The DSA sets EU-wide maximum penalty caps, but the enforcing authority depends on the service and obligation: national Digital Services Coordinators enforce within their competence, while the Commission has direct enforcement powers for very large online platforms and very large online search engines.
Use this page to separate the 6% substantive fine cap, the 1% procedural fine cap, and the 5% daily periodic penalty-payment cap before estimating enforcement exposure.
Structured answer sets in this page tree.
Cited legal and guidance references.
The Digital Services Act does not create one fixed fine amount for every violation. It sets maximum caps and assigns enforcement powers between Member State authorities and the European Commission. For planning, the useful first split is whether the issue is an ordinary intermediary-service matter handled by national competent authorities, or a VLOP/VLOSE matter where the Commission may investigate, adopt non-compliance decisions, impose fines, and impose periodic penalty payments.
For failures to comply with obligations laid down in the DSA, Member States must ensure that the maximum fine is 6% of the annual worldwide turnover of the provider of intermediary services concerned in the preceding financial year. The Commission uses the same 6% ceiling when it imposes fines on a provider of a very large online platform or very large online search engine for infringing the DSA, failing to comply with interim measures, or failing to comply with legally binding commitments.
A separate 1% ceiling applies to procedural failures such as supplying incorrect, incomplete, or misleading information, failing to reply or rectify information, or refusing to submit to an inspection. Under the Commission regime, the 1% cap is based on total annual income or worldwide turnover in the preceding financial year, depending on the addressee.
Member States designate competent authorities and a Digital Services Coordinator. The Digital Services Coordinator is responsible for all matters relating to DSA supervision and enforcement in that Member State unless specific tasks are assigned to another competent authority; it remains responsible for national coordination.
Digital Services Coordinators are, in principle, competent to supervise and enforce compliance by providers of intermediary services established in their territory. The Commission has exclusive competence to supervise, enforce, and monitor VLOP and VLOSE compliance with the enhanced due diligence obligations addressing systemic risks, while the Commission and national authorities share competence for other DSA obligations imposed on VLOPs and VLOSEs.
For very large online platforms and very large online search engines, the Commission may investigate suspected non-compliance through requests for information, interviews, inspections, and access to data or algorithms. If suspicion remains after investigatory steps, the Commission may open proceedings.
Before adopting a non-compliance decision, a fine, or a periodic penalty payment, the Commission must give the provider or other addressee the opportunity to be heard on its preliminary findings and intended measures. If the Commission establishes a breach, it can order measures to address the breach and can impose fines within the DSA caps.
Periodic penalty payments are different from fines. They are daily pressure payments used to compel compliance with specified obligations, such as supplying correct and complete information, submitting to an inspection, complying with interim measures, complying with legally binding commitments, or complying with a Commission non-compliance decision.
The DSA cap for periodic penalty payments is 5% of average daily worldwide turnover or income under Member State penalty rules. For Commission VLOP/VLOSE enforcement, Article 76 caps periodic penalty payments at 5% of average daily income or worldwide annual turnover in the preceding financial year per day, calculated from the date appointed by the decision. The Commission enforcement page also describes temporary service restriction as a last-resort route when serious conditions are met.
A useful DSA penalty record does not estimate a fine in isolation. It ties the possible sanction to the authority, service classification, obligation, investigation step, and evidence proving response quality.
The record should be short enough for legal, trust and safety, product, and operations teams to maintain, but specific enough to distinguish a 6% substantive breach risk from a 1% procedural risk or a 5% daily periodic penalty-payment risk.
The DSA uses a 6% cap for substantive failures to comply with obligations: Member State rules must allow maximum fines up to 6% of annual worldwide turnover, and the Commission may fine VLOP or VLOSE providers up to 6% of total worldwide annual turnover in the preceding financial year for the Article 74 categories.
The DSA uses a 1% cap for procedural failures such as incorrect, incomplete, or misleading information, failure to reply or rectify, and refusal to submit to inspection. The Commission version of this cap applies to total annual income or worldwide turnover in the preceding financial year.
Both can be relevant. Digital Services Coordinators and other national competent authorities enforce providers within their competence. The Commission has direct VLOP/VLOSE enforcement powers, including exclusive competence for enhanced due diligence obligations addressing systemic risks and shared competence with national authorities for other VLOP/VLOSE obligations.
Sorena can help turn DSA enforcement questions into a source-cited record that separates national and Commission authority, 6% fines, 1% procedural fines, and 5% daily periodic penalty-payment exposure.
Ask cited questions about Digital Services Act penalty caps, Commission powers, Digital Services Coordinator roles, and evidence records.
Review whether a DSA issue belongs on the national authority track, the Commission VLOP/VLOSE track, or both.
"supervising, enforcing and monitoring the DSA"
"periodic penalties up to 5%"
"effective, proportionate and dissuasive"