Members of the European Parliament’s Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON) voted, on Tuesday 26 October, on the draft reports for opinion on legislation regarding the Digital Markets Act (DMA) (see EUROPE 12814/9) and legislation on the Digital Services Act (DSA) (see EUROPE 12810/17).
“The most important added value of the ECON Committee was on competition”, summarised Stéphanie Yon-Courtin (Renew Europe, France), the Parliament’s rapporteur on the DMA.
With regard to the DMA, the work of the European Parliament’s ECON Committee has focused on three areas in particular.
First of all, in terms of governance, the text submitted to the vote on Tuesday calls for support for the resources available to national authorities, whether they are sectoral, industrial or consumer authorities.
In addition, the issue of ‘predatory acquisitions’ is also raised in the text. The rapporteur on the case explains that the approach is based, among other things, on “reversing the burden of proof” so that it is up to gatekeepers to prove, through an independent investigation, that an acquisition is in the interests of the market.
Finally, the text also addresses fines for non-compliance with the rules introduced by the DMA by major players in the sector. The minimum threshold for fines has gone from 5% of annual turnover to 4%. This would be “already a strong signal “ said the MEP from the Renew Europe group.
“The sprawling network of gatekeepers must be stopped. We really want to emphasise this. It is not a question of banning gatekeepers, we need them, but it is important to send a strong signal to regulate”, she added.
It remains to be seen what the agenda will be for these two massive dossiers which are the DSA and the DMA.
“Linking DSA and DMA is not necessarily realistic, as the two do not move at the same speed. However, the more we push the DMA, the more it will push the DSA “, said Ms Yon-Courtin.
While the date of 8 November is still being put forward for a vote in the European Parliament’s Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO) - which is responsible for both texts - sources close to the dossier are nevertheless expressing growing reservations about the possibility of meeting this deadline. (Original version in French by Thomas Mangin)