The European Commission has ordered Meta Platforms to restore free access to WhatsApp’s business messaging tools for competing general-purpose AI assistants, escalating a fast-moving antitrust case that targets how the company controls access to its messaging infrastructure.

The interim decision requires Meta to reinstate third-party AI assistants on the WhatsApp Business API under the same terms that existed before October 15, 2025, when the company introduced restrictions that limited access to its own Meta AI system.

The Commission said the measure is necessary to “prevent serious and irreparable harm to competition” in the emerging market for AI assistants, where distribution channels like WhatsApp play a central role in reaching users across Europe.

Antitrust probe moves from investigation to emergency action

The case began in December 2025 when the Commission opened an investigation into Meta’s updated WhatsApp policy. Regulators focused on a policy change that blocked rival AI assistants from the WhatsApp Business API, leaving Meta AI as the only integrated option.

In February 2026, the Commission issued a Statement of Objections indicating that interim measures might be required. A supplementary statement followed in April 2026, signaling intent to restore third-party access.

The decision issued this week confirms those interim measures. It marks only the second time the Commission has imposed such action under Regulation 1/2003 since the Broadcom case in 2009.

The Commission said WhatsApp has held a dominant position in the European Economic Area consumer communications market since at least January 2023. It also said Meta’s policy change, “at first sight,” amounted to a refusal to provide access to infrastructure that was previously open to third parties.

Policy reversal and pricing dispute at the center of case

Meta initially restricted access to its WhatsApp Business API for third-party AI assistants in October 2025. After regulatory pressure, it partially reversed the decision in March 2026 by allowing access again, but introduced a fee structure.

The Commission concluded that the revised pricing was “in practice equivalent to the previous access ban.” Regulators argued that the cost made participation economically unviable for competitors.

Teresa Ribera, Executive Vice-President for Clean, Just and Competitive Transition, said the timing of the intervention reflects how quickly market conditions can shift.

“In rapidly evolving markets, competition can be lost long before a final decision is adopted. This is why these interim measures will remain in place, in order to prevent harm that would be almost impossible to repair,” she said.

She also pointed out the role of WhatsApp as a distribution channel:

“These interim measures will safeguard competition in the growing market for AI assistants, by preserving a key entry point to reach consumers in Europe – WhatsApp – and allowing AI companies to innovate, scale up and reach their full potential.”

Meta response and compliance pressure

Meta rejected the decision and confirmed plans to appeal. The company described the ruling as “regulatory overreach.”

“The European Commission has decided that OpenAI and some of the largest companies in the world can use the paid-for WhatsApp Business product for free,” Meta said in a statement. “This is regulatory overreach subsidized by the many European companies that pay.”

Under the order, Meta must restore access within five working days. Failure to comply could result in fines of up to 10% of global annual turnover, along with daily penalty payments of up to 5% of average daily turnover.

The measures remain in effect until the Commission reaches a final decision or until the end of the investigation. There is no fixed deadline for completion of antitrust cases in the EU system.

The Commission’s action relies on Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 54 of the EEA Agreement, which prohibit abuse of a dominant market position.

Under Regulation 1/2003, interim measures apply when a preliminary infringement appears likely and when urgent action is needed to prevent serious and irreversible harm to competition.

Officials said the case meets both conditions. The Commission pointed to the rapid development of the AI assistant market and the risk that early restrictions could lock in market advantages for dominant players.

The WhatsApp Business API sits at the center of the dispute. It allows companies to connect external systems to WhatsApp for customer communication. Before October 2025, the API allowed third-party AI assistants without restriction.

Market impact and timing concerns

The Commission said the AI assistant sector remains in a formative stage where distribution access can determine market structure. Smaller firms rely on platforms such as WhatsApp to reach users at scale.

Regulators warned that Meta’s policy shift risked limiting competition at a critical stage of market development. The concern focused on whether early exclusion could prevent new entrants from establishing a position in Europe’s AI ecosystem.

The case also indicates broader scrutiny of how large technology firms control access to messaging platforms that function as digital infrastructure for businesses and consumers.

Background investigations continue

The Commission’s substantive investigation remains ongoing. Authorities have not issued a final finding on whether Meta violated EU competition law.

Meta continues to face parallel regulatory pressure in Europe, including separate investigations under the Digital Services Act and ongoing scrutiny of its AI systems and platform governance.

The WhatsApp case now stands as one of the most direct tests of how EU competition law applies to AI distribution channels inside dominant messaging platforms.

Disclaimer: All materials on this site are for informational purposes only. None of the material should be interpreted as investment advice. Please note that, despite the nature of much of the material created and hosted on this website, HODL FM operates as a media and informational platform, not a provider of financial advisory services. The opinions of authors and other contributors are their own and should not be taken as financial advice. If you require advice, HODL FM strongly recommends contacting a qualified industry professional.