scholarly journals A New Order: The Digital Services Act and Consumer Protection

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-17
Author(s):  
Caroline CAUFFMAN ◽  
Catalina GOANTA

On 16 December 2020, the European Commission delivered on the plans proposed in the European Digital Strategy by publishing two proposals related to the governance of digital services in the European Union: the Digital Services Act (DSA) and the Digital Markets Act (DMA). The much-awaited regulatory reform is often mentioned in the context of content moderation and freedom of expression, market power and competition. It is, however, important to bear in mind the contractual nature of the relationship between users and platforms and the additional contracts concluded on the platform between the users, in particular traders and consumers. Moreover, the monetisation offered by digital platforms has led to new dynamics and economic interests. This paper explores the reform proposed by the European Commission by means of the DSA by touching upon four main themes that will be addressed from the perspective of consumer protection: (1) the internal coherence of European Union law; (2) intermediary liability; (3) the outsourcing of solutions to private parties; and (4) digital enforcement.

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 42-48
Author(s):  
S. V. ZAYTSEV ◽  

In March 2018 the European Commission presented a proposal to adopt a digital services tax (DST) on certain types of revenues of multinational digital Companies. The purpose of the digital services tax is to compensate in the short term for the low level of corporate taxation of these companies in the European Union and thus meet the urgent need of civil society for greater tax fairness. DST is presented as an indirect tax on turnover and is often compared to value-added tax (VAT). In this article, the author seeks to highlight the many differences that exist between the harmonized European Union VAT and the new DST. In addition, the author challenges the idea that the DST will actually be an indirect tax and, most importantly, that it will effectively increase tax justice in the European Union.


2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 230-249 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Drake

The aim of this article is to identify why air passengers travelling in the European Union, endowed with the highest standard of consumer protection in the world under EU law, are still being denied their rights and finding it difficult to seek effective legal redress. This article argues that the principal cause of airlines’ non-compliance is the poor regulatory design of Regulation 261/2004, which has been compounded by inadequate application by the Member States and regulatory resistance by the airlines. This contribution will then demonstrate how the European Commission (‘Commission’) has responded through the adoption of both deterrence and compliance-based enforcement strategies, and maps out the mechanisms, tools and actors harnessed by the Commission to create a complex hybrid, multi-layered system of enforcement. The article reveals that enforcement gaps persist and argues that the effectiveness of the regime is unlikely to improve without legislative reform.


2014 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-29
Author(s):  
Roman Kisiel ◽  
Małgorzata Kamińska ◽  
Wiesława Lizińska

Evaluation of changes in the value and structure of public aid in Poland and EU during the years 2007-2012 was the objective of the paper. The data from reports by the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection as well as data from the State Aid Scoreboard published by the European Commission based on the information provided by the Member States concerning that aid was used. In Poland, evident increasing trends of the horizontal aid value can be observed. In 2012, as compared to 2007, it increased by 0.5 billion euro to the level of 1.64 billion euro. Its share in the total value of support oscillates within 55-60% range. In the European Union that share is generally at the level of 70-74%. In Poland, the sectoral aid is limited gradually although its magnitude still differs from the Union standards. In 2012, the share of that aid was relatively small at ca. 14% while in the EU it was 12.9%. The regional aid is at the similar level both in Poland and in the EU oscillating around 20%. However, in 2012, the share of regional aid in Poland increased to the level of 26% and it was higher by 8 pp than the share of that aid in the EU. Significant differences are characteristic for the share of the aid in the GDP. During the period covered by the study the largest differences occurred in 2010 when the share of support in Poland was 1.7% of the GDP and in the EU 0.6% of the GDP. In 2012, a half of the public aid in Poland was allocated to large enterprises. 


2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 387-402
Author(s):  
Morten JARLBÆK PEDERSEN

AbstractBetter regulation is of grave importance to the European Union, as it is seen as a way of obtaining output legitimacy. To achieve this, the European Commission has established a so-called REFIT Stakeholder Platform where stakeholders’ proposals for more effective and efficient EU law are discussed. The central premise for this meta-regulatory instrument is depoliticisation of the REFIT program and the whole better regulation agenda. To ensure this, the European Commission plays a crucial gatekeeping role by only granting access for proposals that echo that premise and by securing depoliticised deliberation afterwards. Utilising a novel typology linking regulatory reform proposals to the risk of politicisation, the argument advanced in this article is that only a minority of the proposals to be considered by Platform members have a low risk of depoliticisation. This, it is argued, is due to the Commission not having a sufficiently well-developed understanding of the premises for REFIT it has itself established.


IG ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 169-185
Author(s):  
Daniel Klein ◽  
Christopher Ludwig ◽  
Christoph Spengel

In March 2018, the European Commission introduced two Directive proposals to target tax challenges in the era of digitalization. The first Directive proposal suggests to introduce a digital services tax of 3 percent on gross revenues from digital services as an interim measure. The second one proposes as a long-term solution to extend the permanent establishment concept to create a virtual permanent establishment if a corporation has a “significant digital presence” in a country. So far, a lack of consensus among the member states of the European Union has made successful legislation on the European level unlikely. Despite the absence of an intra-community agreement, several member states have implemented the Directive proposal of a digital services tax with various adaptions unilaterally. These actions contradict the efforts to develop agreeable tax reforms on a multilateral level. The article at hand critically evaluates the current European reform proposals.


Author(s):  
X. Dai

The European politics of digital convergence has been an important topic for public debate since the early 1990s, when the forces of the digital revolution began to clash with the complicated system of regulation established in the “analogue age” regarding the media and communications sector. When the Maastricht Treaty was signed in the early 1990s, the issue of communications infrastructure was incorporated into the law of the European Union (EU) for the first time in the Union’s history. The Maastricht Treaty stipulates that the EU should develop a Trans-European Network of Telecommunications (TEN-Telecom), which supports network inter-connectivity and service inter-operability (Dai, 2000). The Delors White Paper on Growth, Competitiveness, and Employment envisions the downing of a multimedia age and calls for the creation of a “common information area” (European Commission, 1993). Shortly after the publication of the Delors White Paper, the Bangemann Report delivered a strong message to the European Council in Corfu that the EU’s regulatory framework would have to be reformed in order to take on the challenges brought by new information and communications technologies (ICTs), which are generating a new industrial revolution (Bangemann et al., 1994). The release of the Delors White Paper and the Bangemann Report heralded the creation of a new policy area—the European Information Society, in which EU institutions, in particular the European Commission, have been playing a significant role up until now. Meanwhile, although the issue of regulatory challenges posed by the multimedia revolution or digital convergence was highlighted in the early 1990s by the European Commission, there was surely a lack of detailed proposal for reforming the EU’s regulatory structure for ICTs. European Regulatory reform in the information and communications technology sector gained further momentum during the second half of the 1990s. In December 1997, the European Commission published its Green Paper on convergence, which argues that “getting the regulatory framework right is of crucial importance” (European Commission, 1997, p. iv). To assist public debate, this Green Paper identifies a range of options and poses specific questions with regard to the implications of digital convergence for regulatory reform in Europe. In the 1999 Communications Review, the European Commission provides a systematic analysis about the status quo of regulation on the information and communications technology and suggests a comprehensive plan for the overhaul of regulatory structure. The early years of the 21st century witnessed the official launch by the European Union of a New Regulatory Framework, drawing an end to the old regulatory structure belonging to the “analogue age.” The New Regulatory Framework provides a fundamentally different package of regulation over the information and communications technology sector with a focus on the challenges posed by digital convergence. The purpose of this article is to analyse the implications of digital convergence for regulatory and institutional changes in the European Union. Accordingly, it is the European policy and political responses to the regulatory issues raised by digital convergence that constitute the main focus for the discussions presented in this article. It is argued that, whilst major progresses have been achieved at the EU level since the 1990s in regulatory reform, there are still critical issues remaining to be resolved in relation to the regulation of digital convergence. More specifically, despite that the EU has now managed to move away from technology-specific regulation to technology-neutral regulation, the failure to establish a single European Regulatory Authority (ERA) will continue to create institutional barriers to achieving more effective and efficient regulation over digital convergence.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Philip Zander

<p>This paper discusses the context of a Directive of the European Union which allowed for events of major importance to society to be listed and televised in a manner deemed appropriate by Member States. Union des associations européennes de football challenged the validity of the acceptance of the list of the United Kingdom by the European Commission in 2007. The challenge questioned whether the entirety of the European Championship finals could be included in the list given that this appeared to breach multiple rights and all the matches may not be of major importance.  The General Court of Europe and the Court of Justice of the European Union both found for the United Kingdom, highlighting that their powers were limited in respect of the current action. In doing so the courts left open the question of whether the designation properly balanced relevant rights. As every nation has a different context that may influence the balancing of these rights, any decision on the validity of the designation would have to consider large quantities of information. This paper aims to discuss the designation of the EURO championships in light of the circumstances of New Zealand.</p>


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Philip Zander

<p>This paper discusses the context of a Directive of the European Union which allowed for events of major importance to society to be listed and televised in a manner deemed appropriate by Member States. Union des associations européennes de football challenged the validity of the acceptance of the list of the United Kingdom by the European Commission in 2007. The challenge questioned whether the entirety of the European Championship finals could be included in the list given that this appeared to breach multiple rights and all the matches may not be of major importance.  The General Court of Europe and the Court of Justice of the European Union both found for the United Kingdom, highlighting that their powers were limited in respect of the current action. In doing so the courts left open the question of whether the designation properly balanced relevant rights. As every nation has a different context that may influence the balancing of these rights, any decision on the validity of the designation would have to consider large quantities of information. This paper aims to discuss the designation of the EURO championships in light of the circumstances of New Zealand.</p>


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (21) ◽  
pp. 83-96
Author(s):  
Radmila Dragišić

Aware of the fact that autonomy is an important prerequisite for educational institutions to be able to perform their tasks, in this paper we explore and analyze one of the most interesting cases from the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union in this area. Namely, the European Commission initiated proceedings against the Republic of Hungary for violating the rights of the European Union. The focus is on the Law on Higher Education of that member state, which has caused sharp controversies within the academic community in the countries of the European Economic Area, but also in third countries. Although the work is mostly dedicated to the free movement of services in the field of higher education, we inevitably explore the relationship between European Union law and legal instruments of the World Trade Organization (WTO), as well as the views of the Court of Justice regarding their interpretation. The case we are discussing is also important for the status of countries aspiring to become members of the European organization, since the European Parliament adopted a recommendation to include in the Copenhagen criteria for accession the defense and protection of academic freedom and institutional autonomy in order to prevent their endangerment in member states.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document