While the EU’s platforms rulebook was generally deemed successful, future directions on AI and telecoms regulation remain contentious and uncertain
Both DIGITALEUROPE and Euractiv’s events highlighted the crossroads at which the EU now finds itself
On 4 June 2025, Euractiv hosted its inaugural Tech Policy Conference while DIGITALEUROPE hosted its annual Summer Summit, offering a split-screen on hot topics in EU tech regulation, including digital competition, AI and regulatory simplification. The events, which featured some overlap in speaking line-ups, both featured panels discussing the various contexts in which EU tech and telecoms policy appear at a crossroads. On emerging technologies and advanced connectivity, panellists expressed a sense of urgency in the need for the bloc to change course to avoid being left behind international counterparts. The Trump Administration loomed large over discussions around platform regulation, with questions centred on whether the EU is prepared to stand by its digital rulebook amid criticism and potential retaliation in trade policy. The more definitive contributions from industry and third sector representatives alongside participating MEPs was contrasted, however, by the measured but ranging remarks from the EC, particularly in relation to upcoming reforms to telecoms regulation.
The DMA is working, but too slowly
The Tech Policy Conference opened with a panel on the progress to date in enforcing the Digital Markets Act (DMA), which speakers unanimously agreed was an optimistic but imperfect effort. Alexandre de Streel (Academic Director, Centre on Regulation in Europe) applauded the clear prioritisation of user data and mobile ecosystem harms for DMA enforcement, especially in comparison to the more varied cases opened under the Digital Services Act (DSA), but urged the EC to be more explicit in setting its enforcement agenda. He suggested this could be achieved through issuing guidance on designing compliance solutions for different provisions of the DMA as well as opening more specification proceedings, similar to the one conducted with Apple this year. Sébastien Pant (Competition Policy Officer, BEUC) similarly called for the EC to pick up the pace of its investigations while also better communicating the positive outcomes – including more app stores and more diverse default settings – that the DMA has already delivered. On the importance and size of fines, Pant disagreed with Tim Price (Representative, CODE) who referred to financial penalties as “a bit of a sideshow” as compared to the behavioral changes that the law requires. Panellists unanimously defended fines under the DMA, however, against US characterisations of the law as a tariff and stated that platform regulation should not be on the negotiating table in any trade settlement with the Trump Administration. With potential consumer protection legislation coming in the form of a Digital Fairness Act and a planned review of the DMA approaching in 2026, the panel concluded positively, in general, on the outcome for better protections for consumers online.
Data access and regulatory simplification for AI triggered heated disagreements
Spending her birthday at the Summer Summit, Henna Virkkunnen’s (EVP for Tech Sovereignty, Security and Democracy, EC) keynote speech quickly reeled off the details of the EC’s AI Continent Action Plan. Virkkunen went into further detail on the Apply AI Strategy too, encouraging more businesses and the public sector to adopt AI, while also stressing the need for an EU environment that attracts the best AI talent from around the world. Alexandros Paterakis (Deputy CEO – Executive Board Member of Digital & Advanced Services, PPC Group) echoed this sentiment in the following panel, explaining that the speed at which AI is developing is bringing about new use cases “every week”, providing ample opportunity for businesses. The panel also discussed the importance of data in AI, with visible tension following MEP Aura Salla’s call for the EU to halt its data transfers with not just China, but also the US as a result of the unpredictability of the Trump Administration. Both Paterakis and Jeremy Rollison (Senior Director & Head of EU Policy, Microsoft) disagreed, citing costs and competitiveness as key reasons why these data transfers are necessary. When pressed, Salla also suggested that a slight delay to the implementation of the EU’s AI Act may be beneficial, mirroring some of the discussions reportedly being held behind closed doors in Brussels this week. On regulatory simplification in relation to the GDPR, AI Act and other AI-relevant digital files, MEPs from across the political spectrum were unimpressed for different reasons. MEP Damian Boeselager shared his fear that the idea of simplification had become a smokescreen for reopening old “lobbying fights” and shifting the goal posts on the objectives of the laws. Salla was direct and emphatic once more in calling simplification a “ridiculous word” and demanding that the EU be focused on deregulation instead of reviews and omnibus reforms.
Industry asks for the DNA were consistent, but the EC was less firm on the future directions of the file
At the Summer Summit, Justin Hotard (President and CEO, Nokia) was keen to emphasise the importance of the telecoms sector to the wider digital economy, labelling connectivity “the on-switch for AI”. Hotard also called for a new regulatory environment that enables operators to scale, focusing on in-market consolidation and the need to move from four to three major mobile operators in many European countries. Following Hotard, Virkkunen reiterated the EC’s key goals of enhancing security and competitiveness, reminding the audience that the Digital Networks Act (DNA) is on its way, but did not give any more detail as to what it might include. At the Tech Policy Conference, the panel on building “the backbone of the digital economy” barely referenced the DNA directly, instead discussing banking reform and the Capital Markets Union at length to open conversation. When pressed about the specific market failure the DNA would aim to solve, Franco Accordino (Head of Unit, Investment in High-Capacity Networks, DG CNECT) acknowledged that the EECC had been a success in providing good consumer outcomes such as low prices and delivering network development to an extent, but argued that the EU needed telecoms regulation that could better facilitate innovation within the sector that could evolve business models for the future. After an afternoon of much more critical conversation about the policy directions of the US, Matthias Bauer (Director, European Centre for International Political Economy) praised the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) as an example of regulatory consolidation that the EU should strive for in the DNA, arguing that the telecoms sector was the litmus test for the single market and if reform couldn’t achieve harmonisation within the bloc, then the value of the single market would be seriously in question. Bauer even went so far as to claim that Member States’ regulators had leveraged the idea of sovereignty to guard their national competencies to the detriment of the market.
