SaaS Exit Fees Under the Data Act: What You Can Challenge
The Data Act limits what SaaS vendors can charge when you switch providers. Permitted fees, prohibited charges, and the 2027 deadline explained.
The bill for leaving a SaaS contract early is rarely trivial. When a company tries to exit before term, the vendor’s first response is usually a number: the remaining months of the commitment, “decommissioning” charges, data restitution costs, early termination penalties. Before the Data Act, these fees were governed entirely by the contract. If you had signed terms requiring full payment of the remaining commitment upon early exit, your options were limited.
The Data Act (Regulation (EU) 2023/2854) fundamentally changes this. Articles 29 and 30 regulate — and ultimately eliminate — the fees a SaaS vendor can charge in connection with a provider switch.
This article focuses specifically on switching fees under the Data Act. For the broader framework on SaaS termination under the regulation, see my comprehensive guide. Current as of March 2026.
The Data Act establishes two distinct periods for switching charges. Understanding this timeline is critical for assessing what you can challenge today versus what changes in the near future.
During this phase, data processing service providers may still charge switching fees, subject to strict conditions. Article 29(2) requires that these fees be proportionate to the costs actually incurred by the provider to enable the migration, and that they do not exceed those actual costs.
In practice, the vendor can charge for the time genuinely spent assisting the migration, the technical cost of exporting data in compatible formats, and reasonable support costs related to the transition. What the vendor cannot do: bill the remaining subscription months as an “exit fee”, impose a flat penalty disconnected from actual migration costs, or make data restitution contingent on payment of disproportionate charges.
Article 29(5) provides for the complete elimination of switching fees. From that date, the provider may not charge any fee related to the provider switch. Migration must be free of charge.
This deadline has strategic implications for current contracts. If your SaaS commitment runs until 2028 and you are considering an exit, it may be worth timing the termination after January 2027 to benefit from zero switching fees — unless the cost of maintaining an unused SaaS exceeds whatever transitional fees you would face before that date. The arithmetic depends on your specific situation.
The line between legitimate and abusive fees is not always obvious. Here are the situations I encounter most frequently.
Technical data export fees — In principle chargeable during the transitional period, provided the amount is justified and proportionate. An invoice for €500 to export a CSV of your customer database is questionable. An invoice for €15,000 for a complex mass export requiring custom development is more defensible — but the vendor must be able to substantiate the figure.
Penalty equal to the remaining commitment — This is the most common and most contestable scenario. If your contract provides that early termination triggers payment of all remaining monthly fees, this clause directly conflicts with the Data Act’s framework. The regulation states that switching fees must reflect migration costs, not compensate lost revenue. A 12-month subscription penalty for a data export that takes two hours is not proportionate within the meaning of the regulation.
“Decommissioning” or “account closure” fees — Some vendors charge administrative closure fees. If these are reasonable (a few hundred euros) and documented, they may withstand scrutiny. If they are a disguised penalty, they are challengeable.
Withholding data pending payment — Article 24 requires data restitution regardless of any financial dispute. Holding the customer’s data as payment leverage is contrary to the regulation.
If your vendor imposes fees you consider disproportionate, several approaches are available.
The first is contractual: verify whether the fees invoked are actually provided for in the agreement, and whether the conditions for their application are met. I regularly see vendors applying convenience-termination penalties to a Data Act-based termination — these are different legal regimes with different consequences.
The second is regulatory: the Data Act caps fees at actual costs. Request a line-by-line justification of the charges. If the vendor cannot produce a detailed, documented breakdown, the invoicing is contestable.
The third is negotiation. In my experience, a significant proportion of these situations resolve through structured discussion. The vendor knows the Data Act is mandatory law and that litigation on this subject carries risk. A well-constructed letter that identifies the legal basis and clearly exposes the inconsistencies in the billing is often sufficient to achieve a meaningful reduction.
Some vendors argue that the Data Act does not apply to contracts signed before its entry into force. This is incorrect. The regulation applies to ongoing contracts, including those concluded before 12 September 2025, subject to the transitional provisions of Article 30. A contract signed in 2023 with a five-year commitment is subject to the Data Act. The age of the contract does not eliminate the switching right.
Before initiating a termination, ask a straightforward question: what does it cost to maintain an unused SaaS until the contract’s natural expiry, compared to the exit fees the vendor could legitimately charge during the transitional period? If the difference is material, early termination makes clear financial sense — and the Data Act is the mechanism that makes it possible.
I offer a free initial review of your contract to assess your position.
Stuck in a SaaS contract your company no longer needs? The EU Data Act gives you a legal right to switch providers. Eligibility, process, and pitfalls.
Classes 35, 42 and 41: how to file a communications, digital or advertising agency trademark at INPI or EUIPO.
Let's build together to grow your business
I have been supporting software and SaaS companies for over 10 years, helping them structure their business, protect their intellectual property and strengthen their contracts.
