Why New Zealand businesses should care about the EU Data Act
The EU Data Act is about to change how Kiwi firms handle customer data.
.jpg)
The EU Data Act is reshaping how data is used, shared and protected across Europe. Understanding its impact is crucial for New Zealand businesses, especially those that manufacture IoT devices for, or provide technology services to, EU customers. The regulation entered into force on 11 January 2024, but most provisions start applying from 12 September 2025 (with further phased obligations after that) so organisations selling into the EU should be ready to comply.
What is the EU Data Act?
The EU Data Act (Regulation (EU) 2023/2854) aims to make industrial and IoT data more accessible and usable, with new rules about who can use data, in what ways, and under what terms. The goal is to boost fair competition and innovation while still ensuring data is adequately protected (more on that later). This isn’t limited to data held inside the EU – if a New Zealand business offers connected products, IoT services, or related data services to customers or partners in the EU, the EU Data Act can apply.
Cross-border impact
The EU Data Act, like the GDPR before it, is extra-territorial. That means its obligations travel. If a New Zealand organisation collects, handles, or enables sharing of data from products or services used in the EU, it likely comes under the scope of the legislation. Activities as simple as providing cloud hosting for EU clients or selling internet-connected machinery into Europe count. For example, a New Zealand agritech company exporting smart dairy equipment into Germany could fall inside the scope of these rules.
Key points about the EU Data Act that New Zealand businesses should note:
• Manufacturers or service providers of connected products for the EU must enable customer access to product-generated data.
• Any contractual terms regarding EU data sharing must meet fairness and transparency requirements.
• Failure to meet the EU Data Act’s obligations can result in enforcement action by EU authorities.
Data sharing
The EU Data Act empowers product users (businesses and individuals) to access and reuse the data generated by their devices. This is a striking change from the traditional position, where manufacturers might have considered such data proprietary.
If a New Zealand business holds this data and receives a legitimate request from an EU user (or in some cases, from a third party or EU public authority during emergencies), sharing that data may be mandatory. However, data holders can request “reasonable compensation” for making data available. For micro and small businesses, charges are capped at cost recovery.
Contractual fairness
The EU Data Act puts a spotlight on fairness in contracts relating to data access and data use. Article 13 imposes the general rule that if a data-related contractual term is unilaterally imposed by one business on another and is “unfair”, then it will not be binding.
It then introduces a three-tier test for unfairness:
• A “black list” of always unfair terms. This includes terms excluding or limiting liability for gross negligence or intentional wrongdoing, or limiting remedies for non-performance.
• A “grey list” of presumed unfair terms, which can be proven otherwise. This includes terms allowing termination on unreasonably short notice without serious grounds, or substantial unilateral price changes.
• A general fairness requirement, pegged to good commercial practice in data use/data access and the principle of good faith.
The EU Data Act explicitly addresses the relationship between contractual fairness and the relative strength of parties in data sharing agreements. Stronger parties (including large foreign providers) cannot unilaterally impose unfair conditions in contracts with weaker parties, such as SMEs. Whether a term has been “unilaterally imposed” depends on whether it has been supplied by one party and the other party has not been able to influence its content despite an attempt to negotiate it.
The wide scope of the contractual fairness requirements in the EU Data Act – applying broadly to all data-related rights and obligations between businesses (including natural persons acting in a business capacity) and covering voluntary and mandatory contracts – has been criticised for creating complexity and uncertainty. Even small Kiwi SaaS vendors selling into Europe will need to ensure that their usual boilerplate contracts are compliant. And there are severe penalties for non-compliance, especially in mandatory data sharing contexts.
New Zealand businesses dealing with EU counterparties will need to carefully review and may need to update their contracts related to data access and usage. At a minimum they should ensure:
• Contracts do not contain prohibited unfair terms.
• Data access prices comply with rules for non-discrimination and reasonableness.
• Contractual terms are negotiable or clearly fair to avoid automatic invalidation.
Trade secrets
There are carve-outs from data sharing in the EU Data Act to protect trade secrets and prevent serious harm to business or user safety, but critics argue that these exceptions are too narrow and that the burden of proof is too high. Before refusing, data holders must first take all necessary measures to safeguard trade secrets (for example, through confidentiality agreements). Only if risk cannot be mitigated can they withhold sharing – with careful documentation and possible notification to regulators. This refusal can be contested by the data user or third party requesting the data.
The EU Data Act aims to foster innovation and competition by mandating broader data sharing, but many businesses worry that it will require them to give up valuable data to competitors or third parties, weakening their competitive advantage. Others suggest the obligations to share data will disincentivise research and development investment in the EU, particularly for non-European firms wary of losing proprietary assets. There is a complex balancing act in the EU Data Act, one that – according to critics – currently leans more toward open data at the expense of protecting sensitive business information.
Cloud and data processing services
The EU Data Act introduces requirements for interoperability between cloud providers and easier switching between services for EU entities. Service providers have three primary responsibilities. First, they must inform customers about the data available and the process for switching. Second, they need to eliminate any barriers to switching, whether they are technical, contractual, or otherwise. Lastly, providers must assist customers in leaving the service, which might require technical support to enable interoperability. Early termination fees may still be charged, and switching charges are only allowed on a transitional, reducing basis until 12 January 2027. After that, switching and egress fees will be fully banned.
For New Zealand SaaS and infrastructure providers serving EU businesses, this may mean technical and contractual updates to meet these interoperability and switching standards.
Exceptions for small businesses
The EU Data Act includes several important exceptions for small businesses to reduce their regulatory burden. Micro and small enterprises are generally exempt from the obligation to provide data generated by connected products or related services to users or third parties when they themselves act as manufacturers, service providers, or data holders. These exemptions don’t prevent micro and small businesses, when acting as users of devices or services, from benefitting from rights to access data. They can also receive financial compensation when providing data in situations where larger companies must share it free of charge (such as public emergency situations or requests from public bodies).
Next steps
The EU Data Act means the days of treating connected-product or IoT data solely as a proprietary asset are ending, at least when dealing with the EU.
New Zealand businesses with European customers, distributors, or strategic partners need to check whether they generate or handle user data covered by the EU Data Act, and consider how that data is collected, managed, and able to be shared. In practice, this may mean sitting down with your European counterparties sooner rather than later. Exceptions for small New Zealand businesses may apply but you should check this by seeking legal advice. EU-facing contracts may need to be reviewed and updated, and technical changes may need to be made to enable EU users to access and move their device-generated or service data, as required. Businesses will want to think about how they can safeguard their trade secrets, while still complying with the EU Data Act – any reasons for delaying or refusing data access will need to be well documented and ready for regulatory scrutiny.
There is a phased approach to the EU Data Act requirements taking effect, to give businesses time to prepare for the different compliance obligations:
• Most of the provisions will apply starting 12 September 2025.
• The unfair contractual terms provisions will take effect in two stages:
1. For contracts concluded after 12 September 2025, the fairness check applies immediately.
2. For existing contracts concluded on or before 12 September 2025, the fairness provisions apply starting 12 September 2027 but only if they are indefinite in duration or have a term lasting at least 10 years from 11 January 2024 (i.e., ending on or after 11 January 2034). This gives businesses extra time to adjust longer-term contracts.
• Specific provisions about the design, manufacture, and provision of connected products and related services will take effect from 12 September 2026.
• There are also transitional rules leading up to the full ban on switching fees and data egress fees taking effect from 12 January 2027 onwards.
If you think your business might be impacted by the EU Data Act, reach out to one of our team.
Services in this insight
Fair Trading Act changes will increase governance risk for business
New Zealand’s online gambling laws get a shake up
Consultation opens on New Zealand's payment services regulation
Modern slavery regulation on the way – Is your business ready?
From Hertzian waves to hyperlinks – What the BSA’s online decision means for your business
Space Law in New Zealand — Signals from the ground
Cyber security changes flagged for New Zealand
The four Cs of successful fintech partnerships
New rule 3A introduced to the Biometric Processing Privacy Code
IPP3A is nearly in force – What agencies need to know
OPC shifts public enquiries online – What agencies should do now
AI as a confidante? Legal privilege and the ever-increasing use of AI
New Therapeutic and Health Advertising Code – What you need to know
Building blocks of trade mark law: New Zealand approach to "use as a trade mark" now compatible with Australia
Consumer law update 2025
Open banking launches in New Zealand
Is fair something to fear? The Government announces beefed-up Fair Trading Act
Is it fair? Lessons from Bartz v Anthropic and Kadrey v Meta
Open banking almost live
Why New Zealand businesses should care about the EU Data Act
Product labelling changes flagged for New Zealand
Biometric Processing Privacy Code 2025 introduced to New Zealand
Open banking regulations released for consultation
Ten tips for buy-side M&A success
A recipe for disaster – Is caramel a copyright work?
Becoming a Globally Renowned Fintech Nation (and how regulation can light the path)
Important changes made to the Privacy Act
New Zealand may ban social media for young users
Customer and Product Data Act update – Open banking officially on the way
Tips from the trenches – Your AI policy cheat sheet
Significant regulatory reform proposed for New Zealand media
Security guidance released for emerging tech companies
Customer and Product Data Bill – Select Committee reports back
Consumer law update 2024
New Zealand’s Artist Resale Royalty is ready to go
The shape of coffee – “Moccona” vs “Vittoria”
New Zealand’s Copyright Act gets a sense of humour
WIPO’s traditional knowledge treaty is adopted
Doing business in the Middle East
AI and advertising – What producers need to know
Seven contract clauses every freelancer needs
Baby Reindeer – When truth is stranger than fiction?
Our comments on the Biometric Processing Privacy Code
Therapeutic Products Act to be repealed this year
Is End-to-End to end?
Geographical indications – Changes uncorked by the EU-NZ Fair Trade Agreement
Lawyers and Generative AI – New NZ Law Society guidance released
Facing the future – A biometrics code of practice for New Zealand?
Deepfakes and style mimicking – Should New Zealand adopt a right of publicity?
Five Eyes release the Five Principles to Secure Innovation
The copyright conundrum with generative AI
Innovate at the speed of trust – Privacy Commissioner releases new guidance on artificial intelligence tools
Political advertising on social media: sludge or copyright quagmire?
Privacy Amendment Bill introduced to Parliament
New Data Privacy Framework: Meta gets a lifeline
The long and winding road to royalties
Implications of the Supreme Court’s “new debt” approach in Mainzeal
EU gets closer to AI laws
UK Supreme Court puts Quincecare ‘duty’ back in its box
A Deep Dive into The Customer and Product Data Bill
Searching for a shield: Meta’s €1.2 billion fine and international transfers in the age of Big Data
New NZ-UK Free Trade Agreement signals tech, media and IP law changes
Ditch the fax! Tips for building a tech-savvy law firm
The Incorporated Societies Act 2022 – what you need to know for your society
Common myths about copyright online
Artificial artist, or artificial plagiarist?
Big boost to gaming
Is your product “AI powered”?
The latest on New Zealand’s Consumer Data Right
Space Law in New Zealand
You Cannot Defame the Dead or Can You? Tikanga Māori and NZ Defamation Law
Open Banking is coming – through the Consumer Data Right
Massive SEC Fines for Companies Using Text and Instant Messaging
One Act to Rule Them All
A Legal Guide to Kicking SaaS
Potential changes to the Privacy Act 2020
NZ's Social Media "Code of Practice" Launched
Are you being unfair?
Are you legal?
Power Up 2022
A new Companies Office levy is one step closer
Has Paramount Pictures gone maverick?
From Russia with love: The ‘other’ Russian conflict targeting intellectual property owners
I'm back, baby
Retail Payment System Act 2022 now in force
Paying the price for getting privacy wrong
Can AI be an inventor?
Finfluencer Crackdown
TIN Fintech Insights Report Launch
Britain seeks to regulate 'Big Tech'
Disclosure of personal information - how to, not don't do
The Spice May Flow, But The Copyright Doesn’t
Sound Recording Ownership (Taylor's Version)
The Lowdown (and Lockdown) on Summer Clerkships
Building Blocks of Trust
Firm News | Legal Rankings
Buy Now, Regulate Soon
Ten simple things
Funding the Future
Cyber Security for Start-ups
Other articles you
might like
A recent Court of Appeal decision provides long awaited clarity for businesses on the lawful use of another party’s trade mark in New Zealand.
Two contrasting court judgments have been released on whether it is legal to train LLMs using copyright protected works.
A copyright dispute has broken out over recipes. Which way will the copyright cookie crumble?
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)












.jpg)
%20(1).jpg)

