OpenLobby.EU
Explore

CDISCOUNT

Headquartered in the city of Bordeaux, France, Cdiscount is a leading e-commerce player available to consumers mainly in France.

Lobbying Activity

Meeting with Isabelle Perignon (Director Justice and Consumers) and

1 Oct 2025 · Exchange of views on General Product Safety Regulation (GPSR) and EU Responsible economic operator (responsible person); Product Safety Pledge+

Meeting with Michele Perolat (Head of Unit Taxation and Customs Union), Vanesa Hernandez Guerrero (Head of Unit Taxation and Customs Union)

30 Sept 2025 · Physical meeting - Exchange of views on the Union Customs Code Reform and its link to e-commerce

Meeting with Mehdi Hocine (Head of Unit Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs) and SAMMAN Cabinet d'avocats

9 Jul 2025 · State of parcel delivery services and e-commerce in the Single Market

Meeting with Anna Cavazzini (Member of the European Parliament, Committee chair) and European Tech Alliance and

12 Jun 2025 · Digital policy

Meeting with Nils Behrndt (Deputy Director-General Justice and Consumers)

12 Jun 2025 · Exchange of views on issues related to e-commerce platforms, product safety, consumer protection, enforcement

Response to International Digital Strategy

19 May 2025

Cdiscount, a leading European e-commerce company headquartered in France, has developed a marketplace that enables more than 14,000 professional sellers to access over 17 million unique monthly visitors across Europe. Our platform plays a vital role in the European digital ecosystem by promoting consumer choice and supporting SMEs in Europe. We warmly welcome the European Commissions initiative to present a Joint Communication on the EUs international digital strategy. As a key ecommerce actor operating in Europe, we strongly support the objective of reinforcing the EUs global leadership in digital and technological affairs , and we believe this ambition must rest on a robust, coherent, and competitive European digital foundation. As a prerequisite to foster competitiveness of EU actors through a level playing field, it is essential to ensure the existing rules, which already constitute one of the most stringent and advanced regulatory frameworks in the world, are applied consistently to all market participants, regardless of their geographic origin. A coherent and uniform enforcement approach is crucial to safeguarding fairness and preserving the competitiveness of European companies. The principle of reciprocity must be central to the EUs external digital strategy. The Digital Services Act, the Digital Markets Act, and numerous consumer protection rules already provide a robust legal arsenal. Priority must be given to ensuring these rules are applied uniformly across the EU and enforced effectively, especially against non-European actors who often operate without equivalent obligations and may currently benefit from regulatory gaps. However, another critical competitive concern lies in the imposition of taxes on digital services, which could hinder innovation and place European players at a disadvantage in the face of global competition. Therefore, we would like to draw attention to a growing paradox: while the EU seeks to become a global leader in digital transformation, policy makers are simultaneously contemplating new digital-specific taxes, when these taxes dont already exist in some Members states. This trend risks undermining the very competitiveness and attractiveness of the European digital sector. A forward-looking international strategy should focus on promoting innovation and competitiveness - not penalizing digital actors that already comply with some of the worlds most demanding regulatory standards. In shaping its international digital strategy, the EU must not overlook the importance of supporting European companies. Europes digital sovereignty cannot be achieved without the full involvement and competitiveness of its own industrial and digital actors. Cdiscount stands ready to contribute to this strategic reflection and to support the development of a competitive digital Europe.
Read full response

Meeting with Werner Stengg (Cabinet of Executive Vice-President Henna Virkkunen)

26 Mar 2025 · EU platform policy

Meeting with Dirk Gotink (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur)

26 Mar 2025 · EU customs legislation, e-commerce

Meeting with Ioan-Dragos Tudorache (Cabinet of Executive Vice-President Stéphane Séjourné) and Booking.com B.V. and

25 Mar 2025 · Challenges for European tech companies that want to leverage AI to compete globally. Need for a coherent, proportionate, and effectively enforced regulatory framework that increases the competitiveness of European industry.

Meeting with David Cormand (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur)

20 Feb 2025 · New legislative framework

Meeting with Aura Salla (Member of the European Parliament)

22 Jan 2025 · EU Digital Policy

Meeting with Svenja Hahn (Member of the European Parliament) and Booking.com B.V. and

2 Oct 2024 · Exchange between MEPs and European Tech companies

Meeting with Pierre Jouvet (Member of the European Parliament)

1 Oct 2024 · enjeux du e-commerce européen

Response to Implementing Act on transparency reports under Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 (Digital Services Act)

24 Jan 2024

First we thank the Commission for providing a transition period until the 30th of June 2024, allowing players to adapt their tools and data gathering processes to the templates requirements while still complying with the obligation of reporting from the Digital Services Acts entry into force. However, we believe that the report does not correctly reflect the logic of the DSAs architecture, which provides for increasing obligations depending on the nature and size of the player. Indeed, the template contains reporting obligations that are relevant for very large online platforms (VLOPs) with extended technological means and extends them for all actors. In fact, several of the elements requested are not suitable for smaller players who are less relying on automated means and could create barriers to entry for new players, such as reporting median time to respond to authorities in seconds which would require real-time reporting, or measuring accuracy rate of automated means, which is a notion that needs to be specified and would most likely require to create new data gathering processes. This type of requirements (e.g: linking complaints with moderation decisions, imposing a monthly breakdown) and the granularity of the requested information and categories implies modifying internal processes and IT tools that already allow for compliance with the DSAs other requirements for removal of illegal contents. Furthermore, we note discrepancies between the top-level categories listed in the European Commissions API documentation (i.e. the taxonomy currently being used by VLOPs when reporting into the Transparency Database) and the categories listed in the Transparency Report template, which implies double adjustments for players. While we understand the Commissions objective to gather comparable data, we estimate that this typology of information is not relevant for small and medium players, as the amount of data will be insufficient to give a general trend for each player and will not allow comparison with VLOPs. In conclusion, we believe that the report contains excessive requirements that would lead to disproportionate and burdensome adjustments for most players, without any added value for their compliance to the DSA regarding moderation and due diligence. We therefore call on the Commission to simplify the Transparency Report in accordance with the DSAs objective of proportionality and to ensure full consistency between the Transparency Report template and the Transparency Data bases requirements.
Read full response

Response to Payment services – revision of EU rules (new Regulation)

30 Oct 2023

Cdiscount welcomes the proposal for a Payment Services Regulation (PSR) and its aims to harmonize enforcement, better combat fraud and improve open banking. Cdiscount takes this opportunity to remind that the introduction of Strong Customer Authentication (SCA) had both positive and perverse effects on e-commerce. The cost of the application of the Second Services Directive (PSD2) for e-commerce should not be played down. In that context, Cdiscount stresses the need to implement and harmonize all exemptions, to enable reliable third parties to offer a seamless payment experience to e-commerce users and to involve the whole online payment ecosystem in data sharing for fraud protection purposes. Please find attached Cdiscounts full contribution on the PSR proposal.
Read full response

Meeting with Eleonora Ocello (Cabinet of Commissioner Thierry Breton)

9 Oct 2023 · Platform regulation

Response to Further specifying procedural rules relating to the enforcement of the General Data Protection Regulation

24 Mar 2023

Cdiscount highly welcomes the Commissions initiative to harmonize procedural aspects regarding the enforcement of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in cross-border cases. By doing so, the Commission would introduce more legal certainty for all parties and strengthen the right to defense through the establishment of a well-defined procedural framework. We particularly welcome two key propositions included in the list of the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) that the Commissions initiative responds to: 1. Proposition number 6 regarding the definition of formal admissibility requirements and conditions which secures transparency. 2. Proposition number 5 that sets harmonized procedural deadlines which are very much necessary to ensure predictability for all parties. To go further in the implementation of a harmonized procedural framework, the following additional propositions should be considered: 1. This initiative and its proposals should be extended beyond cross-border cases, as national cases can also generate cross-border effects. As tech global players are active in all European Member States while regulated by a single Data Protection Authority (DPA), when a national DPA makes an extensive interpretation of the GDPR applicable, at least for several months or years, in only one Member State to national players, this national case has a negative cross-border effect by creating a competition distortion: national actors are over-regulated compared with global players, which benefit from this distortion and can accelerate growth. Such cases have already happened since the implementation of the GDPR notably in France, resulting in hundreds of millions euros of losses for national players while global players have strengthened their position on the market. 2. Non-compliance with newly established deadlines should not only account for sanctions towards DPA but should benefit the defendant and lead to the dismissal of the case. 3. A right of appeal to the EPDB should be extended for organizations and federations (both trade unions and consumer organizations) in case of inconsistencies between DPAs interpretations of the GDPR. This right of appeal should apply to both contentious and non-contentious cases (deliberations) and should be accompanied by a suspensive effect to further implementation of harmonization across the EU and avoid competition distortions induced by a differentiated application of the GDPR among Member States. Confining this appeal to organizations rather than opposing parties would ensure that the EPDB intervention is focused on sectorial matters rather than special cases and would avoid blocking procedures to the detriment of plaintiffs. Finally, the decision of the EPBD should be formally notified to every DPA in order to ensure that all DPAs are duly informed of the outcome of the referral and therefore apply a harmonized interpretation of the GDPR across Europe. 4. The existing mechanism under article 64(2) of the GDPR, by which DPAs can request from the EDPB to examine and give its opinion on any matter of general application or producing effects in more than one Member State, should become mandatory when DPAs take decisions creating competition distortions. Such cases would refer to situations where the decisions of a national DPA would impact national actors but would not be applied by cross-border actors active on the national market while being regulated by other DPAs. The examination of DPAs decisions by the EDPB regarding such affairs is crucial as it would provide a unique opinion on the matter of general application and thus guarantee a harmonized application of the GDPR. Should this proposal or not be retained, any similar case should lead to a competitive impact analysis before the DPAs decision.
Read full response

Meeting with Didier Reynders (Commissioner) and Amazon Europe Core SARL and

25 Nov 2021 · The product safety pledge and its future extension.

Meeting with Michele Piergiovanni (Cabinet of Executive Vice-President Margrethe Vestager) and Allegro sp. z o.o. and

4 Jun 2021 · VBER review

Meeting with Thierry Breton (Commissioner) and

2 Dec 2020 · Roundtable with platforms on DSA and DMA

Meeting with Werner Stengg (Cabinet of Executive Vice-President Margrethe Vestager)

1 Dec 2020 · Digital Services Act