The European Commission is preparing to introduce the Digital Fairness Act (DFA), a new legislative initiative aimed at strengthening consumer protection in digital environments.  In the mission letter from 17 September 2024 addressed to Commissioner-designate for Democracy, Justice and the Rule of Law, President von der Leyen refers to the need to develop “a Digital Fairness Act to tackle unethical techniques and commercial practices related to dark patterns, marketing by social media influencers, the addictive design of digital products and online profiling especially when consumer vulnerabilities are exploited for commercial purposes”. The DFA is intended to complement existing frameworks including the Digital Services Act (DSA), Digital Markets Act (DMA), and AI Act but still it remains unclear whether the DFA will be a regulation or a directive.

A public consultation ran from 17 July 2025 to 24 October 2025, receiving 3,341 responses. However, stakeholders’ reactions to the proposed DFA have been mixed. Industry groups such as EuroCommerce have called for better enforcement of existing rules rather than new legislation. Large companies showed low support (ranging from 5% to 22%) for proposed measures on personalisation practices, while business associations similarly expressed caution, with many referring to existing legislation which they consider comprehensive. 

On the opposite side, consumer advocates strongly support stricter regulation. In the consultation, consumer associations backed measures including more control for consumers over personalised advertising (87%), restrictions on personalised advertising using information about vulnerabilities (87%), and prohibition of personalised advertising targeting minors (93%). Academic commentators have raised concerns about potential overregulation, overlap with existing rules, and enforcement complexity.

Against this backdrop what is problematic about online practices?

• Dark patterns – design techniques that manipulate consumers into making decisions they would not otherwise make. Examples include fake urgency claims (“only one room left!”) and deceptive cookie banner designs.
• Addictive design – digital services designed to encourage users to spend more time or money than intended, such as auto-playing videos, reward systems for continued use, or penalties for inactivity. The Commission notes particular risks for vulnerable consumers, including children.
• Online personalisation – practices including behavioural advertising, personalised search results, and dynamic pricing. The Commission is concerned about businesses exploiting consumer vulnerabilities identified through personal data processing.

• Social Media Influencers – insufficient transparency around paid partnerships and commercial communications, as well as problematic content targeting children (e.g., advertising for unhealthy food, alcohol, or vaping products).
• Subscription Traps -difficulties consumers face when attempting to cancel online subscriptions, including automatic renewals, hidden charges after free trials, and unclear contract terms.

According to the Commission, these malpractices cost EU consumers at least EUR 7.9 billion annually. By contrast, the total cost for businesses to comply with EU consumer law is estimated at no more than EUR 737 million—suggesting that enhanced regulation could deliver significant net benefits.

Link:  https://www.digital-fairness-act.com/