European Union competition policy is undergoing a period of recalibration, balancing a desire to foster economic growth and innovation with continued scrutiny of anticompetitive practices. As , the European Commission is signaling a commitment to modernizing its enforcement toolkit, responding to both political pressure and the realities of rapidly evolving markets.
Shifting Priorities in Competition Enforcement
Commissioner Teresa Ribera is leading the charge to reshape the Commission’s approach, aiming for robust and predictable antitrust enforcement, even amidst what she terms the “weaponization of trade.” A key focus is leveraging competition law to advance the EU’s green transition and sustainability goals. However, Ribera has also emphasized that supporting the global competitiveness of European firms, particularly against rivals in the U.S. And China, does not equate to shielding them from competition. The Commission’s strategy centers on deepening the EU Single Market and enabling European companies to scale up and innovate.
Merger Control: Stability and Evolving Guidelines
The number of mergers notified to the Commission in remained stable at 384, consistent with the five-year average of 382. A significant majority – approximately 85% – were processed under the Commission’s simplified procedure. In , nine cases were approved in Phase 1 with commitments, while five were withdrawn during this phase. Only two Phase 2 decisions were adopted – Liberty Media/Dorna Sports and Mars/Kellanova – both cleared unconditionally.
Looking ahead, the Commission has initiated a public consultation and review of its Horizontal and Non-Horizontal Merger Guidelines. This revision, informed by recommendations from the Draghi report on the future of European competitiveness, will address issues such as competitiveness, resilience, market power, dynamic competition, sustainability, digitalization, and efficiencies. A draft of the revised guidelines is expected in spring , with final adoption anticipated in the fourth quarter of .
Expanding Jurisdiction Over Transactions
EU Member States and the Commission are actively exploring ways to exert jurisdiction over deals that fall below traditional filing thresholds. A recent ruling by the EU General Court confirmed Luxembourg’s ability to refer transactions to the Commission under Article 22 of the EU Merger Regulation, even if they aren’t notifiable within the EU. This is due to Luxembourg being the only Member State without a national merger control regime. However, the European Court of Justice has ruled that Member States with national regimes cannot refer transactions that don’t meet their jurisdictional thresholds.
Several Member States, including Bulgaria, Cyprus, Denmark, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovenia, and Sweden, have introduced or are planning to introduce powers to “call in” non-notifiable deals under national merger rules. This trend is facing some legal challenges, as evidenced by Nvidia’s appeal against the Commission’s decision to review its acquisition of Run:AI following an Italian competition authority referral.
Digital Markets and Abuse of Dominance
Digital platform markets remained a primary focus of the Commission’s enforcement activities in . Google was fined €2.95 billion for favoring its own ad exchange, and Microsoft agreed to commitments – including offering versions of Office365 without Teams at a lower price – to address concerns about tying its Teams collaboration platform to its Office suite.
The European Court of Justice further clarified the rules regarding refusal to supply, ruling that such refusals are likely unlawful if they concern access to a digital platform that isn’t indispensable, but only if the asset was created solely for the company’s own use.
The Commission also launched investigations into Red Bull, SAP, Google, and Meta, with a particular focus on the implications of artificial intelligence. While enforcement of the Digital Markets Act (DMA) has gained traction, the Commission continues to utilize Article 102 TFEU – the treaty provision prohibiting abuse of a dominant market position – to maintain contestability in digital markets.
In , the Commission issued its first noncompliance rulings under the DMA, fining two gatekeepers a combined €700 million for alleged violations related to app store alternatives and “consent or pay” advertising models. Both companies have appealed. The Commission also initiated market investigations into Amazon’s AWS and Microsoft’s Azure cloud services to assess whether they should be designated as important gateways under the DMA.
Cartel Enforcement and Increased Fines
Cartel enforcement saw a significant increase in , with total fines reaching €859 million – more than double the combined total of the previous three years. Fifteen car manufacturers were fined over €458 million for collusion related to end-of-life vehicle recycling, while manufacturers of automotive starter batteries faced €72 million in fines for price fixing. The first labour market cartel decision resulted in fines of €329 million for Delivery Hero and Glovo for a no-poach agreement.
The Commission also imposed fines totaling €172,000 for incomplete responses to a request for information during a cartel investigation, highlighting the importance of providing accurate and complete information. A recent ECJ ruling facilitates follow-on damages actions by clarifying that statutes of limitations begin once the competition authority’s infringement decision becomes final.
Foreign Subsidies Regulation (FSR) and Foreign Direct Investment (FDI)
The Commission continues to establish its enforcement practice under the FSR, intervening in M&A transactions and public tender bids involving companies receiving distortive foreign subsidies. Of the 213 deals notified to date, only two have been subject to in-depth review: e&/PPF and ADNOC’s acquisition of Covestro, which was conditionally cleared in December . The Commission has demonstrated flexibility, accepting behavioral remedies rather than requiring divestments.
FDI screening is now effectively universal across the EU, with Greece’s mechanism becoming operational in and Cyprus preparing to apply its regime from April . Screening volumes and intensity remain elevated, with approximately 3,100 cases recorded in . While most interventions remain permissive, cases like Spain’s prohibition of Ganz-Mavag’s takeover of Talgo demonstrate the willingness of Member States to intervene. The EU is also exploring restrictions on outbound investments in strategic technology clusters, mirroring similar initiatives in the U.S.
Looking Ahead to 2026
The coming year is expected to see a culmination of competing pressures – driving productivity and investment while heavily scrutinizing transactions in sensitive sectors. The Commission is likely to continue focusing on perceived “killer acquisitions” and utilizing national call-in powers to review transactions that might otherwise fall below reporting thresholds. The FSR will likely see continued technical reviews, with the Commission focusing on problematic cases and streamlining procedures. FDI screening will remain intensive, and enforcement risks for novel harms to competition, including labor market restraints, are expected to remain high.
