The Tool Desk
Outbyte PC Repair FREERepair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Outbyte Driver Updater FREEScan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Yes. On 5 December 2025, the European Commission fined X, formerly Twitter, €120 million after finding breaches of the Digital Services Act (DSA) involving paid blue checkmarks, the platform’s advertising repository and access for independent researchers. The case concerned misleading transparency and platform accountability—not a blanket ban on paid subscriptions.
What the European Commission found
The decision covered three separate transparency failures by X. They were assessed under the obligations that apply to very large online platforms (VLOPs), rather than under a general prohibition on subscription products.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
| DSA provision | Platform duty | Commission finding | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Article 25 | Do not design interfaces in a deceptive way that materially impairs users’ ability to make informed decisions. | The interface for subscription-linked blue checkmarks could make the badge look like traditional identity verification, even though payment could provide the signal without meaningful identity verification. | Users may misjudge whether an account is authentic or otherwise treat the badge as a reliability signal. |
| Article 39 | Maintain a searchable, reliable and accurate public repository of advertisements. | X’s advertising repository was not sufficiently transparent. | Users, journalists and regulators have less ability to see who is advertising, what ads ran and how they were targeted. |
| Article 40(12) | Provide effective access to relevant platform data for independent researchers studying systemic risks. | X imposed barriers that impaired practical researcher access to public data. | Independent scrutiny of risks such as manipulation, illegal content and election-related harms becomes harder. |
The Commission imposed the €120 million penalty for these combined failures. The amount is the remedy in the December 2025 decision, not a subscription price or a per-user charge.
Why a paid blue checkmark became a DSA issue
The legal problem was the way the badge communicated information. Before subscription badges, a checkmark was commonly understood as a platform signal that an account had been verified in some meaningful way. X’s subscription design placed a verification-looking mark next to accounts because the account holder had paid for a product.
#1 Best Overall
- CLASSIC DESIGN: Traditional 6-panel construction with a pre-curved bill for timeless athletic style and superior sun protection
- ADJUSTABLE FIT: Rear closure system allows for a customizable fit.
- VENTILATION: Strategic eyelets provide enhanced airflow to keep your head cool during physical activities
- VERSATILE WEAR: Perfect for sports, casual outings, or daily wear with a timeless silhouette that matches any outfit
- DURABLE MATERIAL: Constructed with sturdy fabric that maintains its shape and offers lasting comfort for extended wear.
That distinction matters under Article 25. The Commission’s concern was that the interface could prevent an ordinary user from understanding what the mark actually represented. A user who sees a familiar verification symbol may infer identity, authenticity or institutional status without investigating the account further.
Are paid checkmarks automatically illegal?
No. The decision does not establish that every paid badge or subscription is unlawful. A platform can sell a subscription if it describes the product accurately and does not use the design to create a misleading impression. The DSA question is whether the presentation enables an informed choice and avoids deceptive interface practices.
For X, the Commission said the checkmark’s appearance and context did not correspond clearly enough to the meaning users traditionally attached to verification. The finding therefore focused on communication and design, not on the mere fact that X charged for access to a feature.
Recommended Free Tools
Rank #2
- Premium Cotton Construction: Crafted with high-quality cotton, the KBETHOS Classic Cotton Adjustable Low Crown Baseball Cap ensures a soft, breathable, and durable feel against your skin. The premium material adds a touch of luxury to this timeless accessory.
- Low Crown Silhouette: The low crown design brings a modern and sophisticated element to the classic baseball cap. With a sleeker profile, this cap stands out as a stylish choice, making it perfect for those who appreciate contemporary aesthetics.
- Adjustable Strap for Personalized Fit: The cap features an adjustable strap, providing a customizable fit for individuals of all head sizes. This ensures that the KBETHOS cap is not only stylish but also comfortable, allowing wearers to achieve their desired level of snugness.
- Versatile Everyday Wear: Whether you're heading to a casual outing, outdoor activity, or just completing your daily look, the KBETHOS Classic Cotton Adjustable Low Crown Baseball Cap is a versatile accessory. Its enduring design and modern silhouette make it a go-to choice for a wide range of occasions.
- Built-In Sun Protection: Engineered for more than just looks, the KBETHOS Original Classic Low Profile Baseball Cap isn't just a fashion statement – it's your shield against the sun's rays. Designed with built-in sun protection, this cap's brim effectively blocks out harmful UV rays, providing a practical and stylish solution for outdoor activities.
The advertising repository failure
Article 39 requires a VLOP’s ad repository to be searchable, reliable and accurate. The repository is intended to let the public and oversight bodies examine advertising activity rather than treating ads as information visible only while a campaign is running.
The Commission found X’s implementation insufficiently transparent. In practical terms, a repository that is incomplete, difficult to search or unreliable cannot support meaningful checks on an advertiser’s identity, the content of campaigns or the audiences reached. The decision treated that weakness as a separate DSA breach from the blue-checkmark design.
The researcher-access failure
Article 40(12) requires VLOPs to provide effective access to platform data for independent researchers. That access supports research into systemic risks that a platform cannot be expected to assess alone.
Rank #3
- Low Profile UNCONSTRUCTED Plain baseball cap, classic and timeless style. The hat is comfortable for you to wear when doing activities
- Adjustable Size - One Size Fits Most: There is an adjustable button on the back of the baseball cap, which can be adjusted to a fitted size(21.2”-23.6”), the brim of the hat is 2.76”. Rear opening design fits women's low ponytail comfortably
- Adjustable metal button back closure, great fit for most head sizes ensure comfort at all times. The baseball cap is lightweight and has tightly stitching and can be used for more time
- The baseball cap is a stylish minimalist design, it is suitable for both men and women, comfortable and breathable, and easy to wear
- Wide Applicable Occasion: The unisex design makes it fits for men and women for everyday, sports, fishing, travel, outdoor activities, outing, etc
The Commission found that X’s barriers impaired that access. The issue was therefore not simply whether some data existed somewhere, but whether qualified researchers could obtain and use relevant public data in practice. Restrictions that make access ineffective can undermine the DSA’s independent oversight model.
Why X was subject to the strongest DSA duties
The Commission designated X a Very Large Online Platform on 25 April 2023. The designation followed X’s report of 112 million monthly active users in the European Union, as recorded by the Commission in 2023.
VLOP status brings enhanced obligations, including systemic-risk assessments and more demanding transparency requirements. The designation explains why the Commission examined the checkmark interface, ad repository and researcher access under the DSA’s specialised provisions instead of treating them only as ordinary platform-policy matters.
Rank #4
- One Size Fits Most Head Size with Adjustable Closure Strap.
- 6 Panel Construction. 6 Eyelets Venting. Structured Front panels. Build in Sweatband to stay Fresh.
- One style Hat you can Wear all Year Round!
- Suitable for Custom Embroidery and Printing.
- Trendy look and high Quality Material. Easy to Carry and Comfortable to Wear. Will not out of shape easily!
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.“The higher the risk large platforms pose to our society, the more specific the requirements of the Digital Services Act are.”
— Margrethe Vestager, Executive Vice-President for a Europe Fit for the Digital Age, European Commission, 18 December 2023
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Special offer. See more information about Outbyte and uninstall instructions. Please review EULA and Privacy policy.
How the enforcement case developed
- 25 April 2023: The Commission designated X as a VLOP after the platform reported 112 million monthly active users in the EU.
- 18 December 2023: The Commission opened formal proceedings. The announced areas included the suspected deceptive design of subscription-linked blue checks, shortcomings in the ad repository and concerns about researcher access to data.
- 12 July 2024: The Commission issued preliminary findings that X was in breach in areas corresponding to Articles 25, 39 and 40(12). At that stage, the DSA allowed a fine of up to 6% of worldwide annual turnover for an established infringement.
- 5 December 2025: The Commission adopted its decision and imposed a €120 million fine covering the three transparency failures.
- 2026: The Commission accepted an X action plan addressing transparency and researcher-access obligations. Follow-up is still part of the enforcement process.
Preliminary findings are not the same as a final decision. The July 2024 announcement identified the Commission’s provisional assessment; the €120 million penalty followed the December 2025 decision.
Best Value
- Officially licensed by the MLB
- Age range description: adult
- Fit type: Fitted
- Fit Type: Fitted
What the €120 million fine means
It is a DSA transparency penalty
The fine reflects failures in interface design and access to information that the DSA treats as important for informed users, public accountability and independent oversight. It is not a ruling that X’s entire subscription business is unlawful.
It is not calculated as a fixed price per checkmark
The DSA’s potential ceiling of up to 6% of worldwide annual turnover was relevant to the preliminary enforcement stage. The final decision imposed €120 million. The publicly stated decision does not establish the calculation details behind that figure, so it should not be presented as a percentage of X’s subscriber count or as a per-account amount.
It does not settle every commercial question about X Blue
The Commission decision does not establish one current X Blue price or uniform availability for every EU country as of 28 September 2026. Those details can vary by market and product configuration and are separate from the DSA findings.
What X’s 2026 action plan changes
The Commission’s acceptance of an X action plan shows that remediation is being followed up rather than treated as complete merely because the fine was imposed. The plan addresses the transparency and researcher-access obligations identified in the case.
For the public, the meaningful test is whether X makes the badge’s meaning clearer, operates an advertising repository that can actually be searched and relied upon, and gives eligible researchers workable access to relevant data. Acceptance of a plan is not the same as a finding that every obligation has already been satisfied.
What users and researchers should watch
- Badge interpretation: Treat a paid checkmark as a subscription signal unless the platform clearly establishes a separate, reliable basis for identity or authenticity.
- Advertising transparency: A useful ad repository should let people search campaigns and inspect meaningful information without relying on screenshots or temporary visibility in a feed.
- Research access: The practical question is whether independent researchers can obtain relevant public data under workable conditions, not merely whether X publishes a policy saying access exists.
- Regulatory follow-through: The accepted 2026 action plan means implementation remains subject to Commission follow-up.
Bottom line
Twitter Blue did not become illegal simply because it was paid. X was fined because the Commission found that the subscription checkmark could mislead users about what verification meant, while X also failed separate duties concerning its ad repository and researcher data access. The €120 million decision is therefore a transparency and accountability case under the DSA, with remediation still being monitored in 2026.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
