EN   EN 
 
 
 EUROPEAN  
COMMISSION   
Brussels, 23.2.2022  
SWD(2022) 35 final  
 
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT  
 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT  
 
Accompanying the document  
Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council  
on harmonised rules on fair access to and use of data    
(Data Act)  
{COM(2022)  68 final}  - {SEC(2022)  81 final}  - {SWD(2022)  34 final}   
 
1 A. Need for action  
What is the problem and why is it a problem at EU level?  
The overall problem is the insufficient availability of data for use within the European economy . This is mainly  due 
to the lack of clarity on data rights , imbalances in negotiating power, limited access to fair and trustworthy cloud 
services , and  a lack of cross -sector data interoperability in the EU . The problem  affect s a range of economic 
sectors  and lead s to the underutilisation of data at EU level , with negative consequences for consumer choice, 
innovation and public service delivery.   
What should be achieved?  
The objective is to  maximise the value of data in the economy and society by ensuring that a wider range of 
stakeholders gain control over their data and that more data is available for use , while maintaining  incentives to 
invest in data generation.   
What is the value added of action at EU level (subsidiarity)?   
Data value chains in the EU are structured largely in a cross -border way, with data both holders and users 
scattered across various Member States. The problems identified are therefore not specific  to one particular 
Member State. Rather,  they affect the entire single market. This is why c oordinated EU action can add greater 
value to the European economy and to European society as compared to action  taken by individual Member 
States . 
B. Solutions  
What are the various options to achieve the objectives?  Is there a preferred option or not? If not, why?  
This initiative includes measures to increase le gal certainty about access to data,  prevent the abuse of contractual 
imbalances,  facilitate the use of commercially  held data by public sector bodies,  facilitate switching between 
trust worthy data processing service  provider s, and establish a framework for efficient data interoperability . 
The impact assessmen t considered three policy options. Option  1 involves minimal intervention , with  non-binding 
measures to facilitate more efficient and more fairly balanced data access and use . Option  2 proposes a limited set 
of legislative measures to facilitate the use of  data, while strengthening legal certainty on how  and by whom  data 
can be used . Option  3 proposes more far -reaching obligations in terms of the use of data by th ird-party 
businesses, cons umers and public sector bodies , as well as stronger provisions in terms of obligations on data 
service providers and interoperability requirements.   
The analysis concluded that Option 2 is the preferred option. Why? Because i t would enhance legal certainty about 
data (including sui generis  database rights for machine -generated data), increase the amount of data available for 
reuse and give consumers and companies  greater  control over data, while limiting data holders’ costs for making 
data more accessible and maintain ing incentives to generate  data. It would also introduc e a legislative approach to 
the issue  of the fairn ess and trustworthiness of data -processing infrastructures, combined with industry -led 
standardisation of technical interoperability for cloud switching.  
What are different stakeholders' views? Who supports which option?  
Most stakeholders confirm that the obstacles identified in the impact assessment do exist . However, opinions on 
what to do about them are divided: data holders (e.g. car manufacturers) , wary of  regulatory intervention , would 
like to see  solutions that only target clear  market failure s. On the other hand, small and medium -sized enterprises 
(SMEs ) that use data (especially those active in aftermarket services) call for a right to access dat a and are in 
favour of reviewing  the sui generis  right . Consumer organisations also stress the need to empower consumers to 
choose their service providers. Stakeholders are, however, in agreement when it comes to the necessity of EU 
rules to ensure portabi lity in the cloud and to safeguard cloud users against unlawful access  to their data from 
outside the EU.  They are also in favour of alleviating the administrative burden by streamlining the rules on 
business -to-government data sharing.    
C. Impacts of the preferred option  
 
2 What are the benefits  of the preferred option (if any, otherwise of main ones)?                                      
The preferred option would increase EU -27 GDP by 1. 98 percentage  points by 2028, and increase  government 
revenues  and investment activities by EUR 96.8 billion and EUR  30.4 billion respectively  in the period 2024 -2028 . 
This initiative would  also create an additional 2.2 million jobs . The e stimated benefits for each intervention area 
are as follows:  
 empowering consumers a nd companies using connected products and related services and increasing the 
availability of data for commercial use and innovation between businesses would generate up to EUR 
196.7 billion a year  by 2028;  
 improving contractual fairness would generate an additional EUR 7.4 billion a year ; 
 facilitating the use of commercially held data for public interest purposes: reduced administrative burden 
of up to EUR 155 million a year ; 
 facilitating access to fair and trustworthy cloud and edge services: an additiona l EUR 7.1 billion a year . 
What are the costs of the preferred option (if any, otherwise of main ones)?                                     
The c osts of the  preferred option include:  
 the obligation of manufacturers to allow access in the business -to-business/business -to-consumer  context, 
technical infrastructures: EUR 410 million in one -off costs and EUR 88 million in recurr ing costs;  
 ensuring contractual fairness: EUR 69 million a year ;  
 business -to-government data sharing: EUR 552.5 million in one -off costs and EUR 78.1 million in recurr ing 
costs;  
 interoperability requirements: EUR 1 million ( for each standard).  
What are the impacts on SMEs and competitiveness?  
SMEs are among the main beneficiaries of the Data Act . The new rules  would bring more data resources within 
their reach by re-balancing the distribution of data value across market actors, reinforcing their ability to compete 
and to continue doing their business . Addressing the imbalance in bilateral contractual relations alone would 
boost the SMEs’ profits by around  EUR 5.2 billion a year.  
Will there be significant impacts  on national budgets and administrations?   
The initiative would not impact national budgets , except for the measures in the context of  business -to-
government  data use. The support study to the impact assessment estimated that the setting up of national 
structures to streamline business -to-government  data use would cost EUR 21.6 million a year  to public 
administrations in Member States.  
Will there be other significant impacts?  
The initiative would improve  public services and policies, allowing a more effective and rapid response  to public 
emergencies . It would also give consumers and companies greater control over the use of the  data they generate 
and enhance their active partici pation in the digital economy. Finally, greater business and manufacturing 
efficiency should result in less  waste, lower energy consumption and fewer CO 2 emissions.  
Proportionality?  
This initiative is designed to address cross -border and cross -sectoral problems with data access and use . From this 
point of view, i t is proportionate to the desired outcome  and affords  sufficient flexibility for additional national 
and sector -specific measures . 
D. Follow up  
When will the policy be reviewed?  
The policy will be reviewed 4 years  after the adoption of the Data Act .