European regulators have trained their sights on the two giants that power much of the continent’s digital infrastructure. On November 18, 2025, the European Commission launched three separate market investigations under the Digital Markets Act. Two of them examine whether Amazon Web Services and Microsoft Azure function as important gateways between businesses and consumers. The third asks whether the DMA itself possesses the right tools to address entrenched practices in cloud computing.
The move surprised few close observers. Analyses of cloud markets in recent years show that AWS and Azure hold very strong positions, the Commission noted in its announcement. European Commission. Yet the companies do not meet the law’s standard quantitative thresholds for gatekeeper status. That detail has not stopped Brussels. Under a specific provision, officials can still designate a service if it acts as an entrenched gateway with durable market power.
Short. Direct. The implications stretch far beyond compliance checklists.
Cloud computing already sits on the DMA’s list of core platform services. No provider has carried the gatekeeper label for it until now. If the investigations conclude that AWS and Azure qualify, Amazon and Microsoft will face additional obligations for those offerings. They must make their services interoperate with rivals. They cannot favor their own products in ways that distort competition. Contracts that lock customers in could face scrutiny. And the clock starts ticking: six months to comply after any final designation.
By mid-2026 the picture had sharpened. Bloomberg reported that the Commission planned to release preliminary findings as early as the following week after the initial announcement, with a final decision expected by the end of 2026. The Next Web laid out the stakes clearly. Designation would bring interoperability requirements, curbs on customer lock-in, and restrictions on self-preferencing. Fines could reach 10 percent of global annual turnover, or 20 percent for repeat offenses.
Real-world disruptions have lent urgency to the effort. A 15-hour AWS outage disrupted operations at Apple, McDonald’s, and Epic Games. Azure incidents halted check-ins at Alaska Airlines and paused votes in the Scottish Parliament. Such events, the Next Web noted, highlight the risks of concentrating critical infrastructure among a handful of providers. European businesses rely on these systems for everything from basic storage to advanced artificial intelligence workloads. Dependence has become both technical and political.
US hyperscalers control roughly 70 percent of European cloud infrastructure revenue. That statistic alone explains why the probe lands with force. Smaller European providers such as OVHcloud, Hetzner, and Scaleway stand to gain if switching costs fall. Lower barriers could let them compete on merit rather than inertia. Yet the path is anything but simple. Cloud services differ sharply from social networks or app stores. They serve business customers who negotiate complex, high-value contracts. Enterprise buyers often prize reliability, scale, and integration over price.
But the Commission sees patterns worth examining. The third investigation targets practices that may limit competitiveness and fairness. Interoperability obstacles. Limits on data access. Tying and bundling. Imbalanced contract terms. Teresa Ribera, the EU antitrust chief, stated the goal plainly. “We will also look at whether the DMA’s existing rules need to be updated so Europe can keep pace with fast-evolving practices in the cloud sector,” she said, as reported by Reuters. Reuters.
Microsoft offered a cooperative tone. A spokesperson said the company was ready to contribute to the inquiry. AWS took a sharper line. “Designating cloud providers as gatekeepers isn’t worth the risks of stifling invention or raising costs for European companies,” an AWS spokesperson told Reuters. The contrast in responses revealed differing corporate calculations about the probe’s trajectory.
Critics question whether the DMA framework even fits cloud markets. One analysis argued that cloud is fundamentally business-to-business infrastructure, not a consumer-facing platform. The law, written with social media and search in mind, risks forcing square pegs into round holes. International Center for Law and Economics. Still, the Commission presses forward. It has twelve months to complete the work. Preliminary views could surface sooner.
The timing carries geopolitical weight. The investigations unfolded as tensions with the incoming Trump administration simmered. EU tech rules have already drawn criticism from Washington. Fines against Apple and Meta added to the friction. Extending the DMA to cloud infrastructure places two of America’s most valuable companies directly in the regulatory crosshairs. Trade talks, defense cooperation, and technology standards all sit in the background.
European officials frame the effort as essential for digital sovereignty. They want local champions to thrive. They worry that vendor lock-in distorts markets and raises switching costs to prohibitive levels. Data portability matters when workloads span petabytes. Licensing practices that tie cloud credits to software purchases have drawn separate complaints in other jurisdictions. The DMA’s third strand may test whether those issues fall inside its remit or require fresh legislation.
And the market keeps moving. Google Cloud, though smaller in Europe, continues to expand. Sovereign cloud offerings from the hyperscalers themselves attempt to address data residency concerns. Partnerships between European firms and US providers create hybrid models that blur lines of control. OVHcloud and others have lobbied for stronger intervention. Their future growth may hinge on the outcome of these probes.
Industry insiders watch the details. Will the Commission demand technical changes to APIs? Will egress fees face limits? Could bundling of productivity software with cloud credits be curtailed? Each question carries billion-euro consequences. Enterprises that have built architectures around AWS or Azure face uncertainty too. Migration projects already consume budgets. New rules could accelerate or complicate those plans.
So far the process remains opaque. The Commission has shared limited public information beyond the initial announcement. Companies will submit extensive data. Third parties, including competitors and customers, will offer evidence. Market definition alone could spark debate. Is the relevant market all cloud infrastructure, or specific layers such as infrastructure-as-a-service versus platform-as-a-service? How does one measure gateway status when most cloud usage never touches an end consumer directly?
These questions test the DMA’s flexibility. The law was designed for fast-moving consumer platforms. Cloud grows more slowly, with deeper technical roots and longer contract cycles. Success here could validate the framework’s broader application. Failure might expose its limits and prompt calls for targeted cloud legislation instead.
Either way, the conversation has shifted. Cloud is no longer invisible infrastructure. It has become a regulatory priority on par with search and social media. European policymakers see it as foundational to AI ambitions, data protection goals, and economic competitiveness. The AWS-Azure duopoly, while delivering unmatched scale and innovation, now faces formal scrutiny over whether that dominance harms the very customers it serves.
The next twelve months will produce thousands of pages of analysis, submissions, and draft decisions. For technology leaders across Europe and beyond, the outcome will shape procurement strategies, architecture choices, and competitive dynamics for years to come. Brussels has opened the file. Closing it will prove far more complex.
WebProNews is an iEntry Publication