Overview
This report covers Parliamentary Questions (PQs) and replies published from 13.04.2026 to 19.04.2026. The main policy areas highlighted during this period include the enforcement of the Digital Services Act (DSA), compliance monitoring under the Digital Markets Act (DMA), the intersection of artificial intelligence with fundamental rights, and the rollout of digital identity and payment frameworks. The institutional tone of the Commission is notably defensive yet firm, particularly in rejecting allegations of censorship and emphasizing its role as a procedural regulator rather than an arbiter of content. These developments matter for digital-policy professionals because they signal a transition from legislative drafting to rigorous, boundary-testing enforcement, where the Commission is actively defending its jurisdictional limits and regulatory philosophy.
DSA Enforcement & Platform Accountability
❗ Commission Rejects US Congress Censorship Allegations
In Parliamentary Question E-000461/2026, Gerald Hauser (PfE) asked the Commission to address allegations from the US House Judiciary Committee that the EU pressured platforms to suppress freedom of expression. In a response on 15 April 2026, Executive Vice-President Henna Virkkunen firmly rejected the claims as unsubstantiated. She clarified that the Digital Services Act protects freedom of expression by empowering users and that regulatory dialogues with platforms do not equate to influencing political debate.
❗ Commission Clarifies Scope of Meta Investigation and Content Moderation
In Parliamentary Question E-000813/2026, MEPs questioned the Commission’s approach to content moderation and its investigation into Meta. In a response on 17 April 2026, Executive Vice-President Henna Virkkunen reiterated that the Digital Services Act does not define illegal content, which remains the purview of national or other EU laws. She confirmed that the Commission cannot issue orders to remove specific content, emphasizing that moderation decisions lie solely with the providers.
❗ Commission Defends DSA Regulatory Dialogues with Very Large Online Platforms
In Parliamentary Question E-000550/2026, Piotr Müller (ECR) asked how the Commission ensures its informal communications do not lead to over-moderation by platforms. In a response on 16 April 2026, Executive Vice-President Henna Virkkunen stated that the Digital Services Act requires platforms to mitigate systemic risks proportionately. She noted that providers have the freedom to choose their mitigation measures, including voluntary codes of conduct, and must apply their terms diligently to protect fundamental rights.
❗ Staffing and Budget for DSA Enforcement Outlined
In Parliamentary Question E-000947/2026, MEPs raised concerns about the growing size of the Commission’s enforcement team. In a response on 17 April 2026, Executive Vice-President Henna Virkkunen confirmed that the estimated staffing for DSA supervisory tasks in 2026 is 270 full-time equivalents, with an associated cost of EUR 34.82 million. She explicitly noted that none of these tasks involve the moderation of content.
❓ MEPs Question Mandatory Nature of Voluntary Codes of Conduct
In Parliamentary Question E-001432/2026, submitted on 8 April 2026, Tom Vandendriessche (PfE) and others asked the Commission if the threat of Digital Services Act sanctions effectively forces platforms to participate in voluntary codes of conduct on disinformation. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓ Telegram’s Compliance with the DSA Regarding Gender-Based Violence
In Parliamentary Question P-001428/2026, submitted on 8 April 2026, Sandro Gozi (Renew) asked how the Commission assesses Telegram’s design and compliance under the Digital Services Act following reports of systemic technology-facilitated gender-based violence. A response from the Commission is pending.
❓ Concerns Raised Over Risky Products on E-commerce Platforms
In Parliamentary Question E-001130/2026, submitted on 18 March 2026, Jan Farský (PPE) asked if the Commission is considering a specialized mechanism under the Digital Services Act to prevent the spread of risky or illegal goods on platforms like Shein and Temu. A response from the Commission is pending.
Digital Markets Act & Platform Ecosystems
❗ Commission Monitors Google’s Android Developer Verification Under the DMA
In Parliamentary Questions E-000748/2026 and E-000971/2026, MEPs asked if Google’s planned developer verification process for Android restricts third-party app distribution. In responses on 8 and 15 April 2026, the Commission confirmed it is actively engaged in a regulatory dialogue with Alphabet concerning Article 6(4) of the Digital Markets Act. The Commission noted that while gatekeepers must enable third-party app distribution, they are permitted to introduce strictly necessary and proportionate security measures.
❓ Further Scrutiny on Google’s Developer Registration Fees
In Parliamentary Questions E-001419/2026 and E-001349/2026, submitted in April 2026, MEPs asked the Commission to assess whether Google’s requirement for developers to pay fees and provide official identification is compatible with the Digital Markets Act and EU tech sovereignty. Responses from the Commission are pending.
AI Act Implementation
❓ MEPs Request Updated Compliance Costs for High-Risk AI Systems
In Parliamentary Question E-001210/2026, submitted on 24 March 2026, Michael McNamara (Renew) asked the Commission if the European AI Office has a more recent or authoritative estimate of compliance costs for high-risk provisions under the AI Act. A response from the Commission is pending.
❗ Commission Outlines Liability for AI-Generated Discriminatory Content
In Parliamentary Question E-000632/2026, Anthony Smith (The Left) asked how the Commission ensures legal responsibility when AI systems produce racist content. In a response on 15 April 2026, Executive Vice-President Henna Virkkunen explained that the AI Act prohibits systems employing deceptive techniques that cause significant harm. She added that high-risk AI systems require strict data governance, while the Digital Services Act mandates platforms to mitigate systemic risks, including illegal hate speech, regardless of whether the content is AI-generated.
❗ Commission Defends Media Freedom and EMFA Implementation in Italy
In Parliamentary Question E-004452/2025, MEPs requested an investigation into press freedom violations in Italy following fines issued to an investigative journalism program. In a response on 16 April 2026, Commissioner Michael McGrath stated that the Commission does not investigate individual data protection cases but continues to monitor media pluralism. He highlighted that the European Media Freedom Act sets specific safeguards for editorial independence, which the Commission is ensuring Member States implement effectively.
❓ Revision of the Dual-Use Regulation and Spyware Oversight
In Parliamentary Questions E-001285/2026 and E-001304/2026, submitted in late March 2026, MEPs asked the Commission about the evaluation timeline for the Dual-Use Regulation and how it plans to address the inconsistent scrutiny of cyber-surveillance items like Predator spyware. Responses from the Commission are pending.
❗ Coexistence of National eID Solutions and the European Digital Identity Wallet
In Parliamentary Question E-000763/2026, Kosma Złotowski (ECR) asked if the Polish mObywatel application meets eIDAS 2.0 requirements. In a response on 16 April 2026, Executive Vice-President Henna Virkkunen confirmed that existing national eID solutions and the European Digital Identity Wallets may continue to coexist. She noted that Poland is preparing a new version of its app to comply with EU requirements and is actively participating in European pilot projects.
❗ AI Tools for Monitoring EU Law Compliance Will Not Replace Human Assessment
In Parliamentary Question E-000456/2026, Mathilde Androuët (PfE) questioned the democratic basis of using AI to monitor Member States’ compliance with EU law. In a response on 8 April 2026, Commissioner Valdis Dombrovskis stated that digital tools enhance the efficiency of compliance monitoring but will assist, not replace, the substantial assessment of individual cases performed by the Commission.
❓ Legal Gap Regarding the Digital Data of Deceased Persons
In Parliamentary Question E-001378/2026, submitted on 7 April 2026, Yvan Verougstraete (Renew) asked if the Commission considers the lack of a harmonized EU framework for the digital data of deceased persons to be a legal gap requiring legislative initiative. A response from the Commission is pending.
❗ Digital Euro and Private Mobile Payments Viewed as Complementary
In Parliamentary Question E-000419/2026, Jorge Buxadé Villalba (PfE) asked if the merger of European mobile payment technologies renders the digital euro redundant. In a response on 9 April 2026, Commissioner Maria Luís Albuquerque stated that the digital euro and private solutions are complementary. She emphasized that the digital euro fulfils important policy goals as a public good, supporting resilience and monetary sovereignty.
❗ Tackling Online Investment Scams Through the Payment Services Regulation
In Parliamentary Question E-004577/2025, Reinis Pozņaks (ECR) asked how the Commission plans to address fraudulent financial promotions. In a response on 17 April 2026, Commissioner Magnus Brunner highlighted the enforcement of the Digital Services Act and noted that the provisional Payment Services Regulation clarifies that illegal financial offers can trigger liability, allowing payment providers to seek compensation.
❗ Monitoring the Impact of AI on Employment and Working Conditions
In Parliamentary Question E-000571/2026, Idoia Mendia (S&D) asked about the collection of data regarding AI’s impact on the labor market. In a response on 10 April 2026, Executive Vice-President Roxana Mînzatu outlined initiatives such as the AIM-WORK survey and the AI Observatory, which will inform policy actions like the Quality Jobs Roadmap to address algorithmic management.
❗ Commission Outlines Future Legislation on Short-Term Rentals
In Parliamentary Question E-000332/2026, Paolo Borchia (PfE) questioned the legal basis for planned restrictions on short-term rentals. In a response on 8 April 2026, Commissioner Dan Jørgensen confirmed that the Commission will propose a new legislative initiative as part of an Affordable Housing Act, enabling public authorities to take justified measures in areas of housing stress while respecting subsidiarity.
❗ Funding Mechanisms for Youth Digital Entrepreneurship
In Parliamentary Question E-000508/2026, Emmanouil Fragkos (ECR) asked how the Commission supports innovative youth entrepreneurship in lower-performing Member States like Greece. In a response on 13 April 2026, Executive Vice-President Roxana Mînzatu pointed to the Digital Europe Programme, Horizon Europe, and the European Institute of Innovation and Technology as key instruments providing funding for advanced digital skills and start-up support.
❗ EU Defence Funds Ban Support for Fully Autonomous Lethal Weapons
In Parliamentary Question E-000484/2026, MEPs asked about the EU’s stance on lethal autonomous weapons systems. In a response on 16 April 2026, Commissioner Andrius Kubilius stated that the European Defence Fund specifically bans the funding of lethal autonomous weapons that operate without the possibility of human control over selection and engagement decisions.
A central theme emerging from the Commission’s recent responses is its concerted effort to define and defend the boundaries of its enforcement powers, particularly under the Digital Services Act (DSA). Facing accusations of both overreach and under-enforcement, the Commission consistently frames its role as a procedural overseer rather than an arbiter of truth. By repeatedly emphasizing that the DSA does not define illegal content and that moderation decisions remain with the platforms, the Commission positions its regulatory framework as a mechanism for systemic risk mitigation and transparency, strictly anchored in the rule of law.
Furthermore, the Commission’s replies indicate a strategic approach to digital sovereignty that embraces market complementarity. Whether discussing the coexistence of the digital euro with private mobile payment networks or the integration of national eID solutions with the European Digital Identity Wallet, the Commission frames EU-level infrastructure as enhancing resilience and interoperability rather than displacing existing solutions. This suggests a pragmatic regulatory philosophy aimed at building pan-European capabilities while accommodating national and private sector realities.
Finally, the material reveals a deepening integration of core digital frameworks into sectoral policies. The application of the AI Act and DSA principles is increasingly cited in responses concerning employment rights, defense funding, and financial fraud. This indicates that digital-policy implementation is moving beyond the establishment of horizontal rules, focusing instead on embedding these compliance standards across diverse economic and administrative sectors.
All Parliamentary Questions and Commission Answers are accessible via Policy-Insider.AI.
