Overview
This report covers Parliamentary Questions (PQs) and Commission replies published from 05.07.2026 till 12.07.2026. The primary policy areas under scrutiny include the rigorous enforcement of the Digital Services Act (DSA) and Digital Markets Act (DMA), the practical implementation of the Artificial Intelligence Act, and the evolving landscape of European data governance and digital infrastructure. The institutional tone of the Commission is notably assertive and defensive of its regulatory sovereignty, consistently rejecting external criticism of its digital rulebook while heavily promoting its upcoming ‘Digital Omnibus’ as a central vehicle for regulatory simplification. For digital-policy professionals, these developments underscore a definitive shift from the legislative drafting phase toward stringent market enforcement and strategic consolidation of the existing EU digital framework.
DSA Enforcement & Platform Accountability
❗ Commission Rejects US Disinformation Allegations and Defends DSA Framework
In Parliamentary Question E-002016/2026, submitted on 6 July 2026, MEPs sought clarification regarding allegations from the US House of Representatives Judiciary Committee concerning platform censorship. In a response on 6 July 2026, Executive Vice-President Virkkunen disputed the allegations, clarifying that the DSA does not define illegal content and that the Commission cannot order the removal of specific content. The Commission reaffirmed that the Code of Conduct on Disinformation remains a voluntary tool and highlighted the DSA’s unparalleled redress mechanisms.
❗ Commission Details Enforcement Actions Against Online Financial Scams
In Parliamentary Question E-002119/2026, submitted regarding the proliferation of financial scams on digital platforms, MEPs questioned the Commission’s enforcement strategy. In a response on 8 July 2026, Executive Vice-President Virkkunen highlighted ongoing formal proceedings against Meta under the DSA and confirmed that information requests were sent to Apple, Booking.com, Bing, and Google in September 2025. The Commission also pointed to the upcoming Payment Services Regulation and a dedicated action plan against digital fraud to complement the DSA.
❓ MEPs Scrutinize the Role of Civil Society in DSA Enforcement Decisions
In Parliamentary Question E-002571/2026, submitted on 22 June 2026, Catherine Griset (PfE) questioned the neutrality of civil society organisations that allegedly influenced the Commission’s decision to fine platform X EUR 120 million€120MCited figure for DSA breaches. The inquiry focuses on the appointment process and funding of these organisations, probing potential biases in the enforcement procedure. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓ MEPs Call for DSA Enforcement Against Animal Torture Content
In Parliamentary Question E-002756/2026, submitted on 2 July 2026, Sebastian Everding and Anja Hazekamp (The Left) asked the Commission how it ensures platforms detect and remove videos depicting extreme animal cruelty, reportedly originating from third countries like China. The MEPs also inquired about diplomatic dialogues to encourage comprehensive animal welfare legislation globally. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓ Commission Pressed on Counterfeit Medicines and DSA Oversight
In Parliamentary Question E-002413/2026, submitted on 11 June 2026, Giuseppe Antoci (The Left) raised concerns over the illegal online sale of counterfeit medicines by organised crime networks. The PQ asks how the Commission will leverage the DSA and joint monitoring mechanisms with Europol to compel online marketplaces to swiftly remove illicit pharmaceutical advertising. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓ MEPs Seek Stricter Online Protection for Minors Under the DSA
In Parliamentary Question E-002680/2026, submitted on 29 June 2026, a cross-party group of MEPs asked whether current DSA obligations are sufficient to protect minors from cyberbullying, manipulation, and grooming on platforms, specifically within in-game chats. The inquiry highlights a regulatory gap caused by delayed negotiations on the Child Sexual Abuse Regulation (CSAR). A response from the Commission is pending.
DMA, P2B Repeal & Market Competition
❗ Commission Confirms Repeal of P2B Regulation in Favor of DSA and DMA
In Parliamentary Question E-002054/2026, submitted regarding the regulatory framework for online platforms, MEPs sought clarity on protections for business users. In a response on 6 July 2026, Executive Vice-President Virkkunen confirmed that the Platform-to-Business (P2B) Regulation will be repealed under the Digital Omnibus to reduce compliance costs and improve legal clarity. The Commission noted that the DSA and DMA provide a more robust and effectively enforced protection structure for SMEs against asymmetrical platform power.
❗ Commission Clarifies Complaint Handling Transitions Under the Digital Omnibus
In Parliamentary Question P-002254/2026, addressing the enforcement of internal complaint-handling obligations, Executive Vice-President Virkkunen stated on 8 July 2026 that the P2B Regulation has been under-applied. The Commission emphasized that the DSA’s Digital Services Coordinators provide a stronger enforcement structure for business users’ rights, justifying the P2B’s repeal as a simplification measure.
❗ VAT Calculation on Intermediary Fees Remains Outside EU Digital Rulebook
In Parliamentary Question E-001331/2026, the Commission was asked whether online platforms can calculate intermediary fees on accommodation costs after VAT is applied. In a response on 7 July 2026, Commissioner Hoekstra clarified that such calculations are commercial decisions governed by national contract law rather than the VAT Directive or the P2B Regulation, reiterating that the latter is slated for repeal under the Digital Omnibus.
❓ MEPs Question DMA Impact on Apple Siri AI Rollout in the EU
In Parliamentary Question E-002687/2026, submitted on 29 June 2026, a group of MEPs asked the Commission to confirm if its interpretation of the DMA is preventing Apple from offering its new Siri AI to EU users. The inquiry probes whether the Commission rejected Apple’s ‘Trusted System Agent’ proposal and asks what compliance solutions are expected to enable the secure roll-out of advanced AI assistants. A response from the Commission is pending.
AI Act Implementation & Regulatory Scope
❗ Commission Clarifies AI Act Exemption for Military and Dual-Use Systems
In Parliamentary Question E-001843/2026, submitted regarding the scope of the AI Act, the Commission was asked to assess specific AI models. In a response on 7 July 2026, Executive Vice-President Virkkunen clarified that while AI systems used exclusively for military or national security are exempt from the AI Act, dual-use systems are not. The Commission noted that models like Mythos Preview, offered to commercial and cyber-defensive organizations, do not qualify for the military exemption and must comply with the AI Act.
❓ MEPs Probe Transparency in the Development of EU AI Standards
In Parliamentary Question E-002639/2026, submitted on 25 June 2026, Jean-Paul Garraud (PfE) raised concerns following a European Ombudsman inquiry into the development of technical standards under the AI Act. The question asks how the Commission ensures balanced representation among SMEs, researchers, and civil society, and whether these rules might increase EU dependence on the US and China. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓ Systemic Risks of Agentic AI in Financial Markets Raise Concerns
In Parliamentary Question P-002790/2026, submitted on 6 July 2026, Ştefan Muşoiu (S&D) questioned the Commission on the regulatory capacity to manage autonomous agentic AI systems that could trigger systemic effects in financial markets. The MEP asked whether the Commission is exploring European emergency response mechanisms, such as kill switches, to manage these risks. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓ AI Integration in Digital Advertising Sparks Revenue Concerns for Publishers
In Parliamentary Question E-002649/2026, submitted on 26 June 2026, MEPs questioned the Commission about the entry of AI models like OpenAI and Google Gemini into the digital advertising market. The inquiry asks if the Commission plans regulatory measures to prevent further erosion of media publishers’ advertising revenues and whether the upcoming AVMSD review will address this shift. A response from the Commission is pending.
Data Governance & Privacy
❗ Commission Emphasizes GDPR Focus on Natural Persons and Explains Digital Omnibus Reforms
In Parliamentary Question E-001668/2026, submitted regarding data protection rules for businesses, the Commission was asked to clarify the treatment of legal entities. In a response on 9 July 2026, Commissioner McGrath confirmed that the GDPR does not cover legal persons but applies to sole proprietors as they are natural persons. The Commission also highlighted that targeted amendments to the GDPR are proposed within the Digital Omnibus to boost competitiveness and reduce costs.
❗ Commission Clarifies Sponsor Responsibilities Under Political Advertising Regulation
In Parliamentary Question P-002122/2026, the Commission was questioned on the enforcement of the Political Advertising Regulation. In a response on 8 July 2026, Commissioner McGrath stated that primary responsibility for declaring the political nature of ads lies with the sponsors, not publishers. The Commission confirmed it is working with a network of national contact points to ensure compliance and will hold an implementation dialogue in 2026.
❓ MEPs Question GDPR Compliance of Payment Service Providers
In Parliamentary Question E-002602/2026, submitted on 24 June 2026, Auke Zijlstra and Marieke Ehlers (PfE) asked whether banks processing payment data for lobbying or credit profiling violates the GDPR’s purpose limitation principle. The MEPs seek clarification on whether explicit consent is required for such secondary data uses. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓ Risk of Mafia Infiltration in the European Digital Identity Wallet Addressed
In Parliamentary Question E-002581/2026, submitted on 23 June 2026, Giuseppe Antoci (The Left) asked the Commission how it plans to prevent the European Digital Identity Wallet from being exploited for money laundering and economic identity takeover by organised crime. The inquiry also asks if red flag mechanisms will be introduced. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓ Delays in Polish Implementation of Short-Term Rental Data Regulation
In Parliamentary Question E-002668/2026, submitted on 27 June 2026, Piotr Müller (ECR) asked the Commission if it is monitoring Poland’s delay in implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/1028 on data sharing for short-term rentals. The MEP inquired about potential infringement procedures and the impact on the internal market. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓ Proportionality of Short-Term Rental Regulations in Ireland Questioned
In Parliamentary Question E-002777/2026, submitted on 3 July 2026, Cynthia Ní Mhurchú (Renew) raised concerns about Ireland’s stringent short-term rental rules being introduced before reliable EU data is collected. The PQ asks how the Commission will ensure Member States respect the principles of proportionality and better regulation. A response from the Commission is pending.
Connectivity & Infrastructure Resilience
❗ Commission Outlines Support for Digital Skills Amid Regional Disparities
In Parliamentary Question E-001754/2026, addressing the digital divide in Italy, Executive Vice-President Virkkunen acknowledged on 7 July 2026 the deep geographical divide in skill acquisition. The Commission noted that the Recovery and Resilience Facility, alongside the upcoming Education Package and Digital Decade Policy Programme, are actively targeting these disparities to foster upward economic cohesion.
❓ Regulatory Fragmentation Stifles 5G Standalone Deployment
In Parliamentary Question E-002607/2026, submitted on 24 June 2026, Dan-Ştefan Motreanu (PPE) noted that 5G standalone coverage in the EU is only at 2%, lagging significantly behind global competitors. The MEP asked what measures the Commission is exploring to tackle regulatory fragmentation and stimulate investment in high-performance networks. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓ Energy Demands of AI Data Centres Raise Grid Concerns
In Parliamentary Question E-002625/2026, submitted on 25 June 2026, Erik Kaliňák (NI) questioned whether Europe has sufficient energy infrastructure to support its AI ambitions without driving up electricity prices for industry and households. The inquiry asks what measures will prevent data centres from straining competitive energy access. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓ Mandatory Portability of Cloud Control Servers for Connected Products
In Parliamentary Question E-002610/2026, submitted on 24 June 2026, Markéta Gregorová (Verts/ALE) asked if the Cyber Resilience Act requires manufacturers to disclose control server addresses and APIs for connected devices. The MEP suggests mandating server portability to reduce vendor lock-in and extend product lifespans. A response from the Commission is pending.
❗ Commission Reaffirms Safeguards for Health Data Under the EHDS
In Parliamentary Question E-000865/2026, concerning AI and health data, Commissioner Várhelyi stated on 9 July 2026 that the European Competitiveness Fund supports trustworthy AI aligned with the Data Union Strategy. The Commission emphasized that the European Health Data Space (EHDS) and the GDPR provide strict safeguards against inappropriate commercial exploitation of health data while facilitating cross-border exchange.
❓ Legal Hurdles in Cross-Border Exchange of Emergency Patient Data
In Parliamentary Question E-002611/2026, submitted on 24 June 2026, Pascal Arimont (PPE) highlighted that diverging GDPR interpretations hinder patient data exchange among emergency services in border regions. The MEP asked how the Commission will ensure the EHDS and MyHealth@EU practically cover emergency scenarios to prevent local authorities from bearing uncovered costs. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓ Anthropic AI Restriction Fuels Calls for EU Technological Sovereignty
In Parliamentary Question E-002609/2026, submitted on 24 June 2026, Dan-Ştefan Motreanu (PPE) asked the Commission about contingency plans following the US-directed restriction of Anthropic’s advanced AI models for EU users. The inquiry presses the Commission on protecting EU citizens’ data from unilateral decisions by foreign governments. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓ Validity of EU-US Data Privacy Framework Questioned Following US Supreme Court Ruling
In Parliamentary Question P-002741/2026, submitted on 2 July 2026, Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle (Renew) asked if the recent US Supreme Court ruling deeming independent executive authorities unconstitutional undermines the Commission’s adequacy decision for the EU-US Data Privacy Framework. The MEP asked for a timeline on an assessment of the decision’s validity. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓ Publication Delays of EU-US Biometric Data-Sharing Review Scrutinized
In Parliamentary Question E-002634/2026, submitted on 25 June 2026, MEPs questioned the lack of a joint review report for the EU-US Umbrella Agreement, legally required since 2020. The inquiry asks how the Commission expects citizens to trust US authorities with biometric data under future border security partnerships without transparent data protection reviews. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓ Extension of the Prüm II Regulation to Non-EU Countries Raises Privacy Concerns
In Parliamentary Question E-002605/2026, submitted on 24 June 2026, Dan-Ştefan Motreanu (PPE) asked what measures the Commission is exploring to ensure adequate data protection as it seeks to extend the Prüm II Regulation—facilitating automated biometric data exchange—to non-EU countries like the UK, Ukraine, and Canada. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓ Potential DMA Reference in the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement
In Parliamentary Question P-002745/2026, submitted on 2 July 2026, Andreas Schwab (PPE) asked if the Commission is considering introducing an explicit reference to the Digital Markets Act in the competition policy chapter of the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement, aiming for closer cooperation with the UK Competition and Markets Authority. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓ EU-Funded AI Lie Detectors for Border Checks Draw Criticism
In Parliamentary Question E-002623/2026, submitted on 25 June 2026, Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle (Renew) questioned the Commission’s Horizon Europe funding for AI-driven lie detectors intended for border guards. Citing widespread scientific consensus that such tools are unreliable, the MEP asked if the Commission will withdraw funding from ongoing projects. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓ Rising Agentic-AI Threats Prompt Calls for a European Cyber-Army
In Parliamentary Question E-002526/2026, submitted on 17 June 2026, José Cepeda (S&D) warned of coordinated cyberattacks powered by agentic AI, specifically targeting Member States like Lithuania. The MEP asked if the Commission plans to create an EU cybersecurity command centre to act as the foundation for a future European cyber-army. A response from the Commission is pending.
An analysis of the Commission’s responses during this reporting period reveals a pronounced strategic pivot toward regulatory consolidation and robust market enforcement. The recurrent invocation of the upcoming “Digital Omnibus”—specifically concerning the repeal of the P2B Regulation and targeted amendments to the GDPR—indicates that the Commission is actively prioritizing legal clarity and the reduction of compliance burdens over the introduction of new sectoral rules. This suggests an institutional focus on streamlining the existing digital rulebook to empower primary enforcement tools like the DSA and DMA.
Furthermore, the Commission’s rhetoric demonstrates a staunch defense of its jurisdictional sovereignty and regulatory boundaries. By firmly rejecting US legislative allegations regarding platform censorship and strictly delineating the dual-use scope of the AI Act against broad military exemptions, the Commission positions itself as an uncompromising enforcer of European digital standards. The explicit reliance on the DSA’s structured redress mechanisms and the DMA’s market contestability rules frames the EU as transitioning from a phase of normative design into a period of aggressive, confident implementation.
Ultimately, this material reveals that the current phase of EU digital policy is characterized by a dual mandate: simplifying the overarching legislative architecture while fiercely defending the integrity and enforcement capacity of its core pillars against both corporate recalcitrance and geopolitical pressure.
All Parliamentary Questions and Commission Answers are accessible via Policy-Insider.AI.
