DMA AI assistants are becoming the next regulatory flashpoint as Europe shifts its attention from app stores, payment rules, and browser choice toward the intelligence layer that may define how people use devices next. The Digital Markets Act was built to make large digital platforms more contestable, but the first two years of enforcement focused mainly on familiar surfaces: app distribution, search, operating systems, messaging, advertising, and online marketplaces. Now the European Commission is looking more directly at cloud services and artificial intelligence.
That shift matters for Apple because Siri, Apple Intelligence, Private Cloud Compute, and future model-choice features may become part of the same regulatory conversation that once centered on the App Store. If AI assistants become the new front door to apps, content, search, messages, productivity, shopping, media, and device controls, regulators may treat them less like features and more like platform gateways.
The European Commission’s first DMA review said cloud services and AI will be key focus areas as digital markets evolve. Regulators are already investigating whether Amazon Web Services and Microsoft Azure should be designated as gatekeepers for cloud services, and Reuters reported that the Commission is assessing whether some AI services should be treated as virtual assistants under the DMA. That would be a major development because virtual assistants are already listed as a core platform service under the law, even though no major virtual assistant has yet been designated as a DMA gatekeeper.
For Apple, this creates a new kind of risk. The company is not only being judged on whether it lets developers use outside payment links or alternative app stores. It may soon be judged on whether Siri and Apple Intelligence give rival AI services, app developers, media providers, and users enough choice inside the operating system.
From App Stores to the Assistant Layer
The DMA’s move toward AI assistants reflects a larger change in how digital platforms work. The app store was once the main gate. A developer needed distribution, visibility, payment access, and fair rules to reach users. That is still true, but AI can move the gate higher up the stack. If a user asks an assistant to book a trip, summarize the news, order food, choose a song, compare prices, edit an image, or reply to a message, the assistant may decide which app, service, model, or content source gets used.
That makes the assistant a powerful intermediary. A voice or text-based AI agent can influence discovery, ranking, defaults, monetization, and user choice before the user even opens an app. Regulators are watching that shift because the same companies already designated as digital gatekeepers also control operating systems, browsers, search engines, cloud services, app stores, and increasingly AI assistants.
Apple sits directly inside that concern. Siri has not yet become the kind of AI assistant Apple wants it to be, but that is exactly why the regulatory timing matters. If iOS 27 brings deeper Apple Intelligence integration, rival model choices, and more capable Siri behavior, the EU may examine those features as they are being built, not years after they become dominant.
Apple’s challenge is that integration is its strength. The company wants Siri to understand personal context, take actions across apps, protect user privacy, and work across iPhone, iPad, Mac, Apple Watch, Vision Pro, and HomePod. Regulators may ask whether that integration gives Apple’s own services an advantage or makes it harder for rival AI assistants to compete at the same level.
That question is more difficult than the App Store debate because AI assistants can be both a privacy feature and a competition risk. Apple can argue that deep system access must be controlled to protect user data. The EU may argue that control cannot become a reason to block meaningful competition.
Siri Could Become a DMA Test Case
Siri is likely to become the clearest Apple test case if the DMA turns toward AI assistants. Apple’s assistant already has privileged access to system settings, device functions, personal context, notifications, apps, and Apple services. A rebuilt Siri powered by Apple Intelligence could become much more important if it can understand on-screen content, take actions through App Intents, use Private Cloud Compute, and route certain requests to outside models.
That is where the regulatory question begins. If a third-party AI assistant cannot access the same app actions, personal context, device controls, or default placement, the EU may see a contestability problem. If Apple opens too much access, it may create privacy and security risks that undermine the company’s core user promise.
Apple’s rumored AI Extensions strategy could become a partial answer. Reports have said Apple plans to let users choose rival AI models across iOS 27 features, including text and image tasks, through a Settings-based system that could support models from companies such as Google or Anthropic. If Apple builds that choice clearly, it may be able to argue that Apple Intelligence is not a closed AI layer.
The question will be how far that choice goes. Choosing a model for Writing Tools is different from choosing a default assistant. Allowing Gemini or Claude to help generate text is different from letting those services replace Siri’s system-level role. The DMA debate may eventually turn on exactly that distinction: whether rival AI services are allowed to operate inside Apple’s ecosystem only as tools, or whether they can compete as true assistants.
The EU has already shown interest in this direction beyond Apple. Regulators have proposed measures requiring Google to give Android users more choice around AI services integrated into phones. Broadcasters have also urged the EU to treat smart TV platforms and virtual assistants as gatekeepers because assistant search and recommendation systems can shape access to media content. Those arguments point toward a wider regulatory concern: AI assistants may become the new default layer for content and services.
Apple’s Privacy Defense Will Be Tested Again
Apple will likely respond to DMA AI pressure with the same core argument it has used in other European disputes: opening sensitive parts of the system can weaken privacy, security, and product quality. The company has already criticized the DMA for delaying features in Europe and forcing design choices it says could expose users to more risk. Apple has argued that some EU requirements make it harder to launch features consistently across regions.
That privacy argument may be especially strong around AI. A useful personal assistant may need access to messages, calendars, emails, photos, files, location, app data, health-adjacent information, and on-screen context. Apple can say it is safer for that access to remain inside a controlled architecture such as on-device processing and Private Cloud Compute. The EU may respond that privacy protections can be designed without giving Apple exclusive control over the AI interface.
This creates a difficult policy conflict. Regulators want contestable markets. Apple wants controlled integration. Users may want both privacy and choice. A badly designed opening could expose sensitive personal data to too many providers. A tightly closed system could leave Apple as the only assistant with meaningful access to the device.
The best outcome for Apple would be a structured model-choice system that lets users select outside AI models for specific tasks while keeping sensitive system permissions transparent and limited. That would allow Apple to preserve its privacy architecture while showing regulators that rivals can compete where competition is technically safe.
The risk is that the EU decides this is not enough. If AI assistants are designated or treated more aggressively under the DMA, Apple could face obligations around defaults, interoperability, ranking, data portability, and access to system functions. That could force a more fragmented version of Siri and Apple Intelligence in Europe.
AI Regulation Could Reshape the iPhone Experience
The DMA moving toward AI assistants could affect the iPhone more deeply than earlier App Store changes. Alternative app stores and payment links matter to developers, but many users may never notice them. AI assistant rules could affect the daily interface: what happens when someone asks a question, launches a task, summarizes a document, searches for media, or uses voice to control the device.
If Europe requires more assistant choice, iPhone users in the EU could eventually see new Settings panels, default assistant options, permission prompts, AI model selectors, and clearer labels showing when a response comes from Apple or an outside provider. That could make the platform feel more open, but also more complex.
For developers, the shift could be just as important. If Siri and Apple Intelligence become regulated as gatekeeper layers, app makers may gain stronger rights to appear in assistant results, expose actions, and compete for user tasks. App Intents could become not only a developer framework, but part of a competition policy conversation.
The strategic issue for Apple is timing. Siri is still being rebuilt. Apple Intelligence is still expanding. Rival model integration is still evolving. Europe is moving toward the AI layer before Apple’s final assistant strategy is fully visible. That means Apple may have to build its next major AI interface with regulation already in mind.
The DMA began by challenging app-store power. Its next phase may challenge assistant power. For Apple, that means the question is no longer only whether developers can reach users through the App Store. It is whether users and developers can reach each other through the AI layer that may sit above every app.
The future iPhone interface could be shaped as much by Brussels as by Cupertino. If AI becomes the operating system’s most important layer, the DMA’s move from app stores to assistants may be one of the most consequential regulatory shifts Apple faces in Europe.
