Brussels seeks its own fining power over dark patterns in the Digital Fairness Act

The European Commission proposed a Digital Fairness Act on Wednesday, November 11, that would ban manipulative "dark patterns" online and, through a companion revision of EU enforcement rules, let the Commission itself fine companies up to 6% of their worldwide annual turnover, according to its press release.

A blacklist aimed at how apps and shops are designed

The proposal targets design choices rather than products. It would ban "fake claims that a product is almost sold out," require clear prices for purchases made with virtual in-app currencies, and offer "the option for consumers to turn off addictive design features," the Commission said. Its questions and answers name autoplay of videos and notifications unrelated to the user's activity as examples of features people could switch off.

Several measures reach into how digital services earn money:

• Subscriptions and free trials. Companies would need a simple cancellation option and "active confirmation before free trials are converted into a paid contract," the Commission said.
• In-app currencies and minors. Companies would have to show what virtual currency purchases are worth in real money, and for minors those currencies "will also have to be turned off by default." Loot boxes and pay-to-win or pay-to-progress features would be banned for minors.
• Personalized ads and prices. Bans the Digital Services Act already applies to online platforms, on targeting minors with personalized advertising or targeting people based on sensitive data, would extend "to all websites and apps."
• Ticket pricing. In virtual queues, companies would have to show the current price in real time and the highest possible price.

The proposal also says consumers "will have clear rights when using an AI agent to buy products on their behalf" and a right to reach a human in customer service.

Brussels as a direct enforcer

At present the Commission "cannot directly enforce these rules," it said; national authorities do, coordinated through a network that has run more than 30 joint actions since 2020. Under the proposed revision of the Consumer Protection Cooperation Regulation, the Commission could step in when a breach is likely to affect consumers in at least two-thirds of member states representing at least two-thirds of the EU population, and only against companies that are not small or medium-sized enterprises. National authorities would then have to stop their own investigations of the same case.

Non-EU companies would have to appoint a legal representative in the EU. The act would also turn the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive into a regulation "directly applicable in all Member States," which the Commission presents as a simplification for businesses.

A €13.7 billion estimate, and two readings of the burden

The Commission said the package is expected to save EU consumers up to €13.7 billion a year. Consumer Commissioner Michael McGrath said at the presentation that misleading practices cost consumers "€10.3 billion per year" and called the package "the most significant reform of EU consumer protection rules in more than 20 years."

The European Consumer Organisation (BEUC) backed the plan before its release. "The Digital Fairness Act is a much-needed tool to give consumers back control of how much time and money they spend online," Director General Agustín Reyna said in a statement.

The Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA Europe), a trade group for communications and technology firms, said the act overlaps with the Digital Services Act, the Consumer Rights Directive and the General Data Protection Regulation. "The Digital Fairness Act creates an enforcement maze," Policy Manager Albane Vannier said in a statement. The group also warned that the act's wider definition of vulnerable consumers could push services to monitor user behavior.

The proposals now go to the European Parliament and the Council, the Commission said.

Where the money is made is where this proposal bites

We think the Digital Fairness Act matters to technology companies less for its bans on fake countdowns than for where it reaches: subscription renewals, in-app currencies and personalized pricing are revenue lines, not interface details, and a ceiling of 6% of worldwide turnover makes the fines large enough to matter to the biggest platforms.

The opportunity is one rulebook instead of 27 national readings of a directive, which favors companies that already sell across the bloc. The threat is a long negotiation in which Parliament and the Council widen the text, as CCIA warns, while compliance costs land before the benefits. We would watch two things: how the rights around AI shopping agents are defined, since agents are a new distribution channel, and whether the two-thirds threshold survives. Our view would change if co-legislators drop direct Commission enforcement, which would leave the act largely in national hands.

The view in this final section is FinanceInTime's editorial opinion, for information only. It is not investment, tax, legal or other advice, and it does not take your circumstances into account. Forecasts are uncertain and past results do not guarantee future ones.