Digital Fairness Act (DFA): how the rules for the EU’s digital economy will change

28.01.2026

• Who will it affect?
• What will be regulated?
• 3. Misleading advertising in games
• 4. Other problematic practices
• When will this happen?
• What should businesses do?
• Contact a lawyer for further information

On 24 October 2025, the European Commission’s public consultation on the Digital Fairness Act (DFA) closed. It is important to note that, at this stage, the DFA is a legislative initiative rather than an enacted legal instrument. A final draft is not expected before Q3 2026, and mandatory application is not expected before 2029.

The DFA is aimed at strengthening consumer protection in the digital environment. The initiative does not replace the existing consumer protection directives (UCPD, CRD, UCTD), but complements them. Unfair digital practices cause EU consumers harm of at least EUR 7.9 billion per year.

A key uncertainty is that the DFA currently relies not on specific prohibitions, but on framework principles. The final format—whether “black lists” of practices or a more flexible, principles-based approach—will only become clear in 2026.

Who will it affect?

Territorial scope: the market location principle—any company operating with consumers in the EU, regardless of where it is incorporated. Accordingly, companies incorporated, for example, in Georgia, the United States or the UAE, that target the European market will be required to comply with the DFA.

Sectors likely to be most affected:

The games industry (a particular focus): developers of mobile, PC and console games, game platforms, free-to-play models, and live-service games. More than 3,000 responses from gamers in the first two weeks of the consultation showed strong public interest.

Other sectors: e-commerce (such as Amazon, eBay), streaming services (Netflix, Spotify), social media (Meta, TikTok), travel platforms (Booking.com), and FinTech (BNPL providers).

It remains unclear whether lighter requirements will be introduced for small businesses and small studios (as under the DSA). Experts estimate compliance costs at EUR 500,000 and above for mid-sized companies, which is critical for the competitiveness of SMEs.

What will be regulated?

1. Dark patterns

Such practices include, in particular, manipulative design: contrasting buttons (a bright “Accept all” versus a faded “Decline”), false urgency, and subscription/cancellation asymmetry.

For example, if an app shows: “Only 5 minutes left! Premium set for a paladin for EUR 9.99 instead of EUR 49.99!”, while the “regular” price of EUR 49.99 never actually applied, the timer resets on each login, the screen is dimmed, hiding the X to close the notification—such conduct could potentially be classified as the use of dark patterns.

2. Addictive design

Mechanics designed to maximise time and/or spend: infinite scroll, autoplay, reward loops, loot boxes.

For example:

• Daily login rewards: if a user misses a day, six days of progress are reset
• Energy systems: limited “energy”, replenished over time or by purchase
• Loot boxes with “winning” animations
• Push notifications: “Your energy is full!”
• Digital currency that masks the real-world cost

Within the DFA, particular attention is given to the risk of addiction being formed among underage users.

3. Misleading advertising in games

For example, an advert shows a “pull the pin” puzzle, or high-quality graphics supposedly representing gameplay. In reality, however, the product is a typical idle game with auto-progression—“tap to upgrade”—where “puzzles” make up 1% of the content or are absent altogether. At the same time, the core gameplay is yet another game about building and speeding up progression, which the advert fails to disclose.

4. Other problematic practices

The DFA also addresses unfair personalisation, where companies use collected data to manipulate consumer choice.

A common example is dynamic pricing based on the device used: iPhone owners may see higher prices for the same services than Android users. At the same time, the pricing mechanism itself remains opaque to the consumer.

In influencer marketing, the problem lies in blurred boundaries between a recommendation and advertising. Where a popular blogger describes product placement as a “collaboration” or “partnership” instead of clearly indicating the advertising nature of the post, the consumer is deprived of the ability to assess the information critically. Of particular concern is the use of children in such covert marketing.

Price manipulation includes the practice of gradually adding mandatory fees during checkout—when an initial ticket price of EUR 50 becomes EUR 85 after adding a “mandatory booking fee”, a “processing charge”, and a “seat selection fee”. This also includes fictitious discounts from prices at which the product was never sold, and artificially creating scarcity through messages such as “only 2 rooms left”, where availability is not in fact limited.

Finally, subscription models are often built on asymmetry: subscribing takes one click, whereas cancellation requires calling a call centre, going through multiple confirmation pages, or waiting for a “retention specialist”. Automatic renewal without prior notice and the unobtrusive conversion of a free trial into a paid subscription complement the list of typical problematic practices.

When will this happen?

The European Commission plans to present a draft legislative act in Q3 2026. After that, a lengthy negotiation process will begin between the three key EU institutions—the Commission, the European Parliament, and the Council. These so-called “trilogues” usually take around one to one and a half years.

If everything goes to plan, final adoption of the DFA can be expected in late 2027 or early 2028. This will be followed by a transition period, which for legislation of this type typically lasts 18–24 months. This will give companies time to adapt their systems and processes.

On a realistic assessment, mandatory application of the DFA will begin no earlier than 2029. Until then, the text may change materially—either towards stricter requirements or towards a relaxation—depending on the outcome of political bargaining between Member States and the European Parliament’s position.

What should businesses do?

At the current stage, companies should conduct an internal audit to identify potential risks. This applies to all consumer-facing interfaces—from websites to mobile apps. Particular attention should be paid to subscription and cancellation processes, price transparency, and the absence of manipulative design elements.

For the games industry, it is critical to analyse whether advertising materials accurately reflect actual gameplay. If an advert demonstrates puzzles and strategy, while the core game is an idle title with purchases of progression boosts, such conduct is highly likely to be classified as misleading advertising. An assessment is also required of loot-box mechanics in terms of transparency and ethical design, as well as disclosure of the real-world cost of in-game currency.

Monitoring the development of the legislative initiative should be continuous, ideally through industry associations, which can coordinate the industry’s position and participate in consultations with regulators.

After the publication of the draft in Q3 2026, more concrete work will begin. Companies will need to map the DFA requirements against current practices, develop an implementation roadmap for the necessary changes, and budget for compliance. For large and mid-sized companies, this may mean investments of EUR 500,000 and above.

The Digital Fairness Act may materially affect the business models of digital companies, particularly in games, e-commerce, FinTech, and subscription services.

Authors: Kamal Tserakhau, Aleksei Molchanov.

---

The REVERA team advises on EU regulation of digital products, audits of user interfaces, advertising practices, and preparation for the new consumer-law requirements. We help develop a compliance strategy taking into account the future DFA requirements.