On 25 March, EIF brought together policymakers, industry representatives and consumer organisations to take stock of EU consumer protection in the digital age. At the heart of the discussion was the forthcoming Digital Fairness Act and a question that divided the room: does Europe need new rules, or does it need to enforce the ones it already has? Participants shared a broad concern about the growing gap between the pace of digital change and the capacity of current frameworks to protect consumers, while holding different views on the appropriate legislative response.
Opening Remarks
Stephanie Yon-Courtin MEP opened by arguing that robust EU consumer law is a precondition for trust in the digital world. She focused her remarks on addictive design and the attention economy, stressing that features such as infinite scrolling, autoplay and push notifications are not neutral choices but the product of deliberate behavioural research aimed at maximising engagement and spending. The consequences for minors are particularly serious, she noted, ranging from sleep and attention disorders to mental distress. MEP Yon-Courtin called on the Commission to use the Digital Fairness Act to ban the most harmful addictive features for minors, extend the ban on targeted advertising to all services directed at children, and disable addictive features for younger users by default. She also urged the Commission to work across directorates rather than in silos, describing the DFA as one targeted but necessary addition to a broader consumer protection toolbox.
The Commission's Perspective
Isabelle Pérignon, Director for Consumers at DG JUST, confirmed the Digital Fairness Act will be presented before the end of the year alongside a revision of the Consumer Protection Cooperation regulation. The 2024 Digital Fairness Fitness Check identified concrete gaps around dark patterns, addictive design and non-transparent influencer marketing, practices estimated to cost consumers more than €7.9 billion per year. The DFA will address these gaps without duplicating what the DSA, GDPR or AI Act already cover, and will seek to simplify existing rules in areas such as withdrawal rights for digital subscriptions. On minors, Ms Pérignon confirmed the Commission is assessing whether features such as loot boxes should be disabled by default and examining the feasibility of outright prohibitions in products directed at children. She also flagged the enforcement dimension as critical, noting that the Consumer Protection Cooperation network has yet to impose fines despite 16 ongoing investigations, including against Shein and Temu, underlining the urgency of reforming its powers.
Stakeholder views
Benjamin Brake, Director General of DOT Europe, urged the debate to address a prior question before reaching for new legislation: whether the EU faces a regulatory gap or an implementation gap. Many of the practices under discussion, including dark patterns and manipulative interfaces, are already covered by the DSA, GDPR and Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, frameworks that are still in the early stages of implementation. He argued the priority should be effective enforcement, legal clarity and simplification rather than additional layers of regulation that risk creating further uncertainty. Mr Brake cautioned against broad interventions that could remove tools such as personalisation, which can enhance safety for younger users, and called for any new measures to be targeted and evidence-based. He proposed looking to the DSA and DMA as enforcement models, and raised the possible creation of a European Digital Enforcement Agency to ensure consistent application across platforms.
Els Bruggeman, Head of Advocacy and Enforcement at Euroconsumers, reframed the consumer interest at the outset: consumers are not the enemy of innovation but one of its main drivers, and good consumer law should empower them to push markets to do better. She acknowledged the enforcement gap is real and welcomed the parallel revision of the Consumer Protection Cooperation regulation. Where existing principles are unclear or difficult to apply to new digital realities, she argued that targeted legislation to fill genuine loopholes is warranted. Two examples anchored her contribution. On dynamic pricing, a complaint filed against FIFA over World Cup ticket pricing illustrated how the practice becomes exploitative in markets with no effective competition, even if it can be legitimate elsewhere. On minors, survey research conducted across Euroconsumers' member countries showed a digitally fluent generation that is aware of the risks and asking not for blanket bans but for safety by design and better empowerment tools. Ms Bruggeman's broader caution to DFA drafters was to define fairness carefully: not everything that influences behaviour is harmful, and poorly drawn rules risk eliminating features that genuinely benefit consumers alongside those that do not.
European Internet Forum ©2026. All Rights Reserved.
