Apple and Meta have once again found themselves under fire from European Union regulators, this time facing substantial fines under the new Digital Markets Act (DMA).
The European Commission has fined Apple €500 million and Meta €200 million for violating the Digital Markets Act (DMA).
The penalties highlight concerns about dominance and business practices of Apple and Meta. These actions follow a lengthy investigation by the European Commission, which concluded that both companies breached DMA rules designed to open digital markets to smaller competitors and increase consumer choice.
European Commission
European Commission said Apple was found to have breached its anti-steering obligations by restricting app developers from informing users about cheaper alternatives outside the App Store. The Commission has ordered Apple to remove these restrictions and prevent future violations.
Meta violated the DMA by not offering users a proper alternative to its “Consent or Pay” model for Facebook and Instagram, which required users to either consent to data tracking for personalized ads or pay for an ad-free experience. The Commission determined this did not provide users with a genuine choice. Although Meta introduced a new model in November 2024, the fine addresses the non-compliant period from March to November 2024.
These are the first non-compliance decisions under the DMA. Additionally, the Commission removed Meta’s Facebook Marketplace from DMA obligations, concluding it no longer meets the required user threshold.
What went wrong
Apple’s resistance to allowing alternative app distribution methods and its imposition of the so-called Core Technology Fee has drawn particular ire. These measures are seen as deterrents for developers wanting to bypass the App Store, undermining the DMA’s core goals.
Though Apple avoided sanctions in a separate case concerning browser options, the overall picture suggests a pattern of minimal compliance paired with strategic fee structures that sustain its control over iOS ecosystems. Apple’s response to the fine — labeling the decision unfair and harmful to privacy — reads more as a deflection than a genuine commitment to user empowerment or transparency.
Meta, meanwhile, has come under scrutiny for its pay-or-consent model, which critics argue coerces users into accepting tracking or paying for privacy. The EU sees this as a breach of DMA principles, pushing back against a model that effectively monetizes personal data in exchange for basic access. Meta’s assertion that the EU is unfairly targeting American firms reflects a defensive posture that prioritizes profit over regulatory compliance or ethical data practices.
Comments from noyb
Max Schrems, Chair of noyb, has criticized Meta’s advertising model, stating that while only a small percentage of users prefer personalized ads, the company’s “pay or okay” system yields an unreasonably high consent rate, which he argues is not genuinely voluntary under EU law.
Although the European Commission has issued a fine, the case remains ongoing and only covers the period from March to November 2024. Since then, Meta introduced a third option called “less ads,” which has been widely criticized for poor usability, including forced ad breaks and nudges toward fully personalized ads.
Max Schrems argues that Meta continues to use personal data for advertising purposes and calls the “less ads” feature a deceptive tactic to legitimize the flawed system. The non-profit noyb.eu, which advocates for strict enforcement of EU data protection laws, has filed hundreds of cases against major tech companies and is funded by over 5,000 members.
Both companies’ reactions underscore unwillingness to adapt their business models in line with European standards. Instead of constructive engagement, they’ve framed the issue as economic protectionism or an attack on innovation. These positions ignore the real issues at hand—market fairness, consumer autonomy, and digital accountability.
Baburajan Kizhakedath