The EU Data Act in practice: Key recent developments

Support for Data Act compliance has been bolstered in recent months by the launch of the EU’s new Data Union Strategy, which aims to address the need for access to high-quality data in Europe, particularly to fuel AI developments. A key pillar of this strategy is ‘streamlining data rules’ to provide organisations with greater certainty and reduce compliance costs – and the Data Act, which became (mostly) applicable nearly six months ago (see our previous blog here), is squarely in frame. As such, the Commission has recently launched a number of initiatives to support organisations with Data Act compliance:

What does “reasonable compensation” mean for data sharing?

On 2 February 2026, the Commission published draft guidelines on the concept of “reasonable compensation” under Article 9 of the Act, which governs what data holders may charge data recipients where data sharing is mandated. This has been one of the most contentious aspects of the regime to date. The guidance is especially relevant to mandatory B2B data-sharing arrangements. 

The guidelines clarify that compensation for data sharing is optional and, where charged, must comply with fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) principles - for example, prohibiting excessive pricing and ensuring that similarly situated data recipients are treated equally. For example, where a car manufacturer is required under the B2B data-sharing rules to share data with two different providers of mapping software, the rules would generally prevent the manufacturer from charging materially different fees to each of them. 

Any margin is discretionary – and no margin is permitted for data shared with SMEs and not-for-profit research organisations (where compensation is limited strictly to the incremental costs of meeting the specific request). For other recipients, compensation may include both those costs and, within reasonable limits, a margin reflecting unrecovered investments in data collection or production. Data holders must be able to explain the basis of their calculation with sufficient transparency to allow their compliance to be assessed, while protecting confidential information.

These guidelines are in draft form and are open to public consultation until 20 February. 

Model contractual terms

The Commission has also published sets of model contractual terms addressing B2B sharing of connected product data under the Act and standard contractual clauses focussed on switching between cloud services. Each set includes versions reflecting the different legal obligations, categories of counterparty, and commercial assumptions possible under the Act. These terms are expressly voluntary and can be amended, but are drafted in compliance with the Act’s rules on unfair contract terms.

As market uptake of the Act’s data sharing arrangements has been limited to date (potentially due to the complexity in contracting), these model terms and standard clauses may provide a helpful starting point for businesses seeking pre-vetted language addressing key concepts in the Act. Even where they are not adopted wholesale, they may still be useful as the accompanying drafting notes offer insight into how the Commission understands and expects certain provisions of the Act to operate in practice.

Digital Omnibus proposals

The Digital Omnibus package proposes targeted amendments to the Act to reduce the regulatory burden and clarify key areas. Significantly, the Omnibus would bolster protections for trade secrets in the context of mandatory connected product data sharing, including by allowing data holders to refuse access where there is a substantial risk of unlawful disclosure to third countries with weaker legal safeguards. It also proposes to: 

• limit the power of public authorities to require data from businesses to cases where the data is genuinely necessary to respond to a public emergency;
• move to a lighter switching regime for custom-made data processing services and exemptions for SMEs and small mid-cap providers (both under certain conditions), recognising that the regime may be disproportionate in those instances; and
• consolidate the current fragmented framework on the re-use of public sector data by incorporating provisions from the Data Governance Act, the Open Data Directive and the Free Flow of Non-Personal Data Regulation into a cohesive set of rules within the Act.

New support resources

To further support practical implementation, the Commission has launched a Data Act Legal Helpdesk, through which organisations can submit questions on compliance via an online portal. Responses are expected within 15 days in most cases and are intended to provide tailored case-specific clarification.

More support is anticipated, with the Commission indicating that additional guidance on key definitions in the Act will be published this quarter.

Will these changes make a difference?

All of these changes are intended to bridge the (large) gap between the text of the Data Act and its real-world application.  The Act has asked more questions than it has answered.  The answers are now coming in stages. 

The Commission hopes with these changes to, in its words, make the Data Act easier to navigate, reduce costs and boost legal certainty, and more guidance is generally better than less.  The key test will be whether we see a marked increase in Data Act compliance, and evidence of companies realising the benefits of the Act.