EU Commission Preliminarily Designates AWS and Azure as DMA Gatekeepers for Cloud Services

On June 25, 2026, the European Commission informed Amazon and Microsoft that it preliminarily believes Amazon Web Services (AWS) and Microsoft Azure should be designated as gatekeepers under the Digital Markets Act (DMA) for cloud computing services. The announcement marks a significant escalation in the EU’s bid to rein in the dominance of hyperscale cloud providers, directly targeting the infrastructure that powers much of the global digital economy. If finalized, the designations would impose a sweeping set of obligations on the two companies, reshaping how cloud services are sold, integrated, and priced across the 27‑member bloc.

A new frontier for the Digital Markets Act

The DMA, which entered into force in November 2022, empowers the European Commission to designate large online platforms as gatekeepers if they meet three cumulative criteria: a significant impact on the internal market, operation of a core platform service that serves as an important gateway for business users to reach end users, and an entrenched and durable position. Core platform services listed in the regulation include cloud computing services, alongside online intermediation, search engines, social networks, and others. While the first gatekeeper designations in September 2023 focused on search, social media, and advertising, the Commission signaled early on that cloud infrastructure would come under scrutiny.

AWS and Azure together command an estimated 50–60% of the global cloud infrastructure market, with AWS holding roughly 32% and Azure around 23%, according to recent industry reports. In Europe, their combined share is even higher, making them the undisputed backbone of enterprise IT, government digitization, and startup growth. The Commission’s preliminary view is that each service meets the DMA thresholds individually, given their enormous revenues, user bases, and control over access to cloud markets. Amazon and Microsoft now have an opportunity to rebut the findings before a final decision, which must be adopted within 45 working days under the DMA’s fast‑track procedure.

What the designation means for AWS and Azure

If confirmed as gatekeepers, AWS and Azure would be required to comply with a detailed list of “do’s and don’ts” designed to foster competition and fairness. These include:

• Interoperability and portability: Gatekeepers must allow business users to access data generated through their activities and provide tools to enable seamless migration to alternative providers. For cloud services, this means customers must be able to move workloads, databases, and configurations without technical or contractual barriers. Egress fees — charges for transferring data out of a cloud — have long been criticized as a lock‑in tactic and would likely be outlawed.
• Prohibition of self‑preferencing: Providers cannot rank their own services or products more favorably than those of competitors. In the cloud context, this could force AWS and Azure to treat third‑party databases, AI models, and software offerings on equal footing with their own proprietary solutions.
• Data access and portability: The DMA mandates that end users and business users have effective and real‑time access to data they generate. Cloud gatekeepers would need to provide continuous, API‑based mechanisms for customers to export their entire digital footprints.
• Uninstalling obligations: Users must be able to uninstall pre‑installed software or apps easily. For cloud platforms that bundle monitoring, identity management, or development tools, this could require offering a naked infrastructure service stripped of any tied‑in software.
• Fraud prevention and reporting: Gatekeepers must allow third‑party services to operate without imposing disproportionate restrictions, and they must report on their compliance efforts regularly.

Beyond these horizontal rules, the Commission can tailor additional remedies if it finds systematic non‑compliance or particular market failures. In the cloud sector, this might include mandated technical standards for APIs, container formats, or service‑level agreements to prevent vendor‑specific lock‑in.

Reactions from Amazon and Microsoft

Neither company greeted the preliminary finding with enthusiasm. A spokesperson for Amazon Web Services stated, “We fundamentally disagree with the Commission’s preliminary view. AWS opens its cloud to every imaginable technology, and our customers choose us because of our relentless innovation, not because of any lack of competition. The DMA was not designed for a highly competitive market like cloud computing.”

Microsoft, which has been a more vocal supporter of interoperability initiatives in recent years, struck a more measured tone but still pushed back. “Azure operates in a fiercely competitive market with dozens of capable alternatives. We have already introduced industry‑leading data portability commitments and believe we already meet the spirit of the DMA. We will engage constructively with the Commission while protecting our ability to innovate for European customers,” a Microsoft representative said.

Legal scholars anticipate that both companies will challenge the final decision, should it come, before the EU’s General Court. The DMA leaves limited room for appeal on factual grounds, but Amazon and Microsoft may argue that cloud computing is inherently dynamic and that they lack the “entrenched and durable” position the law requires. They could also point to the presence of Google Cloud, IBM Cloud, Oracle, and a growing number of European‑based alternatives like OVHcloud and Deutsche Telekom’s Open Telekom Cloud.

A multi‑front regulatory assault

The DMA cloud gatekeeper move is just the latest chapter in Europe’s widening push to regulate big tech. In parallel, the Data Act, adopted in 2025, already imposes obligations on cloud providers to ease switching and limit egress fees, though critics say its scope is narrower. The European Data Protection Board has also issued guidelines on cloud data transfers, while several national competition authorities — notably those in Italy, France, and the Netherlands — have opened investigations into cloud licensing practices.

Furthermore, the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) is conducting a market study into cloud services, and the US Federal Trade Commission recently requested public comments on cloud computing business practices. Should the EU finalize the DMA designations, it will likely accelerate similar moves in other jurisdictions, creating a patchwork of rules that hyperscalers must navigate.

Potential impact on cloud customers and the ecosystem

For European enterprises and public sector bodies, a DMA gatekeeper designation for AWS and Azure could be transformative. IT managers have long complained about the hidden costs of cloud concentration: skyrocketing egress fees, proprietary APIs that make migration painful, and predatory licensing terms that tie software discounts to exclusive cloud use. The DMA’s transparency and portability mandates would give customers real bargaining power and the ability to adopt multi‑cloud or hybrid strategies without penalty.

Smaller cloud providers and independent software vendors stand to benefit, too. With AWS and Azure forced to level the playing field, European challengers might finally gain the access they need to compete on merit. Industry analyst firm Frost & Sullivan estimates that liberated cloud switching could reduce European companies’ total cloud spend by as much as 15–20% over five years, redirecting billions of euros toward innovation rather than lock‑in costs.

However, some observers warn of unintended consequences. “The DMA is a blunt instrument,” said Dr. Helena König, a Brussels‑based competition lawyer. “While well‑intentioned, the interoperability requirements could force cloud providers to implement one‑size‑fits‑all solutions that actually hamper security or degrade performance. There’s a real risk that innovation slows down as resources are diverted to compliance.” Others worry that the rules might benefit mainly the next rung of large competitors — like Google Cloud or Oracle — rather than true startups, entrenching a new oligopoly.

The road to a final decision

The European Commission’s procedure for designating gatekeepers under the DMA is swift by regulatory standards. Within 45 working days of the preliminary finding — by the end of August 2026 — the Commission must adopt a formal decision. In the meantime, Amazon and Microsoft can submit written observations, request a hearing, and contest the factual basis of the Commission’s analysis. The companies may also propose commitments to address the concerns, though the DMA’s framework is less flexible than antitrust settlements.

If designated, the gatekeeper obligations would kick in six months after the decision, giving AWS and Azure until early 2027 to overhaul their platforms, contracts, and APIs. Failure to comply can result in fines of up to 10% of global annual turnover, escalating to 20% for repeated infringements, and even structural remedies in extreme cases. Given AWS’s 2025 revenue of approximately $110 billion and Microsoft’s cloud‑related revenue exceeding $90 billion, the financial stakes are enormous.

The Commission’s move has already sent shockwaves through the tech sector. Share prices of Amazon and Microsoft dipped by 2.3% and 1.8%, respectively, in after‑hours trading following the announcement. Investors are nervous that the DMA designations could curtail the extremely high‑margin lock‑in revenue that has long been a pillar of cloud profitability.

A moment of reckoning for cloud computing

This regulatory intervention arrives at a time when the cloud market is undergoing its own seismic shifts. The rise of generative AI has intensified demand for the specialized infrastructure that only a handful of providers can supply. Nvidia’s GPU‑powered instances, Microsoft’s deep integration with OpenAI, and Amazon’s custom AI chips have created a new layer of potential lock‑in, one that the DMA’s framework may not fully anticipate.

“The Commission is essentially playing whack‑a‑mole,” said tech policy analyst Marcus Tullius. “As soon as one form of lock‑in is addressed, another emerges. The DMA is a powerful tool, but it must be complemented by ongoing market monitoring and, where necessary, targeted antitrust enforcement.”

Nevertheless, customer advocacy groups and pro‑competition organizations have applauded the Commission’s preliminary finding. “This is a defining moment for digital sovereignty in Europe,” declared Clara Weiss, director of the European Cloud Alliance. “By tackling the fundamental gatekeeping power of AWS and Azure, the EU is ensuring that businesses and governments can choose their digital infrastructure freely, without fear of retribution or exorbitant switching costs.”

As the comment period unfolds, all eyes will be on the detailed arguments Amazon and Microsoft submit. The outcome will not only determine the future of cloud computing in Europe but also set a global precedent for how governments can tame the infrastructure layer of the internet. For enterprises and startups buckling under unwieldy cloud bills, the DMA’s intervention may finally deliver the competitive shot in the arm they have been demanding for years.

Timeline of key DMA and cloud regulation events

Takeaways for IT leaders and cloud strategists

The Commission’s preliminary finding is not yet law, but its direction is unmistakable. Organizations currently locked into AWS or Azure environments should begin preparing for a world in which data portability, egress, and interoperability rights are legally enforceable. That means auditing existing cloud contracts, mapping data dependencies, and exploring multi‑cloud architectures that can be activated when the DMA’s obligations take hold.

Legal teams should watch for the final decision and any subsequent Commission guidance on what constitutes effective compliance. The digital operations strategies drafted today may dictate whether an enterprise can swiftly capitalize on new competitive freedoms — or remain trapped in a legacy relationship with a gatekeeper.