RequirementsEU DSA

EU Digital Services Act requirements

A grounded overview of DSA requirements by service tier, from intermediary-service baseline duties through hosting, platform, marketplace, VLOP and VLOSE obligations.

Use it to identify the specific DSA control set for notice and action, statements of reasons, complaints, trader checks, advertising, recommenders, transparency reports, systemic-risk work, audits, data access and enforcement readiness.

Author
Sorena AI
Published
May 9, 2026
Updated
May 9, 2026
Sections
6

Structured answer sets in this page tree.

Primary sources
8

Cited legal and guidance references.

Publication metadata
Sorena AI
Published May 9, 2026
Updated May 9, 2026
Overview

The Digital Services Act does not apply one flat checklist to every digital service. It layers duties by service type: all intermediary services have baseline obligations; hosting services add notice, action and statement-of-reasons duties; online platforms add complaint, dispute, advertising, recommender and transparency duties; marketplaces that let consumers contract with traders add trader-traceability and product-interface duties; and designated very large online platforms and very large online search engines carry systemic-risk, audit, data-access and enhanced transparency obligations.

Section 1

Classify the DSA service tier first

Start with the service actually offered in the EU. The DSA covers intermediary services and then adds obligations for hosting services, online platforms, online marketplaces, and designated very large online platforms or very large online search engines. A product can have more than one service surface, so classify each surface separately instead of assigning one global label.

The minimum requirements record should identify the service, EU targeting or establishment facts, service tier, whether the micro or small enterprise exclusions are relevant, average monthly active recipient reporting status for platforms or search engines, and whether the Commission has designated the service as a VLOP or VLOSE.

  • All intermediary services: keep authority and user contact points, clear terms, legal representative data where the provider has no EU establishment, and annual content-moderation transparency reporting unless the micro or small enterprise reporting exclusion applies.
  • Hosting services: add an electronic notice-and-action mechanism, notice processing records, affected-user statements of reasons, and escalation for suspected criminal offences involving threats to life or safety.
  • Online platforms: add internal complaints, certified out-of-court dispute information, trusted-flagger priority, misuse suspension policies, ad disclosures, recommender transparency, and DSA Transparency Database submissions for statements of reasons.
  • Marketplace platforms that let consumers conclude distance contracts with traders: add trader identification, verification, retention, consumer-facing trader disclosures, compliance-by-design listing fields, random checks against official databases, and illegal-product consumer notifications.
  • VLOPs and VLOSEs: confirm the Commission designation and track the enhanced duties that apply four months after notification, including systemic-risk assessment, mitigation, compliance function, independent audit, recommender choice, ad repository, data access and six-month transparency reporting.
Section 2

Notice, action, statements of reasons and complaints

Hosting services need a notice-and-action mechanism that collects enough information to identify the alleged illegal content without a detailed legal investigation: explanation, exact electronic location, notifier contact details where required, and a good-faith statement. The provider must acknowledge receipt when it has contact details, decide in a timely, diligent, non-arbitrary and objective way, and tell the notifier the decision and redress options.

When a hosting provider restricts content, monetisation, service access or an account because user-provided information is allegedly illegal or incompatible with terms, it must give affected recipients a clear statement of reasons where contact details are known. Online platforms must also send statements of reasons to the Commission's DSA Transparency Database without personal data.

  • Notice intake fields: alleged illegality explanation, exact URL or other location, notifier name and email unless an exception applies, good-faith confirmation, timestamp, content category, trusted-flagger status, and whether automation helped process the notice.
  • Decision record fields: action taken or not taken, legal or terms basis, facts and circumstances relied on, automation used, territorial scope, duration, redress options, and timing from notice receipt to decision.
  • Statement-of-reasons controls: provide the affected user with restriction type, factual basis, legal or contractual ground, automation information where applicable, and clear redress information.
  • Complaint controls for online platforms: keep a free electronic internal complaint system available for at least six months after the moderation decision, handle complaints with qualified staff supervision, and record reversals and median handling times for reporting.
  • Out-of-court dispute controls: display clear access information for certified bodies, track disputes, outcomes, median completion time and the share of body decisions implemented.
Section 3

Platform, marketplace, advertising and recommender requirements

Online platforms need user-facing governance controls beyond hosting. The requirements file should connect terms, moderation, complaints, ads, recommender systems, protection of minors and misuse policies to product surfaces that users actually see.

Marketplace-style platforms have a separate Article 30-32 control set. They should not treat trader onboarding as a purely commercial KYC workflow: the DSA requires specified trader data, best-efforts reliability checks, secure retention for six months after the contractual relationship ends, selected trader information displayed to consumers, and consumer notifications when an illegal product or service is discovered.

  • Terms and moderation: disclose content moderation policies, procedures, measures and tools, including algorithmic decision-making and human review, in clear terms; VLOPs and VLOSEs also need a concise machine-readable terms summary and Member State language coverage where they offer services.
  • Ads on online platforms: show that content is an advertisement, identify the person on whose behalf it is shown, identify who paid if different, explain main targeting parameters, let users declare commercial communications, and avoid profiling ads based on special-category data.
  • Minor-related advertising: when an online platform is aware with reasonable certainty that a recipient is a minor, do not present profiling-based ads using that recipient's personal data.
  • Recommenders: state main recommender parameters in plain language, explain why information is suggested and the relative importance of the parameters, and provide accessible controls when options are available.
  • Trader traceability: collect trader identity, address, phone, email, ID or electronic identification, payment account, trade-register data where applicable, and self-certification to offer only compliant products or services.
  • Marketplace product interface: enable traders to provide product or service identification, economic-operator contact details where required, and applicable labelling, marking, product-safety and compliance information.
Section 4

Transparency reporting and public disclosure records

DSA transparency reporting is not one report for every provider. All intermediary services in scope publish annual content-moderation reports unless an exclusion applies; hosting services report notice data; online platforms add dispute and misuse-suspension data; and VLOPs/VLOSEs publish enhanced reports at least every six months with additional staffing, linguistic expertise, accuracy, active-recipient and risk/audit information.

The implementing transparency templates make reporting operational. A useful DSA requirements register should therefore maintain the raw counters, report period, service name, Member State order data, notice-and-action data, complaint and dispute data, automated-moderation descriptions, AMAR numbers, staffing and language fields, methodology notes, and links to each published report.

  • Article 15 report evidence: authority orders, notice counts, trusted-flagger notices, actions taken, automated processing counts, median action times, own-initiative moderation, complaint outcomes, automation purposes, accuracy/error indicators and safeguards.
  • Article 24 platform report evidence: out-of-court dispute numbers, outcomes, median completion times, implementation share, misuse suspensions, and average monthly active recipient publications for each platform or search engine.
  • VLOP/VLOSE Article 42 report evidence: six-month reporting cadence, content moderation human resources by official EU language, staff qualifications and linguistic expertise, training and support, accuracy indicators by language, and AMAR by Member State.
  • Statement database evidence: platform registration, API or webform submission path, personal-data removal checks, submission logs, schema validation results, rejected-submission handling and daily reconciliation against internal moderation decisions.
  • Report publication controls: use stable public URLs, preserve prior reports where available, record reporting period start and end dates, and keep methodology changes with the report they affect.
Section 5

VLOP and VLOSE systemic-risk, audit and data-access duties

A designated VLOP or VLOSE needs a separate enhanced-obligations workstream. The Commission designation is based on average monthly active recipients in the EU meeting the DSA threshold, and the enhanced duties apply to the designated service rather than every product operated by the same company.

The practical requirement is a traceable risk and assurance system: annual and change-triggered risk assessments, mitigation design, board and compliance-function oversight, independent audit, audit implementation, public reporting, data access for regulators and vetted researchers, recommender options not based on profiling, and a public ad repository where advertising is presented.

  • Risk assessment scope: illegal-content dissemination, fundamental-rights impacts, civic discourse and electoral processes, public security, gender-based violence, public health, minors, and serious effects on physical and mental well-being.
  • Risk-factor review: recommender and other algorithmic systems, content moderation systems, terms enforcement, advertising systems, data practices, intentional manipulation, automated exploitation and regional or linguistic risks.
  • Mitigation evidence: design or feature changes, terms changes, moderation process changes, algorithmic and recommender testing, advertising-system changes, internal resources, trusted-flagger or dispute-body cooperation, codes of conduct, interface notices and child-protection measures.
  • Audit evidence: independent-auditor selection, independence and conflict checks, audit scope, methodology, findings, opinion, recommendations, audit implementation report within one month for non-positive opinions, and publication package within the DSA timing rules.
  • Data-access evidence: regulator requests, data and algorithm explanations, vetted-researcher request handling, security or trade-secret concerns, proposed alternatives, API or database access controls, and public-data access for qualifying researchers.
  • Additional transparency: non-profiling recommender option for each recommender system and searchable ad repository with ad content, sponsor, payer, presentation period, targeting parameters and reach information.
Section 6

Enforcement ownership and evidence readiness

DSA enforcement is split between national Digital Services Coordinators and the Commission. Member States designate competent authorities and a Digital Services Coordinator for national supervision and enforcement, while the Commission has exclusive competence for the enhanced VLOP/VLOSE obligations and shares competence for other obligations imposed on those services.

A requirements overview should therefore include an enforcement evidence index. The index should make it possible to answer authority requests quickly without over-collecting personal data: source article, service tier, owner, production system, evidence store, publication URL, last report, complaint route, authority contact point, and escalation owner for Commission or Digital Services Coordinator requests.

Which DSA requirements apply first to an online service?

Classify the service tier first. Baseline intermediary-service duties apply broadly, hosting services add notice-and-action and statements of reasons, online platforms add complaint, dispute, ads, recommender and reporting duties, marketplaces add trader traceability, and designated VLOPs/VLOSEs add systemic-risk, audit, data-access and enhanced reporting duties.

Do all DSA services need VLOP or VLOSE risk assessments and audits?

No. The systemic-risk, independent-audit, ad-repository, vetted-researcher data-access and non-profiling recommender-option duties are enhanced duties for services designated by the Commission as VLOPs or VLOSEs.

What evidence should a DSA requirements register keep?

Keep the service-tier analysis, Article mapping, notice and moderation logs, statements of reasons, complaint and dispute records, trader checks where relevant, ad and recommender disclosures, transparency-report inputs and publications, AMAR publications, VLOP/VLOSE risk and audit files, data-access requests, authority communications and source URLs.

  • Digital Services Coordinator readiness: maintain contact-point records, legal-representative records where applicable, authority order logs, complaint status data and ability to produce information without undue delay.
  • Commission readiness for VLOPs/VLOSEs: keep RFI response owners, algorithm and recommender documentation, data-access request playbooks, audit files, compliance-function records and management-body risk approvals.
  • Penalty awareness: the DSA sets maximum fines of 6% of annual worldwide turnover for obligation failures and 1% for incorrect, incomplete or misleading information or failures related to replies and inspections; periodic penalty payments can also apply.
  • Service restriction as last-resort risk: the DSA gives Digital Services Coordinators and the Commission escalation routes for serious, continuing infringements, subject to procedural safeguards and judicial involvement where required.
  • Visitor takeaway: do not start with a generic DSA project plan; start with the service tier, then build the exact evidence set required for that tier's notice, redress, transparency, marketplace, advertising, recommender, risk, audit and data-access duties.
Recommended next step

Build a DSA requirements register around the service tier

Sorena can help convert the DSA requirements on this page into article mappings, owner assignments, evidence requests and reusable review checks for intermediary, hosting, platform, marketplace, VLOP and VLOSE obligations.

Primary sources

References and citations

digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu
Referenced sections
  • Commission page explaining national DSC responsibilities, Commission competence for VLOP/VLOSE enhanced duties and complaint channels.
"supervising, enforcing and monitoring"
digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu
Referenced sections
  • Commission enforcement overview for investigative tools, non-compliance decisions, fines, periodic penalties and interim measures.
"investigative and sanctioning measures"
digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu
Referenced sections
  • Commission FAQ explaining that hosting services give statements of reasons and online platforms submit them to the public machine-readable database.
"clear and specific statements of reasons"
digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu
Referenced sections
  • Commission overview describing user rights to explanations, appeal routes, easier illegal-content flagging and advertising transparency.
"greater control and more choices"
digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu
Referenced sections
  • Commission overview of designation, four-month compliance timing and enhanced VLOP/VLOSE duties including audits, data access, recommender options and ad repositories.
"four months to comply"
eur-lex.europa.eu
Referenced sections
  • Articles 49-53 and 74 define Digital Services Coordinator powers, penalties, complaint rights and Commission fines for VLOPs/VLOSEs.
"Competent authorities and Digital Services Coordinators"
Related guides

Explore more topics

DSA Ads and Recommender Systems: transparency duties, user choice, and evidence
A grounded DSA guide to ad labels, targeting restrictions, recommender parameter disclosure, non-profiling options for VLOPs and VLOSEs, ad repositories, and compliance evidence.
DSA Applicability Test: classify intermediary services, platforms, marketplaces, VLOPs and VLOSEs
A source-grounded EU Digital Services Act applicability test for classifying intermediary services, hosting services, online platforms, marketplaces, VLOPs and VLOSEs.
DSA Article 28 minors protection guide for online platforms
EU Digital Services Act guide to Article 28 minors protection: platform scope, child-safety measures, targeted ads limits, recommender controls, and grounded evidence.
DSA average monthly active recipients: what platforms must publish
A grounded FAQ on average monthly active recipients under the EU Digital Services Act, including publication, EU recipient scope, the 45 million VLOP/VLOSE threshold, and evidence records.
DSA Complaint and Dispute Workflows for Online Platforms
Build DSA complaint, appeal, statement-of-reasons, and out-of-court dispute workflows for online platform moderation decisions.
DSA crisis response for VLOPs and VLOSEs
EU Digital Services Act crisis response guide for VLOPs and VLOSEs: Article 36 Commission decisions, Article 48 crisis protocols, mitigation, governance, requests for information, and records.
DSA Dark Patterns: interface design checks for online platforms
Article 25 DSA guidance for reviewing online platform interfaces for deceptive, manipulative, or choice-distorting design patterns.
DSA Enforcement and Penalties in the EU
How Digital Services Act enforcement works: Commission and Digital Services Coordinator roles, VLOP and VLOSE investigations, fines, periodic penalty payments, and evidence readiness.
DSA illegal content notices: what must be included?
A grounded FAQ on EU Digital Services Act illegal-content notices: Article 16 notice elements, acknowledgement, decision notices, trusted flagger priority, statements of reasons, and records.
DSA Marketplace Trader Traceability FAQ
Answer to what EU Digital Services Act Article 30 requires online marketplaces to collect, verify, display, retain, and evidence for trader traceability.
DSA Marketplace Trader Traceability Guide
EU Digital Services Act guide for online marketplaces collecting, checking, displaying, storing, and evidencing trader traceability information.
DSA notice and action plus statements of reasons guide
A grounded Digital Services Act guide for notice intake, moderation decisions, statements of reasons, DSA Transparency Database submission, complaints, appeals, trusted flaggers, and records.
DSA Notice and Action Workflow for Hosting Services and Online Platforms
A grounded DSA notice-and-action workflow covering notice intake, completeness checks, trusted flaggers, decisions, user communications, statements of reasons, appeals, and records.
DSA recommender transparency FAQ: Article 27 and VLOP options
What EU Digital Services Act recommender transparency requires: main parameters, user options, VLOP/VLOSE non-profiling choices, and evidence to keep.
DSA researcher data access for VLOPs and VLOSEs
Article 40 DSA guide to vetted researcher data access for VLOPs and VLOSEs: DSC requests, eligibility checks, amendment grounds, confidentiality, security, and evidence records.
DSA service tier classifier for platforms, marketplaces, VLOPs and VLOSEs
Classify a digital service under the EU Digital Services Act as intermediary, hosting, online platform, marketplace, VLOP or VLOSE, with EU recipient-count evidence and obligation outputs.
DSA statement of reasons FAQ
When DSA statements of reasons are required, what they must contain, when online platforms submit them to the DSA Transparency Database, and what appeal records to keep.
DSA statement of reasons log workflow for online platforms
Build a DSA statement of reasons log for moderation decisions, Transparency Database submission, complaint links, retention, and QA controls.
DSA transparency report template fields and cadence
A source-grounded template outline for Digital Services Act transparency reports, covering applicable service tiers, reporting periods, CSV/XLSX format, retention, statement-of-reasons links, and required evidence tables.
DSA Transparency Reporting Obligations by Provider Tier
A grounded guide to EU Digital Services Act transparency reports, active-recipient publication, statements-of-reasons submissions, VLOP/VLOSE reports, templates, cadence, and evidence.
DSA VLOP and VLOSE Risk Assessments and Mitigation Guide
Grounded guide to Digital Services Act systemic risk assessments, mitigation measures, audits, transparency reports, data access, and governance evidence for VLOPs and VLOSEs.
DSA VLOP Audit Pack Workflow: Risk, Mitigation, Audit, and Transparency Records
Build a DSA VLOP or VLOSE audit pack covering Article 34 risk assessments, Article 35 mitigations, independent-audit evidence, transparency reports, data access, and compliance governance.
DSA VLOP Risk Assessment FAQ: Article 34, Mitigation, Audits
What VLOPs and VLOSEs must assess under the EU Digital Services Act, when to reassess, how Article 35 mitigation and annual audit evidence fit together, and what records to keep.
DSA vs DMA Platform Rules
Compare the EU Digital Services Act and Digital Markets Act by scope, designation thresholds, obligations, enforcement, evidence, and practical team ownership.
DSA vs GDPR: online-platform governance and personal-data obligations
Compare the EU Digital Services Act and EU GDPR by scope, ads, recommenders, minors, transparency, complaints, enforcement, and evidence.
DSA vs P2B Regulation: EU platform obligations compared
Compare the EU Digital Services Act with the Platform-to-Business Regulation for platform scope, business-user terms, content moderation, ranking transparency, complaints, enforcement, and evidence.
DSA vs Terrorist Content Online Regulation: notice-and-action vs removal orders
Compare DSA content-governance duties with the EU Terrorist Content Online Regulation removal-order workflow for scope, timing, evidence, authorities, and team ownership.
EU Digital Services Act checklist for platforms and hosting services
A grounded DSA checklist for classifying service tiers, notice-and-action, statements of reasons, complaints, transparency reports, ads, recommenders, trader traceability, VLOP/VLOSE duties, and evidence records.
EU Digital Services Act Compliance Guide
DSA compliance guide for intermediary services, hosting providers, online platforms, marketplaces, and VLOP/VLOSE teams: obligations, controls, and evidence to keep.
EU Digital Services Act FAQ: DSA scope, platform duties, VLOPs, reports, and penalties
Concise EU Digital Services Act FAQ covering intermediary-service scope, active-recipient thresholds, illegal-content notices, statements of reasons, trader traceability, recommender transparency, systemic-risk duties, reporting, penalties, and complaints.
EU Digital Services Act penalties and fines: caps and enforcement roles
DSA penalty caps and enforcement roles: Member State fines, Commission fines for VLOPs and VLOSEs, 1% procedural fines, and 5% periodic penalty payments.
EU Digital Services Act service types and scope
Classify DSA service scope across mere conduit, caching, hosting, online platforms, marketplaces, online search engines, and VLOP/VLOSE threshold duties.
EU DSA deadlines and compliance calendar: application dates, reporting cycles, and VLOP clocks
Calendar view of grounded EU Digital Services Act dates: full application, user-number publication, VLOP/VLOSE designation clocks, statements of reasons, and transparency reporting cycles.
EU DSA Transparency Calendar: reporting, SoR database, AMAR updates
Build a DSA transparency calendar for annual reports, statement-of-reasons database submissions, active-recipient updates, and VLOP/VLOSE audit touchpoints.
EU DSA vs UK Online Safety Act: scope, duties, regulator, and evidence
Compare the EU Digital Services Act and UK Online Safety Act for platform scope, risk assessments, child protection, transparency, regulators, enforcement, and owners.