Promoting competition and protecting consumers in the digital age: a roadmap for growth
Source: gov.uk (2025-03-10)

A speech by Sarah Cardell, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) Chief Executive, delivered at the techUK Tech Policy Conference 2025.

Good morning.

I must confess I hadn’t realised when I accepted the invitation to speak today that techUK had turned 10 within just a few months of the CMA’s 10th anniversary last year. We thought a lot about what this milestone meant at the CMA. How much our operating environment had changed over the course of a decade; how we needed to change with it, while staying true to the fundamentals of our mandate to promote competition and protect consumers.

We have been progressing that change rapidly over recent months and I’ll talk more about that shortly. I will just say, though, that techUK’s mission at the beginning of its second decade – to make the UK the best place for technology companies to locate and thrive – is very much a mission the CMA shares.

Context

So what does the landscape look like for the CMA today? What has changed, and where are we headed?

Well, the eagle-eyed amongst you may have noticed that CMA has been in the news once or twice recently… not just in the daily course of our announcements, but as part of an important wider conversation about the role of competition in driving growth.

I know the power of effective competition is something techUK members live and breathe. We hear directly from you how critical it is for your businesses that opportunities exist to enter and scale in open, competitive markets. I want to leave you in no doubt that the CMA is committed to this goal. These markets – your markets – are the lifeblood of the UK tech sector and foundational to the success of the whole UK economy. I know we will continue to work closely together to help realise the enormous opportunities they represent for our country.

Over the last 6 months, I’ve been speaking to businesses and investors to better understand how the CMA can maximise our contribution to the growth that we all wish to see – in the tech sector and across the economy. I have heard that, while our commitment to promoting competition is critical, it is not enough. How we go about our work in practice matters a great deal, particularly to business and investor confidence in the UK regulatory environment.

Some of you may, by now, be familiar with the ‘4Ps’ framework that I set out before Christmas (https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/driving-growth-how-the-cma-is-rising-to-the-challenge) – a framework to upgrade the way the CMA works, based directly on helpful feedback from a wide range of businesses and representative groups including techUK. It’s based on four key principles of pace, predictability, proportionality and process (by which I really mean our direct engagement with business). In practice, the ‘4Ps’ mean some fundamental changes to the way we go about our work, which I am confident will enhance business and investor confidence in the UK’s competition and consumer protection regimes, and the attractiveness of the UK as a destination for capital.

I’ve spoken recently about applying the ‘4Ps’ framework to our merger regime – and there is more to come on that later this week. Today, I would like to talk about the ‘4Ps’ and the new digital markets competition regime, including what this might mean for the CMA’s approach to our first Strategic Market Status – or SMS – designation investigations, which we launched in relation to search (https://www.gov.uk/government/news/cma-to-investigate-googles-search-services) and mobile ecosystems (https://www.gov.uk/government/news/cma-to-investigate-apple-and-googles-mobile-ecosystems) back in January.

Many of your businesses also provide products and services direct to consumers, and you will be aware that the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act also introduces a new consumer protection regime, to be enforced by the CMA, which will come into effect from April. At the end of the speech, I will preview some of our thinking in that area too – including responding to some of the concerns that have been raised with us on behalf of techUK members.

Strategic steer

Before I come to the ‘4Ps’, I’d like to offer a few reflections on the government’s draft strategic steer for the CMA (https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/draft-strategic-steer-to-the-competition-and-markets-authority) which was published last month, including how it affects our work in digital markets.

Our purpose, and our statutory mandate to promote competition and protect consumers, are unchanged. Those fundamentals remain front and centre in the draft steer. But they are firmly situated within the government’s number 1 priority of growth and investment, providing helpful clarity to guide the CMA as we independently carry out our statutory functions.

5 key points are worth highlighting:
- Where we have discretion, we have a clear steer on what to prioritise and how to design our interventions, with a strong focus on driving growth and investment in the UK. This includes supporting growth and international competitiveness in the 8 key sectors of the government’s industrial strategy.
- Prioritising action where there is a clear and direct impact in the UK. And thinking carefully about when and how we engage in global issues. I’ll come back to this, as many of the issues we consider in digital markets have a global dimension.
- Within the UK, working with relevant regulators to ensure regulatory action is coherent, timely and supports growth and investment in the UK. The CMA’s role in the Digital Regulation Cooperation Forum (https://www.drcf.org.uk/) is key here.
- Using the new digital markets competition regime flexibly, proportionately and collaboratively to unlock opportunities for growth across the UK tech sector and the wider economy.
- Using our new direct consumer protection powers under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act (DMCCA) to help grow the economy through promoting consumer trust and confidence, while deterring poor corporate practices.
Underpinning all of this – and directly aligning with the ‘4Ps’ framework – is a steer for the CMA to discharge our duties in a way which helps drive growth and build investor and business confidence.

Applying this framework to the digital markets competition regime

So how will the CMA apply the ‘4Ps’ and respond to the strategic steer as we operate the new digital markets competition regime?

I believe this regime creates a unique opportunity to deliver benefits for companies of all shapes and sizes across the UK tech ecosystem, and the wider economy. Opportunities for the largest firms to continue investing and innovating in a stable, predictable and proportionate regulatory environment; but also opportunities for new entrants and disrupters, investors and entrepreneurs, start-ups and scale-ups (many UK-based) to innovate and thrive. Greater access to data and key functionality, more interoperability, fair terms, more choice.

How we operate this new regime will be critical to its success – and to ensuring it carries the confidence of businesses and investors, both in the UK and abroad. Unlike merger reviews, we are starting with a blank canvas. Or perhaps it’s more accurate to say a canvas on which the 4Ps have already been sketched out, and to which we can add colour and texture as we implement the new regime. Because this is a regime in which the ‘best-in-class’ features of regulation are already baked in.

Let me give you a flavour of our proposed approach – both how the 4Ps are already reflected and how we will go further in applying them and taking account of the strategic steer. In April we will also publish a short document setting this out in more detail.

Pace

Perhaps more than in any other part of our economy, it’s essential that our work in digital markets is developed and implemented at a pace that keeps up with market dynamics – and avoids creating protracted uncertainty that could chill investment and innovation.

The DMCCA already imposes tight statutory time limits and a broader statutory duty of expedition.

In practice, we want to move through our work as quickly as possible, for example by progressing thinking on potential interventions alongside our SMS investigations. We are, however, mindful, that pace must be balanced with engagement and effectiveness, especially at the outset of a new regime.

Delivering effectively at pace means streamlining our approach to our investigations. Focusing as quickly as possible on key areas of potential concern. Rapidly standing down lines of enquiry where no clear evidence of concern arises. Prioritising issues where we can deliver positive outcomes for UK businesses and consumers quickly and effectively. Avoiding gold plating, by requesting only salient information, and keeping our decisions as short and clear as possible.

At the outset of our 2 live SMS investigations, we published ‘invitation to comment’ documents. These were intentionally and necessarily broad, to be refined by evidence and responses we received, which is what we are now doing now. As we move through those investigations you should expect to see clear and explicit streamlining and prioritisation in our approach.

Predictability

The evolution of next-generation technologies may be unpredictable. The regulatory environment should not be. Certainly not if we want to sustain high levels of investment and innovation.

One of the strengths and distinguishing features of the UK approach is the targeted, bespoke nature of the regime. There are no default designations and no broad-brush rules. This has many advantages; but one potential downside is the risk of uncertainty about whether a firm will be designated and, if it is, what rules will apply. We have had understandable feedback from businesses and investors asking for greater certainty about how the regime will work in practice.

As with pace, some clarity is provided by the legislation. For a firm to be considered for SMS designation, the thresholds are £1 billion UK turnover, or £25 billion globally. Substantial and entrenched market power is required in relation to a digital activity, and a position of strategic significance in the market. Only a handful of firms are likely to fall within scope. And, of course, designation is not automatic. It follows an evidence-led investigation, with decisions grounded in an in-depth understanding of the realities of an industry.

The legislation also provides a limiting framework for the design of conduct requirements: they can only be implemented in pursuit of at least one of 3 objectives (fair trading, open choices and trust and transparency) and they must be one of 13 ‘permitted types’.

We are also creating greater predictability through published guidance, extensive stakeholder engagement and transparent timelines.

But I want to go further, by incorporating a new step into our SMS designation investigations – an initial ‘roadmap’ for possible future interventions if the firm were to be designated with SMS. We will publish the roadmap when we consult on a proposed designation decision, providing clarity on which issues are likely to be prioritised for earlier action, which we propose to deprioritise, and which remain subject to further consideration.

For our current SMS investigations, we intend to publish roadmaps alongside our consultations on the proposed decisions in June (for search), and July (for mobile). Providing greater predictability, and also greater transparency for stakeholders about which issues to engage with us on at a particular point in time.

Consultation proposals on the interventions that we do prioritise for early action will then follow alongside the final decision on the SMS investigation, currently expected in October 2025.

Proportionality

To spur investment and innovation across digital markets, any regulatory intervention must be proportionate.

That principle of proportionality is really the heart of the UK’s digital markets competition regime. As I have just explained, and unlike some other jurisdictions, there is no automatic process for designations and no automatic regulatory requirements.

Proportionality also underpins our choices about which issues to tackle and which interventions to select – in other words, our prioritisation approach. The following considerations are key and directly connect to the government’s strategic steer:

First, impact. We will prioritise those interventions which have a clear and direct impact for UK consumers and businesses.

Second, strategic significance – including prioritising those interventions which strongly support business investment and economic growth in line with the strategic steer.

Third, whether the CMA is best placed to act. Reflecting the steer, we will consider the interplay with other regulators domestically and internationally. For global issues:
- we are less likely to act where action by another agency effectively addresses any UK concerns
- where there is a clear case for UK specific action, we will look for an effective and proportionate solution that best delivers for the UK. In some cases, it will make sense to replicate effective outcomes from other jurisdictions. But we will also work with designated firms and other stakeholders to understand where there are opportunities to take a bespoke and proportionate approach that delivers a positive and effective outcome for the UK
Of course, we look at these issues in the round. And as you would expect, we also carefully consider both risk levels and whether we have adequate resources available to deliver impactful outcomes at pace. That includes ensuring we have the right expertise and deep understanding of the markets we are looking at. We have been investing in this capability intensely over recent years, particularly through our new Data, Technology and Insights Directorate.

We are also building out a new ‘business and strategic analysis’ capability to deepen our understanding of firms’ strategies and business models. Bringing the perspective of business and investors directly into our work is vital to create the best conditions for innovation, investment and growth.

Process

The regime will only deliver on its enormous potential for growth and wider benefits if we – the CMA and innovative, ambitious businesses across the tech sector – work together, constructively and collaboratively. That is why it was designed from the outset to be highly participative, based on deep engagement with diverse stakeholders. In practice, this means wide-ranging consultation and inclusive engagement at every step – some of you in this room may already be taking part in these processes.

Now, we are challenging ourselves to make sure this engagement really works for businesses and investors. We will put in place a regular and defined programme of engagement – a ‘go to you’ approach where the CMA pro-actively makes that connection in a way that is quick, easy, and informal for businesses.

We will engage relevant members of our Growth and Investment Council (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/growth-and-investment-council-terms-of-reference/cma-growth-and-investment-council-terms-of-reference) during our SMS investigations, so that we hear key industry and expert perspectives. We will continue to strengthen ties with trade associations and UK-based venture capital firms, partnering on a series of events over 2025. We will deepen direct engagement with the UK startups and scaleups that stand to gain from our work. The new regime supports an ecosystem with opportunities for everyone, and we will engage with large UK-listed companies – including beyond the tech and digital sectors – to understand their perspectives.

techUK is, of course, a valued member of our Growth and Investment Council and represents thousands of diverse member organisations. I hope you will all take away what I have said today about our willingness to engage with open minds and an open door.

The new consumer enforcement regime

Now, I know many of you are business-to-consumer (B2C) businesses and keen to understand more about how we are approaching our refreshed mandate for consumer protection under the DMCCA.

The new powers, coming into force in April, offer an opportunity – and I think this is well put in the strategic steer – to grow the economy by promoting consumer trust and confidence, while deterring poor corporate practices. Because consumers deserve to know that the CMA has their back; and fair-dealing businesses deserve to know that their competitors are playing by the same rules and can’t gain a competitive advantage by breaking the law.

These new direct enforcement powers mean that the CMA will be able to decide whether consumer protection laws have been breached without having to take businesses to court; and we will be able to take direct action to tackle these breaches including through fines and redress.

At the beginning of April, alongside final guidance, we will publish an approach document. This will include detail on our enforcement priorities for the first 12 months of the new regime, with a focus on the most egregious harms. Today I’d like to preview some of those plans.

Early priorities and guidance

In recent months, we have consulted extensively on guidance for the new consumer regime, receiving constructive feedback from a range of stakeholders (including techUK). We have heard loud and clear that businesses – large and small – want to do the right thing for their customers and many are working hard to ensure they comply. But for smaller businesses especially, the compliance burden must be proportionate.

Taking that feedback on board, we will be streamlining the drafting of our Guidance on Unfair Commercial Practices (https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/unfair-commercial-practices-guidance) considerably to make it as clear and accessible as possible, whilst retaining the case studies and examples which we know businesses and advisors find helpful. We’ll be publishing that final guidance in early April.

It is worth touching briefly on 2 areas where we received particular feedback, including from techUK, during our consultation.

Drip pricing

This was where we received the most substantive feedback to our consultation. We want to reflect carefully on that feedback before finalising our position. So I am announcing today that we will take a phased approach to the guidance here. In April, we will provide a clear framework for complying with the parts of the law which are already well understood and largely unchanged. By this, I mean the prohibition of genuinely unexpected and untrailed mandatory charges added on at the end of a purchasing journey. These ‘dripped fees’ harm consumers, and fair dealing businesses, by hindering effective price competition – which we know primarily happens on headline prices.

For those aspects of the drip pricing guidance that have created more uncertainty (including fixed-term periodic contracts) we will run a further consultation on revised draft guidance in the summer, with a view to producing finalised guidance in this area in the autumn. In the meantime, we will only take enforcement action against drip pricing which clearly breaches the rules in line with the April guidance.

Fake reviews

Fake reviews is a banned practice under the DMCCA. Although we can tackle fake reviews under our existing powers, and indeed you may have seen Google recently offered undertakings on this, we recognise that new provisions may require changes to systems and compliance programmes. We hear that you need time to bed these in, and so for the first 3 months of the new regime we will focus on supporting businesses with their compliance efforts rather than enforcement.

Looking ahead to commencement – our early enforcement approach

The remaining law where our new direct enforcement powers can be used hasn’t changed materially. However, we recognise that the risks of getting it wrong are changing substantially. Businesses have told us they are preparing to comply and will be relying on the clarity and certainty provided by our final guidance to be published at commencement in April.

Reflecting that, our early enforcement action is likely to focus on the most egregious breaches. For example, aggressive sales practices that prey on vulnerability; providing information to consumers that is objectively false; contract terms that are very obviously imbalanced and unfair.

At the same time, we will support the vast majority of well-intentioned businesses who want to do the right thing, but may be unclear on exactly what is needed to ensure compliance – especially in areas where the law has been updated or is less clear-cut. When considering the appropriate level for any penalty, we will also take into account where businesses have taken proactive steps to correct infringing conduct.

I am confident this approach will deliver robust protections for consumers, focusing on clearly illegal conduct that results in tangible harms. At the same time, it gives businesses the clarity to comply as quickly as possible – and the confidence that early enforcement action will be proportionate. This is, after all, in the interests of both businesses and consumers; when businesses get it right, consumers benefit.

Conclusion

I want to finish by broadening the lens for a moment, to the wider work the CMA does to support growth and investment in UK digital and technology markets.

In particular, we are supporting government on its industrial strategy and the roll-out of the AI Opportunities Action Plan. Whether it be through removing barriers to competition and scaling in priority sectors identified by the industrial strategy; unlocking opportunities for new and diverse players in cross-economy areas like procurement and smart data; or facilitating legitimate collaboration between businesses to achieve a step change in productivity and innovation – the CMA is committed to playing its part.

I know techUK and its members will provide valuable insights and collaboration across much of our work this year. I am looking forward to continuing to work closely together.