The European Commission on June 25, 2026, delivered a regulatory thunderbolt to the cloud computing industry, announcing preliminary findings that Amazon Web Services and Microsoft Azure should be treated as gatekeepers under the Digital Markets Act (DMA). This preliminary designation marks a significant expansion of the DMA’s reach beyond traditional consumer platforms like search engines, social media, and app stores, directly targeting the foundational infrastructure of the digital economy.

If finalized, AWS and Azure will face strict new obligations designed to prevent them from leveraging their market power to stifle competition and lock in customers. The move underscores Brussels’ growing concern that a handful of hyperscale cloud providers have amassed an unhealthy dominance over the market for cloud infrastructure and platform services, harming both European businesses and innovation.

The DMA’s Gatekeeper Criteria

The Digital Markets Act, formally Regulation 2022/1925, came into force in November 2022 and became applicable in May 2023. It establishes a clear set of criteria to identify “gatekeepers” — large digital platforms that serve as an important gateway between business users and end users. A company qualifies as a gatekeeper if it has a significant impact on the EU internal market, provides a core platform service that is an important gateway for business users to reach end users, and enjoys an entrenched and durable position.

Quantitative thresholds provide a rebuttable presumption of gatekeeper status: annual European Economic Area (EEA) turnover of at least €7.5 billion in each of the last three financial years, or an average market capitalisation or equivalent fair market value of at least €75 billion in the last financial year; and the provision of the same core platform service to more than 45 million monthly active end users established or located in the EU and to more than 10,000 yearly active business users established in the EU.

Both AWS and Microsoft Azure comfortably exceed these thresholds, given their global cloud revenues. AWS generated $90 billion in revenue in 2025, with a significant portion from European enterprises, while Microsoft’s intelligent cloud segment brought in over $130 billion. The Commission’s preliminary investigation, which began in early 2025, focused on whether these cloud infrastructure services act as critical gateways for businesses, similar to how iOS and Android gatekeep mobile ecosystems.

Why Cloud Services?

The DMA initially designated gatekeepers in areas like online search (Google), social networking (Meta), video sharing (TikTok), and ad intermediation. Cloud computing was always on the radar, but the Commission faced tougher analytical questions: while cloud platforms are undeniably critical for modern business, they operate differently from consumer-facing platforms. The preliminary findings indicate Brussels now views the entire cloud stack — from infrastructure (IaaS) to platform services (PaaS) — as a core platform service under the DMA, meaning that providers like AWS and Azure serve as unavoidable trading partners for millions of European companies.

This is a watershed moment because it acknowledges that the cloud wars are not just about price and features but about structural barriers that prevent customers from switching providers or adopting multi-cloud strategies. Practices such as exorbitant data egress fees, technical incompatibilities, licensing restrictions, and loyalty discounts have long drawn criticism from competitors and customers alike.

Specific Obligations for Gatekeepers

If the preliminary designation is confirmed after a consultation period and investigation, AWS and Microsoft Azure will be compelled to comply with a list of do’s and don’ts. Key obligations include:

  • Interoperability and portability: Gatekeepers must allow business users to access, port, and use their own data freely, including data generated by their use of the cloud service. This could force AWS and Azure to offer easy-to-use export tools and maintain open APIs so that workloads can move to other clouds without technical hindrance.
  • No self-preferencing: The gatekeeper cannot rank its own services more favourably than those of third parties. This could challenge, for example, how Microsoft promotes its own database or AI services within Azure’s marketplace versus those of competitors like Databricks or Snowflake.
  • Anti-steering provisions: Gatekeepers may be required to allow app developers and business users to communicate with and steer their customers toward alternative distribution channels and service providers, potentially undermining exclusive enterprise agreements.
  • Transparency in ranking, indexing, and crawling: The cloud providers must publish transparent conditions for any ranking algorithms used in their marketplaces and allow business users to access their own performance data.
  • Ban on tying and bundling: Gatekeepers cannot force users to subscribe to or register with other core platform services as a condition for using the main service. For Azure, this could impact how Microsoft bundles its cloud services with Office 365 or Windows licensing.

Critically, the DMA allows the Commission to impose additional tailored remedies if systemic non-compliance occurs, including structural separation in extreme cases. Fines for non-compliance can reach up to 10% of global annual turnover, with periodic penalty payments of up to 5% of average daily turnover.

The Preliminary Phase and Next Steps

The June 25 announcement is preliminary; the Commission has opened a formal investigation and is now gathering feedback from stakeholders, including competitors, business users, and consumer groups. AWS and Microsoft have been given the opportunity to rebut the findings and present evidence that they do not meet the gatekeeper criteria or that the designated core platform services should be defined more narrowly.

Amazon has previously argued that it does not possess gatekeeper power because the IaaS market is highly competitive, with customers routinely using multiple providers and on-premises solutions. Microsoft has made similar claims, while emphasizing that it is a smaller player in cloud infrastructure compared to AWS. Both companies are expected to mount vigorous defenses during the consultation period, which typically lasts 45 working days.

If the Commission confirms the designation, the companies will have six months to comply with the obligations. Non-compliance could trigger the hefty fines and a potential market investigation that might lead to more aggressive remedies.

Impact on Windows Users and the Broader Ecosystem

For Windows enthusiasts and business users deeply integrated into the Microsoft ecosystem, this regulatory push has direct implications. Microsoft Azure is tightly woven into Windows environments through Active Directory, Visual Studio development tools, Azure Virtual Desktop, and the entire Microsoft 365 suite. Enterprises running Windows workloads on Azure often face significant switching costs, partly due to proprietary integrations and licensing advantages that make it economically unattractive to move.

The DMA’s interoperability requirements could compel Microsoft to decouple some of these integrations, making it easier to run Windows workloads on competing cloud platforms without losing functionality or facing exorbitant license fees. This might finally deliver on the long-promised vision of truly portable Windows-based cloud computing.

Cloud lock-in has been a persistent concern for Windows administrators. Practices such as charging high data egress fees when moving data out of Azure, offering deep discounts for reserved instances that tie customers into long-term commitments, and using restrictive software licensing — for instance, making it cheaper to run Microsoft SQL Server on Azure than on AWS — could all come under regulatory scrutiny. The DMA’s ban on unfair contractual terms and tying might force Microsoft to offer more flexible licensing that works equally across cloud providers.

Challenges on the Horizon

Regulating cloud services under the DMA is not straightforward. Unlike consumer platforms where end users are individuals, cloud services are primarily B2B. Defining “end user” and “business user” in a multi-tenant, layered cloud environment is complex. A startup using Azure’s PaaS features is both a customer of Azure and a platform for its own users; where does the gatekeeper obligation begin and end?

Moreover, technical feasibility complicates interoperability mandates. Cloud services are not simple commodities; deep integration of proprietary AI accelerators, custom processors, and advanced networking mean that moving a workload is not just about copying data. Amazon’s Nitro system and Microsoft’s Azure-optimized hardware create cost and performance advantages that are not easily replicated elsewhere. Forcing openness could paradoxically slow innovation if providers become reluctant to invest in differentiating hardware or software.

Both companies are also likely to challenge the designation in court. The DMA provides for appeal to the General Court of the EU, and legal battles could delay enforcement for years. However, the regulation was designed to be robust, and the Commission has shown resolve in implementing it against other gatekeepers like Apple and Google.

European Competitors and the Cloud Market

The EC’s action is partly a response to calls from European cloud providers and industry groups, who have long complained about unfair practices by the “Big Three” (AWS, Azure, Google Cloud). European firms like OVHcloud, Deutsche Telekom, and SAP have lobbied for stricter rules, arguing that hyperscale practices suppress local innovation and make the European cloud market dependent on non-European providers. The DMA designation, if upheld, could level the playing field and encourage adoption of European cloud services, consistent with the EU’s broader goal of “digital sovereignty.”

At the same time, large European enterprises may benefit from clearer rules that reduce the risk of vendor lock-in and make multi-cloud strategies more viable. The CFO of a major German manufacturer, speaking anonymously, told us that “the ability to move analytics workloads between clouds without re-engineering everything would save us millions annually.”

Industry Reactions

Preliminary reactions have been swift. AWS issued a statement asserting that “the IaaS market is intensely competitive, with customers free to choose among numerous providers and on-premises alternatives,” and that the designation is “premature.” Microsoft Azure’s legal team emphasized its “longstanding commitment to European compliance and customer choice,” while warning that overly rigid rules could “burden innovation and distract from cybersecurity priorities.”

Cloud analysts are divided. Some see the move as long overdue, arguing that the real barrier in cloud is not technology but contractual and economic lock-in. Others caution that the DMA’s blunt instruments may not fit the nuanced cloud market, potentially creating unintended consequences such as reduced investment in European cloud regions or a shift toward even more proprietary solutions outside the gatekeeper definition.

What Comes Next?

The preliminary designation initiates a formal process that will unfold over the next several months. Stakeholders should submit comments by late August 2026, and a final decision could come as early as December 2026. AWS and Microsoft will likely use every legal and procedural lever to narrow the scope or delay implementation.

For businesses, the regulatory uncertainty adds another variable to cloud strategy planning. Some may postpone major cloud commitments until the rules become clearer. Others may accelerate multi-cloud adoption to hedge against compliance costs that could be passed on by the gatekeepers.

In the long run, the DMA’s application to cloud computing could reshape the global technology landscape. If Europe successfully imposes interoperability and fairness constraints on the dominant cloud platforms, it may inspire similar actions in other jurisdictions, including the United States, where the Federal Trade Commission has been investigating cloud business practices.

For Windows users and Azure-dependent enterprises, the potential for a more open and competitive cloud ecosystem is tantalizing — but the path from regulatory announcement to tangible change is fraught with legal, technical, and political obstacles. The Commission’s bold step, however, leaves no doubt that the era of self-regulation for Big Cloud is over in Europe.