AWS and Azure May Become EU Gatekeepers. What Changes for Cloud Customers?

On 25 June 2026, the European Commission said it had reached a preliminary view that Amazon Web Services and Microsoft Azure should be designated as gatekeepers under the Digital Markets Act. The finding is unusual because neither cloud service meets the DMA's usual quantitative thresholds. The Commission believes their market positions still make them important gateways between European businesses and their customers.

For companies running on AWS or Azure, nothing changes today. Amazon and Microsoft can respond before the Commission makes a final decision. If the designation is confirmed, both providers would then have six months to show how their cloud services comply with the DMA.

The decision could eventually strengthen customers' position on data access, interoperability and contractual restrictions. It will not make a complex cloud estate portable overnight. This article explains where the practical gains may appear, what remains undecided, and what belongs on your agenda before the next renewal.

What the Commission Has Decided

The DMA allows the Commission to designate a company through a qualitative assessment when the normal user and revenue thresholds do not capture its real position. Under Article 3 of the Regulation, the central questions are whether the company has a significant impact on the EU market, whether its service is an important gateway between businesses and customers, and whether that position is entrenched and durable.

The Commission's preliminary answer is yes for AWS and Azure. It identifies them as the largest and second-largest cloud computing services in the EU and says their importance justifies designation even without the usual threshold test. Amazon and Microsoft now have a right to respond, so the process has not reached a final decision.

A final designation would also apply to the named cloud services, rather than every product Amazon and Microsoft sell. That matters because the DMA attaches obligations to specific core platform services. According to the Commission's overview of the designation process, the providers would have up to six months after a final decision to comply and explain their measures in formal reports.

Customers should therefore read the announcement as a direction of travel. It is a serious regulatory step, but it has not rewritten an AWS or Azure contract yet.

Why Cloud Has Become a Gatekeeper Question

Cloud platforms sit underneath applications, customer services, internal operations and an increasing share of corporate AI work. A company may begin with standard computing and storage, then gradually add databases, identity tools, monitoring, security services and provider-specific application components. Each decision can be reasonable on its own while making the combined estate harder to move.

The commercial structure can add another layer. Committed-use terms, bundled services and discounts tied to broader adoption may reward consolidation with one provider. By renewal time, the choice is no longer a simple comparison between equivalent services. Technical dependencies and commercial commitments have accumulated together.

These are close to the issues the Commission is investigating. At a cloud market roundtable on 1 July, it organised the discussion around interoperability and technical features, financial conditions, and contractual and commercial practices. Participants considered approaches that could reduce switching barriers and strengthen customer choice.

That framing is important. The DMA process is examining how market power affects customers and competitors. It is not a judgment that every AWS or Azure service is poor value, or that every European customer should leave. The concern is whether customers retain a realistic choice after their technology and contracts become deeply connected to one platform.

What Final Designation Could Change

The DMA already contains obligations intended to make digital markets more open. The Commission's summary of those rules says gatekeepers must allow third parties to interoperate with their services in certain situations, give business users access to data generated through their use of a platform, and avoid favouring their own products over competing offers in specified contexts.

Applied to cloud services, those principles could support clearer access to customer-generated data, better conditions for third-party products and closer scrutiny of arrangements that make another provider difficult to use. A designated provider must also document how it complies. That gives regulators and business customers a concrete basis for testing whether promised changes work in practice.

The limits are equally important. Many existing DMA obligations were developed around app stores, search engines, marketplaces and other consumer-facing platforms. Cloud infrastructure raises different questions. A right to access data does not automatically create a compatible database service elsewhere, and a general interoperability duty does not guarantee that two cloud platforms will run the same application in the same way.

The Commission acknowledges this gap in its DMA review. It is assessing both the possible gatekeeper designations and whether the current obligations are sufficient for cloud markets. The separate cloud investigation is expected to report by May 2027. Final designation could therefore be the start of a more detailed compliance process, rather than a complete answer delivered in one decision.

The DMA and Data Act Solve Different Problems

European cloud customers already have switching rights under the Data Act, which has applied since September 2025. The Commission's Data Act guidance says cloud providers must remove obstacles to switching. Platform and software services must offer open interfaces and export data in a commonly used, machine-readable format, while infrastructure providers must support materially comparable outcomes for shared features.

The Data Act also phases out cloud switching charges, including data egress charges, from 12 January 2027. These rules apply across the cloud market, regardless of whether a provider is large enough to become a DMA gatekeeper.

The DMA addresses a different layer. It deals with the conduct of companies whose market position allows them to set terms for a wider ecosystem. The Data Act gives an individual customer a minimum route out; the DMA can address practices that weaken competition and choice across the market.

For a customer planning a move, the distinction is practical. Data Act rights can support the exit plan today. A future DMA designation may improve the surrounding commercial and technical conditions, but it should not be treated as a substitute for that plan.

What Gatekeeper Status Will Not Solve

The hardest cloud dependencies often sit inside the application. Standard virtual machines and common database engines may transfer with limited change. Applications built around provider-specific databases, messaging systems, identity services or AI interfaces usually need more engineering work before they can run elsewhere.

Regulation can require access to data and remove artificial barriers. It cannot rewrite an application, test a new environment or transfer operational knowledge to the team that will run it. Those tasks still determine the real effort and risk of a migration.

Gatekeeper status also does not change ownership or jurisdiction. An AWS or Azure service that complies fully with the DMA remains part of an American company. The designation concerns competition and fairness in the European market; it is not a sovereignty certification.

None of this means leaving is always the right answer. Some workloads gain little from moving, while others carry contractual, regulatory or continuity requirements that justify the work. A useful assessment separates the two instead of turning a regulatory development into a blanket migration instruction.

What to Put on the Next Renewal Agenda

Start with the contract. Identify notice periods, data-export provisions, committed-use terms, bundled discounts and any conditions that become less favourable when you divide workloads between providers. Ask the account team to explain the exit process in writing, including what support, formats and timelines apply.

Then map the technical dependencies behind the contract. Separate workloads built on common standards from those tied to provider-specific services. For each important system, record where its data sits, which services it depends on, and what would need to change before another provider could run it.

Test one part of the exit path before the renewal makes it urgent. Export a representative dataset, restore it in a separate environment and check whether the documentation matches the actual process. A small test will reveal more about portability than a broad assurance in a contract or sales presentation.

Finally, compare alternatives against the workload rather than the regulatory headline. A European provider may offer a better jurisdictional fit for sensitive systems, while AWS or Azure may remain the sensible choice for others. The objective is a defensible plan with options, not movement for its own sake.

If the Commission confirms the designation, AWS and Azure customers may gain stronger regulatory support in future negotiations. The sound approach is to prepare using the rights and technical options available now. That leaves the organisation in a better position whichever way the final decision goes.

Thinking about migration? Book a free consultation to discuss your situation.