.svg)
Brussels-based industry body the Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA) has said that a proposal to bar "gatekeepers" from Financial Data Access (FiDA) licensing would undermine competition, limit consumer choice and contradict EU innovation goals.
CCIA Europe has sharply criticised the recent proposal from the European Commission that would prohibit companies designated "gatekeepers" under the Digital Markets Act (DMA) from obtaining licences under the forthcoming FiDA Regulation.
In a letter addressed to Maria Luís Albuquerque, the European commissioner for financial services, CCIA Europe describes the plan as “discriminatory”, arguing that it would stifle innovation, entrench incumbent players and reduce consumer choice.
The proposal, reported in a commission non-paper on FiDA simplification, suggests an absolute ban on gatekeeper firms operating as financial information service providers (FISPs) within the EU.
In documents seen by Vixio, the commission has joined with the European Parliament in pushing for tough restrictions on big tech engagement with the framework.
“FiDA should enable innovative start-ups to enter financial markets and not reinforce the dominance of big techs,” the document says, adding that “big techs could add personal financial data to the vast amounts of consumer data they already have, which would increase the risk of creating a fully transparent consumer, thereby undermining consumer sovereignty.”
CCIA Europe contends that this would effectively exclude major tech platforms, many of which are US-based, from offering account information services, despite the fact that FiDA was designed to foster competition and innovation in the financial sector.
Limiting competition
“Excluding gatekeepers without any proper justification is deeply concerning. The so-called justification given, that it would simplify the framework, logically doesn't make sense, especially considering the Commission’s original proposal aimed to keep the market open,” said Boniface de Champris, senior policy manager at CCIA.
De Champris told Vixio that the DMA had a very different purpose. “Under the current approach, they would be effectively barred from obtaining a licence, accessing financial data, or offering information services altogether.”
“The real gatekeepers in this market are the incumbent banking players, large banks and insurers, many of whom don’t see the value in allowing any new competitors to enter,” he said.
The policy advocate suggested "it feels like history is repeating itself”, with events echoing the banking industry's lobbying at the time of the revised Payment Services Directive (PSD2) being passed.
“Open banking has delivered real results for consumers, as it’s given them more choice, helped them make informed decisions, and enabled them to use financial services in more innovative ways,” said de Champris.
“No one really questions open banking anymore, and open finance is the natural next step. We’re seeing a familiar fight all over again.”
“While PSD2 was primarily about open banking, FiDA is meant to take us further in an open direction, to enable open finance,” he said.
“Instead, it risks shutting out many innovators, which completely defeats the purpose of the regulation, twisting into closed finance."
Unacceptable restrictions
In its letter, the CCIA stresses the need for appropriate safeguards to address privacy and competition concerns.
However, it urged negotiators involved in the ongoing trilogue discussions to reject what it views as a disproportionate and unjustified restriction.
The association stresses that existing EU legislation, including the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the DMA itself, already places robust limits on how consumer data can be processed, and suggests that FiDA should reinforce these limits rather than contradict them.
It also argues that the proposed move would breach fundamental rights, such as an individual’s rights over the portability of their personal data and the freedom to conduct a business protected under Article 16 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU.
In addition, the industry body questions the legal and policy rationale underpinning the commission’s stance, saying the justification draws selectively and inappropriately from the EU’s separate Data Act.
Although the Data Act includes gatekeeper restrictions aimed at addressing imbalances in industrial data access, CCIA Europe says those provisions are not relevant to the FiDA framework, which is focused on consumer financial services and is intended to enable, rather than restrict, data-driven innovation.
Moreover, it warns that the blanket prohibition risks violating the EU’s international trade commitments under the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), potentially amounting to de facto discrimination against non-EU service providers without any clear public policy justification.
The letter concludes with a call for trilogue negotiators to uphold the commission’s original vision for FiDA, one based on openness, fairness and innovation.
“Now more than ever, we urge you and trilogue negotiators to reject the blanket exclusion of gatekeepers from FiDA licensing and instead adopt fair and non-discriminatory rules that actually foster innovation, openness, and — above all — customer choice.”
