or encourage spending.<\/p>\n

The Commission is expected to present its proposed Digital Fairness Act by the end of 2026. In parallel, EU officials are considering changes that would allow the Commission itself to enforce consumer-protection law and impose financial penalties in exceptionally large, systemic and cross-border cases.<\/p>\n

That would represent an important change from the existing system, under which consumer law is normally enforced by national authorities. Regulators cooperate through the EU\u2019s Consumer Protection Cooperation network when a practice affects people in several member states, while the Commission coordinates discussions and facilitates common action.<\/p>\n

McGrath argued that coordination alone has not created a sufficiently credible deterrent. Although national authorities possess enforcement powers and EU rules require the availability of substantial fines for widespread infringements, the fragmented structure can make it difficult to produce a single, rapid response to a digital service operating under largely identical conditions throughout the 27-member bloc.<\/p>\n

The proposed central powers would be reserved for major cases with an EU-wide dimension rather than replacing routine national supervision. However, they could allow Brussels to investigate and sanction conduct affecting millions of users without depending entirely on separate administrative or judicial procedures in multiple countries.<\/p>\n

The possible enforcement reform would apply more broadly than the largest social-media companies. Officials are considering coverage that could include smaller online traders, app providers and video-game businesses when their conduct causes widespread consumer harm. That reflects the Commission\u2019s view that manipulative commercial design is not limited to a handful of designated technology platforms.<\/p>\n

At the centre of the initiative are so-called dark patterns: interface choices that steer users towards decisions they might not otherwise make. These can include presenting acceptance buttons more prominently than rejection options, repeatedly prompting people to purchase upgrades, concealing important information, automatically selecting paid features or creating unnecessary obstacles when users try to cancel a service.<\/p>\n

Subscription traps are another priority. Consumers may be offered a free or discounted trial but encounter unclear renewal terms, difficult cancellation procedures or multiple screens designed to discourage withdrawal. Regulators are also examining practices in which cancelling a service is significantly more complicated than joining it, or where important costs emerge only near the end of a transaction.<\/p>\n

The Digital Fairness Act is also expected to examine addictive design. This category can include infinite scrolling, automatic video playback, persistent notifications, reward mechanisms, highly personalised recommendations and prompts calibrated to keep users engaged. Such features are commercially valuable because additional attention can generate advertising revenue, data collection, in-app purchases or subscription retention.<\/p>\n

The Commission has said its objective is not to prohibit ordinary efforts to make digital products appealing. The regulatory question is whether particular designs unfairly exploit behavioural vulnerabilities, undermine informed choice or expose users to foreseeable physical, psychological or financial harm.<\/p>\n

Children are likely to occupy a central position in the proposal. McGrath said younger users can be especially impressionable when digital engagement is connected to commercial transactions. Concerns include purchases made inside games, pressure to acquire virtual items, personalised advertising, influencer marketing and repeated prompts that obscure the distinction between entertainment and spending.<\/p>\n

A Commission survey published on July 9 found strong demand among children for greater protection. Nearly half of the almost 5,000 participants from across the EU called for rules addressing addictive features that keep people online longer, while more than half sought stronger safeguards against personalised advertising and personalised pricing.<\/p>\n

\"European<\/figure>\n

The findings are likely to reinforce calls for rules that do not place the entire burden on children or their parents. Existing safety controls can require extensive technical knowledge, may be easy to dismiss and often depend on users recognising risks at the moment they are being influenced by a platform\u2019s design.<\/p>\n

McGrath has advocated a broader policy response combining regulation, safer default settings, parental oversight, digital education and tools that help young users understand commercial and psychological risks. He has cautioned against treating any single intervention as a complete solution.<\/p>\n

The proposed consumer legislation is emerging alongside a wider European debate over whether access to social media should be restricted below a certain age. Several governments have explored age limits or stronger verification requirements, while critics have raised concerns about privacy, proportionality and the ability of young users to bypass restrictions.<\/p>\n

McGrath indicated that international evidence on outright age-based bans remains inconclusive. He argued that policymakers must also examine how platforms are designed, how defaults operate, whether parents can exercise meaningful control and whether children receive adequate preparation for digital environments that will remain part of their adult lives.<\/p>\n

The Commission\u2019s consumer initiative is separate from, but closely connected to, enforcement under the Digital Services Act. The DSA requires the largest platforms to assess and reduce systemic risks, including risks to minors, public health and users\u2019 physical and mental wellbeing. It also prohibits deceptive interface design in circumstances covered by the regulation.<\/p>\n

On July 10, the Commission issued preliminary findings that Meta\u2019s Facebook and Instagram services had breached the DSA because of their allegedly addictive design. Investigators focused on infinite scrolling, autoplay, push notifications and highly personalised recommendation systems, which the Commission said could fuel compulsive use and place users into an \u201cautopilot\u201d pattern of consumption.<\/p>\n

The Commission also found that Meta\u2019s current mitigation measures did not adequately address those risks. It criticised tools that could be easily dismissed or overridden and said parental controls could require too much time and technical knowledge. Brussels suggested possible changes including less engagement-focused recommendation systems, more effective screen breaks and disabling certain continuous-consumption features by default.<\/p>\n

Meta disputed the preliminary assessment, saying it had introduced Teen Accounts and other protections that allow parents to restrict access, impose time limits and block overnight use. The company has the right to examine the Commission\u2019s evidence and respond before a final decision is taken.<\/p>\n

A confirmed DSA breach can result in a fine of up to 6 per cent of a company\u2019s worldwide annual turnover. The Commission made a similar preliminary finding against TikTok in February, citing infinite scrolling, autoplay, notifications and personalised recommendations. Those proceedings demonstrate that some addictive-design conduct can already be investigated under existing platform legislation.<\/p>\n

The planned Digital Fairness Act would nevertheless address a wider range of consumer relationships and commercial practices. It could reach businesses that are not designated as very large platforms under the DSA and conduct that is more directly connected to purchasing, subscriptions, pricing, advertising or contractual decisions.<\/p>\n

Existing EU consumer law already prohibits unfair and misleading commercial practices, and member states must provide for fines in major coordinated cross-border cases. Under the EU\u2019s modernised enforcement framework, the maximum penalty available for certain widespread infringements must reach at least 4 per cent of the trader\u2019s annual turnover in the member states concerned. Where turnover cannot be established, the maximum fine must be at least \u20ac2 million.<\/p>\n

The practical problem, according to supporters of reform, is not simply the absence of legal rules. It is the difficulty of applying them consistently to rapidly changing digital products. A platform can redesign an interface, alter a recommendation system or introduce a new payment mechanism across Europe almost immediately, while investigations remain distributed among authorities with different resources, priorities and procedural requirements.<\/p>\n

\"European<\/figure>\n

Centralised intervention could reduce the risk of inconsistent national outcomes and allow the Commission to address a single EU-wide practice through one enforcement process. It could also make penalties more predictable for companies, although businesses are likely to demand clear safeguards, defined jurisdictional thresholds and protection against being investigated simultaneously under several overlapping legal regimes.<\/p>\n

That potential overlap has become one of the main concerns surrounding the initiative. Some officials and member states have questioned whether new consumer rules could duplicate obligations under the DSA, the Digital Markets Act, the General Data Protection Regulation and existing directives on unfair commercial practices and consumer rights.<\/p>\n

Poland has been among the countries reported to have raised concerns about duplication. Technology companies and business groups are also expected to argue that Europe should simplify its regulatory framework rather than add another set of obligations. They are likely to seek precise definitions of addictive design, unfair personalisation and manipulative choice architecture.<\/p>\n

The Commission says the Digital Fairness Act is intended to close identified gaps while simplifying and clarifying the rules for compliant businesses. Its earlier review of EU consumer law identified dark patterns, addictive product design, unfair personalisation, misleading influencer marketing, problematic pricing practices and digital-contract issues as areas requiring further attention.<\/p>\n

The legislative details will determine whether the measure operates as a targeted amendment to existing consumer law or creates a broader regulatory framework. Key unresolved questions include which authority would open cases, how responsibilities would be divided between Brussels and national regulators, what turnover base would be used to calculate penalties and how companies could challenge decisions.<\/p>\n

Lawmakers will also have to decide whether specific practices should be prohibited outright or assessed case by case. A general ban can provide certainty where conduct is clearly harmful, but technology companies may argue that features such as autoplay, recommendations and notifications can serve legitimate functions depending on the context, age of the user and available controls.<\/p>\n

Consumer organisations are expected to press for rules based on measurable outcomes rather than formal compliance. A cancellation button may technically exist, for example, but still be ineffective when it is hidden behind multiple menus. A time-management tool may be offered but deliver little protection if users can dismiss it instantly or if the platform continues to deploy prompts engineered to restore engagement.<\/p>\n

The initiative could therefore shift the regulatory focus from whether a choice is theoretically available to whether the overall design permits consumers to exercise that choice freely and without unreasonable friction. That approach would affect product development, user testing, advertising strategy, subscription management and the design of recommendation systems.<\/p>\n

Companies operating across the EU may need to document how interface decisions were made, assess risks to different user groups and demonstrate that commercial objectives did not override consumer autonomy. Businesses serving children could face stricter expectations for default settings, purchase confirmation, advertising disclosures and parental controls.<\/p>\n

The proposal remains at an early stage and must still be approved by the Commission before being submitted to the European Parliament and the Council of the EU. Both institutions could substantially amend its scope, enforcement structure and penalty provisions during negotiations.<\/p>\n

Even before legislation is adopted, the announcement increases pressure on digital companies to review engagement mechanisms and consumer journeys. Recent DSA proceedings against Meta and TikTok show that Brussels is already prepared to treat platform design, rather than only illegal content, as a central enforcement issue.<\/p>\n

The emerging policy direction is that online consumer protection should address the systems influencing behaviour before a purchase, subscription or prolonged session occurs. For the technology industry, the regulatory question is no longer limited to what information is displayed on a screen. It increasingly concerns how interfaces organise choices, how algorithms sustain attention and whether users can disengage as easily as they can enter.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

BRUSSELS \u2014 The European Union is preparing legislation that would give Brussels stronger powers to penalise technology companies for addictive design, subscript<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":1850,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5],"tags":[800],"class_list":["post-1853","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news","tag-technology-regulation"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/swedishpost.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1853","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/swedishpost.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/swedishpost.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/swedishpost.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/swedishpost.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1853"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/swedishpost.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1853\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/swedishpost.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/1850"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/swedishpost.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1853"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/swedishpost.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1853"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/swedishpost.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1853"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}