The European Commission has sent preliminary findings to Google that would require the company to share anonymized search data with rival search engines and AI-powered tools. The proposal, published on April 16, 2026, outlines measures to comply with the Digital Markets Act.
What Google Would Have to Share
Under the proposal, Google must share four categories of anonymized data on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms: ranking, query, click, and view data. The aim is to allow third-party online search engines to optimize their services and contest Google Search's dominant position.
The EU explicitly included AI chatbots with search functionalities as eligible data beneficiaries, meaning eligible AI products serving EU and EEA users could access anonymized signals from Google Search. The proposal doesn't give AI chatbots access to Google's index but instead allows access to data similar to what Alphabet uses to optimize its own search services.
The Commission's proposal addresses key technical and regulatory aspects such as the criteria for who can access the data, the exact types and scope of data to be shared, the frequency of data transfers, secure anonymization of any personal information, and how FRAND pricing should be determined.
The Timeline
The Commission opened proceedings on January 27, 2026, to specify measures that Alphabet must implement to comply with its data sharing obligation under the DMA. The Commission will adopt a final decision by July 27, 2026, within six months of opening the proceedings. A public consultation opened on April 16, 2026, and ran until May 1, 2026.
This is a specification proceeding rather than an enforcement action. Google has the opportunity to respond to the preliminary findings in writing before final measures are adopted. The proceedings do not constitute a finding of non-compliance, but they create the legal architecture for one.
Google's Response
Google has opposed the proposal. Clare Kelly, the company's senior competition counsel, stated that "Hundreds of millions of Europeans trust Google with their most sensitive searches" and "the Commission's proposal would force us to hand this data over to third parties, with dangerously ineffective privacy protections." Google called it "overreach" that "far exceeds the DMA's original mandate."
The privacy and security concerns Google raises are not trivial. Search queries reveal intent patterns, health questions, financial matters, and personal relationships. The question is whether the Commission's anonymization requirements adequately protect users while still providing data that's useful to competitors.
What's at Stake
The case is significant because it shows the DMA moving from broad obligations to detailed implementation. The Commission is now trying to define what meaningful access would look like in operational terms, and the Google case may become an important test of how far the DMA can reshape competition in digital search markets and related AI services.
If Google fails to comply with finalized measures, the Commission can impose fines of up to 10% of the company's global annual turnover, and up to 20% for repeated infringement. Based on recent earnings, that could mean fines of roughly $30.7 billion at the high end.
Teresa Ribera, the Commission's executive vice-president, framed the action bluntly: "Data is a key input for online search and for developing new services, including AI. Access to this data should not be restricted in ways that could harm competition. In fast-moving markets, small changes can quickly have a big impact."
Why This Matters Beyond Search
For anyone watching the broader fight over AI model development and data access, this case establishes a template. The DMA's position is that dominant platforms cannot leverage exclusive data access to lock out competitors. That principle applies as much to search as it does to the foundation models now powering chatbots, like those from OpenAI and Anthropic.
European AI startups raised $52 billion in 2024 against $209 billion in the United States. The Commission's counterargument is that a market in which Google, Apple, and Microsoft can embed their AI assistants at the operating system level while rivals are confined to app stores will not produce European AI champions regardless of how much venture capital is available. Access to the platform is a precondition for competition.
The crypto and decentralization community has long argued that data monopolies distort markets. This is the EU taking a version of that argument and codifying it into enforcement. Whether the anonymization protocols hold up, whether the data proves useful to competitors, and whether Google's legal challenges succeed will shape how aggressively regulators move on similar fronts. A binding decision by late July will set the terms. For a look at related antitrust dynamics, see the Commission's press release and coverage from The Next Web.
