Contributed By YNG Legal
No comprehensive digital economy regulation framework exists in Bulgaria. Digital economy is rather regulated by a patchwork of national and EU legislative acts. At the EU level, these include the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) (2016/679/EU), the Digital Services Act (Regulation (EU) 2022/2065), the Data Act (Regulation (EU) 2023/2854), the Digital Markets Act (Regulation (EU) 2022/1925) and the AI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689), as well as some industry-specific EU legislation such as the Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA) (Regulation (EU) 2022/2554). At the level of national legislation, digital economy is regulated mainly by the Data Protection Act (2006), the Electronic Commerce Act (2006) and the Supply of Digital Content and Digital Services and the Sale of Goods Act (2021), as well as the Cybersecurity Act (2018). Taxation issues are covered by the general tax legislation – with the VAT Act containing specific rules on the tax treatment of telecommunications services, digital services, distance selling, etc.
The key challenges relating to the digital economy lay in the interplay between Bulgarian and EU law. While EU law prevails over national law, some provisions of EU regulations and directives require national implementation in order to function properly. The Bulgarian legislature has consistently had issues with delayed and fragmentary implementation, which has led to some suboptimal legal regimes, creating uncertainty and complicating enforcement.
Taxation of Digital Services and Goods in Bulgaria
From a value-added tax (VAT) point of view, the standard VAT rate of 20% applies. As a general rule, all services should be taxable with VAT at the place of consumption, ie, where the customer is based – which normally would require that vendors are VAT registered in all countries where they have customers.
The Bulgarian legislation, based on relevant EU directives, has exempted most digital economy vendors from this obligation through the one-stop-shop scheme. Under this scheme, providers of digital services and goods may choose to register for VAT only in Bulgaria while charging VAT at the place of consumption, reducing paperwork and accounting costs.
From a withholding tax point of view, most digital services and goods are exempt from at-source taxation, unless they are bundled with consulting work or market research services.
Challenges in Managing Tax Compliance
The key challenges companies face with regard to tax compliance in the digital market relate to cross-border transactions, given the fact that the EU provides the opportunity to freely offer goods and services between its member states, while maintaining the different and sometimes overlapping taxation systems of those member states. A comprehensive tax and accounting analysis is normally needed before starting cross-border operations.
Advertising revenues are generally treated similarly to other digital services – the general VAT rules apply and no withholding tax is owed. It should, however, be noted that if the advertising service includes consultancy and/or marketing elements, the advertising revenue may be treated as remuneration for technical services, and a withholding tax at the standard rate of 10% would apply to the advertising revenue from the territory of Bulgaria.
Employing a local accountant to oversee tax compliance is essential for any business with active operations in Bulgaria. Most businesses are obliged to submit monthly declarations with complex accounting information, even when not registered for VAT purposes.
Regulatory Framework of Consumer Protection Within the Digital Goods and Services in the TMT Sector
Consumers benefit from several forms of protection in Bulgaria. As Bulgaria is a member state of the EU, Bulgarian legislation is aligned with the EU’s rules.
All the general rights of consumers must be observed in Bulgaria such as transparent information, fair contract terms, conformity of digital content, fair commercial practices, data protection, the right to erasure, etc.
The latest important legislative development affecting all areas of business (including the TMT sector) is the introduction of the euro as Bulgaria’s official currency as of 1 January 2026, replacing the Bulgarian lev. Key obligations for a business include displaying prices of goods and services in both currencies for a period of at least a year and using the fixed exchange rate of the lev rounded to two decimal places when recalculating prices.
Violations will be monitored by several state authorities, and a special website and telephone line have been set up for reporting misconduct.
Best Practices to Ensure Consumer Rights in the TMT Sector
To ensure that consumer rights are respected, companies in the TMT sector may take various measures:
Legal Framework for the Resolution of Consumer Disputes
Consumer disputes in Bulgaria can be resolved through court proceedings, and there are special procedural rules in favour of consumers that ensure they have equal chances in spite of their weaker financial and psychological position in relation to companies. The Bulgarian Civil Procedure Code applies to all court proceedings. It also integrates mediation by empowering courts to refer parties to a mediation session before the first case sitting, with financial incentives such as fee refunds for successfully mediated agreements.
Also, in the CPA there is a strong emphasis on alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in line with EU policy. Consumers are also encouraged to first submit complaints directly to the service provider. If the issue remains, they may turn to ADR bodies.
Best Practices for TMT Companies With Regard to Consumer Disputes
Effective dispute management begins with prevention. This starts with accessible and responsive customer support, clear and transparent terms and policies, and detailed guidelines on the complaint management process.
Automated tools such as chatbots may be useful for standard queries, but alternatives should be available for more complex or sensitive complaints.
TMT companies should focus on vulnerable groups, such as minors and elderly users, ensuring their rights are protected.
In the past few years, ground-breaking new regulations on cryptocurrency have been introduced that have completely reshaped the cryptocurrency landscape. Up until the end of 2024, crypto exchanges, custodians and payment services were simply required to register with the National Revenue Agency (NRA) and comply with basic anti-money laundering laws and other EU consumer protection regulations.
Since 2025, with the adoption of the MiCA Regulation (2023/1114/EU), new businesses are required to pass a much more extensive licensing procedure, while entities that were compliant under the pre-MiCA regulations are required to acquire authorisation under the new scheme by the end of June 2026 or cease operations that require licensing.
The key legal challenge presented by cryptocurrency is in regulating its dual nature – both as a financial instrument and as a means of exchange, ie, money. This becomes especially apparent when looking into cryptocurrencies that purport to maintain stable value referenced to a recognised fiat currency (e-money tokens, or EMTs within the meaning of MiCA).
As of now, the MiCA regime regulates that some EMT-related services should be carried out by entities that hold not only a MiCA licence, but also a payment service provider licence, which creates intense regulatory pressure and uncertainty for these businesses. There have been moves to amend this regulatory issue, but we do not expect to see major results on that front for at least a few years.
Crypto is regulated primarily as financial instrument or digital asset by emerging EU and national law, not as technology per se. Therefore, while crypto is heavily regulated by the MiCA regime, there is no comprehensive regulation regarding blockchain technology. Instead, depending on its use, blockchain may be impacted by sectoral regulations (eg, finance, data protection, digital identity) and innovation support frameworks rather than treating it as a standalone regulated subject.
Laws and Regulations Relating to Cloud and Edge Computing
Bulgaria does not have a standalone “Cloud Act” or “Edge Computing Act”. Instead, cloud and edge services are regulated through a combination of EU‑level rules (directly applicable) and Bulgarian national laws:
NIS2
The NIS2 Directive (NIS2) (2022/2555/EU) is yet to be transposed in Bulgaria. Based on its requirements, certain regulated industries – particularly banking, financial services and insurance – will be subject to stricter cybersecurity obligations than other sectors. Under NIS2, entities in the banking and financial market infrastructure sectors are automatically classified as essential entities, placing them in the highest supervisory tier. Once NIS2 is implemented in Bulgaria, these entities will face more rigorous security, governance and incident‑reporting obligations, as well as more intensive supervisory oversight and higher administrative sanctions.
Personal Data Processing Issues in the Context of Cloud Computing
The main issue remains the location of the personal data processing. Cloud environments may store or process data outside Bulgaria or the EU, which triggers the GDPR transfer rules.
Other issues may arise in sector-specific cases such as banking and finance, healthcare or the public sector. The main concern remains the localisation of certain categories of data.
Bulgaria does not have a standalone national AI law yet. Instead, AI regulation comes from two sources:
Bulgaria does not yet have a deepfake‑specific statute. However, a natural person’s likeness, voice and moral rights are protected through a combination of EU‑level rules such as GDPR and existing Bulgarian national laws such as tort liability under the Obligations and Contracts Act, moral rights or rights in general under the Copyright Act (although no specific deepfake language yet exists), criminal charges under the Criminal Code for defamation, identity fraud, etc.
Sector-specific AI regulation in Bulgaria is yet to be developed based on the introduction of the AI Act in national legislation.
Elements will be gradually developed with the application in national legislations (in the EU member states) of the new requirements relevant to the AI rules. For instance, the AI Act does not create a standalone liability regime. Instead, it imposes strict compliance duties on providers, deployers, importers and distributors of AI systems.
The new EU Product Liability Directive (2024/2853/EU) explicitly covers the new AI systems and creates strict liability for defective AI systems and software. Under the Directive (national transposition may vary from member state to member state), manufacturers are liable for lack of safety, cybersecurity vulnerabilities, failure to provide updates, and data quality issues affecting performance. A very important element in this case will be the burden of proof for defectiveness and the presumption of causation for the claimant. Under the Directive, the claimant may benefit from presumption of defectiveness when the AI system does not comply with the AI Act and the presumption of causation when the product is defective and caused harm.
Laws and regulations in relation to the Internet of Things in Bulgaria include:
It should be noted that there is no concise IoT Act or Code, which means that the interplay between machine communications, communications secrecy and data protection may vary substantially on a case-by-case basis. Here are some basic principles:
As described above, the most challenging aspect of deploying IoT solutions is the fragmentary and dynamic nature of applicable legislation – multiple EU and national legal acts may be applicable to this activity, with the applicable law constantly changing (eg, the imminent changes in Bulgarian national law related to implementing NIS2).
Another challenge specific to IoT products is differentiating between personal and non-personal data – IoT solutions often generate datasets with both personal and non-personal data mixed, and it is therefore the controller’s task to identify the personal data and apply appropriate measures in accordance with GDPR.
IoT providers must also enable user access to IoT-generated data (EU Data Act requirement), which creates issues with providing secure APIs and real-time data access models.
Finally, as telecoms-based IoT solutions rely on public networks, they are subject to the same confidentiality and secrecy requirements, explained in detail in 11. Data Privacy and Cybersecurity.
To manage their IoT deployments, companies should implement the following governance frameworks:
The most important legal requirement for IoT companies with respect to data sharing is the right of users of interconnected devices to access data generated by their use of the IoT device and to request that such data be shared with a third party (EU Data Act requirement). IoT providers must make such data available in a usable and secure format, while also sharing it in a fair and non-discriminatory manner, without unreasonable contractual restrictions. These obligations may only be limited insofar as such limitations are with respect to protecting trade secrets and security-sensitive data, while also taking into account communication security and secrecy requirements.
The Data Act contains size-based exemptions and transitional arrangements to reduce burdens on smaller companies:
The EU data sharing legislation imposes heightened requirements for, conditions or excludes the sharing of certain categories of data:
In Bulgaria, audiovisual media services are regulated primarily by the Radio and Television Act (RTA), which transposes the relevant EU legislation into national law.
The RTA applies to:
all of them subject to differentiated regulatory regimes.
The competent authority is the Council for Electronic Media (CEM), an independent regulator responsible for licensing, registration, supervision and enforcement of audiovisual media legislation.
The main requirements under the RTA are:
Licensing and authorisation are different within the providers under the RTA and can be outlined as follows:
The fees for such licensing and registration regimes are determined based on the CEM’s administrative costs. An initial fee is charged for the issuance of an individual licencе and/or for registration, and for verification of the accuracy of the documents. Following this, an annual supervisory fee is due, which is based on the number of registered residents who can be served the media services.
Technologies and Services Falling Within the Scope of the ECA
In Bulgaria, the telecommunication rules are primary regulated in the ECA. This transposes the requirements of Directive (EU) 2018/1972 establishing the European Electronic Communications Code into national law.
The technologies and services covered by the ECA can be distinguished into two groups:
The providers of such services should comply with the general requirements set out by the Communications Regulation Commission (CRC), which are adopted following public consultation.
Pre-Marketing Requirements
Any undertaking intending to place on the market a product or service that falls within the scope of the ECA is required to notify the CRC of its intention to provide such product or service. There is no general requirement for approval by the regulatory body outside of the notification obligation. The notification should be completed in Bulgarian and contain specific information as follows:
Some providers – for example, the providers of number-independent interpersonal communication services – are not subject to the registration regime.
The register is kept by the CRC and consists of a public list of providers of electronic communications services, which is available online.
Depending on the type of service or technology, additional registration or authorisation by the CRC may be required. For example, the use of radio frequency spectrum, the use of numbering resources and the use of harmonised radio frequency spectrum for wireless broadband services require authorisation by the CRC.
Security requirements for telecommunications services include:
In Bulgaria, net neutrality is governed by both EU regulations and national laws that aim to ensure equal and non-discriminatory access to the internet for all end-users. The ECA guarantees the principle of net neutrality, while acting as a complementary legislation to the Open Internet Access Regulation (2015/2120/EU). The regulation guarantees the right of access to an open internet by prohibiting internet service providers (ISPs) from blocking, slowing down or discriminating against specific types of traffic.
ISPs may apply traffic management measures only where necessary for the efficient use of the network, maintaining service quality and preventing congestion, provided that such measures are transparent and non-discriminatory. ISPs may also offer specialised services, as long as they do not negatively affect the quality of internet access for other users.
Key elements of the national legislation include:
The CRC serves as the national regulatory body responsible for the oversight of the enforcement of the net neutrality regulation. It is responsible for:
In particular, for the purposes of applying Article 4, para. 4 of the Open Internet Access Regulation, the CRC has approved a mechanism for monitoring internet access service performance indicators relating to speed and other quality-of-service parameters. The mechanism is available online for free use.
Net neutrality promotes competition, innovation and consumer protection by ensuring equal access to the network and freedom of choice. However, the implementation of net neutrality requires a balance between the interests of all stakeholders and effective network management, with telecommunications service providers opposing the regulation and its scope worldwide.
At present, Bulgarian legislation does not contain explicit regulation regarding 5G, IoT and AI. Instead, different aspects of these technologies are regulated across various laws and secondary legislation. Some of the relevant legal acts are the ECA, the Cybersecurity Act, GDPR and the Protection of Competition Act.
Considerations when integrating these technologies include:
Such emerging technologies are yet to have an impact on the legal framework of the electronic communications sector in Bulgaria with the current need to adapt the existing regulations and introduce new ones. An EU regulatory framework for AI is forthcoming, which is then to be transposed into national legislation.
In the banking sector, after DORA entered in force in the beginning of 2024, financial sector purchasers of IT services have been pushing their IT suppliers to update existing service agreements. The issues usually raised relate to (i) the allocation of costs associated with changes to IT services necessary to achieve DORA compliance and (ii) whether the IT services provider handles “critical or important functions” as per DORA. In this context, negotiating a clear and predictable framework of allocated responsibilities and costs between the IT services provider and the client has been the main challenge in the financial sector in the past few years.
With the pending implementation of NIS2 in the Bulgarian legislation, some affected purchasers (eg, postal and courier service providers, food and medical manufacturers, etc) have been initiating renegotiations based on the draft legislation for implementation of the Directive – on similar lines as with DORA. However, as the NIS2 legislation is not yet adopted and the proposed draft might be changed in the course of the legislative process, such negotiations are difficult and full of uncertainty.
The application of the EU AI Act also poses challenges based on issues such as liability for AI-related outputs and using customer data to train AI models. While these do not stem directly from local legislation but from applicable licence terms, copyleft effects from the implementation of open-source LLMs are often an issue that affects the IP clauses in technology agreements.
Under the ECA, the regulatory practice of the CRC and the CPA, where applicable, telecommunications service agreements with consumers must include, at a minimum, the following key elements:
In addition, service providers are required to apply general terms and conditions compliant with the ECA, which function as mandatory contractual background rules.
Although telecommunications service agreements operate within a regulated framework, companies may still negotiate favourable terms through benchmarking market offers, negotiating enhanced SLAs, linking service quality to financial remedies, and including flexibility clauses for regulatory or technological changes.
Further to the above, interconnection agreements are subject to enhanced regulatory scrutiny in Bulgaria and require careful consideration of both legal and competition-related factors.
Key considerations for TMT companies with regard to interconnection agreements include:
Interconnection agreements should cover at a minimum: interconnection services and delivery timelines; interconnection points and routing; technical interfaces and signalling; traffic management and quality-of-service parameters; termination, numbering and caller identification; interconnection and co-location pricing; protection of trade secrets, etc.
Applicable Legal Framework
The provision of trust services and the use of electronic signatures and digital identity schemes in Bulgaria are primarily governed by:
Types of Electronic Signatures
Key Legal Considerations
Applicable Legal Framework
The Bulgarian video gaming industry is not regulated by a single statute. Instead, general legislation and sector-specific laws apply, depending on the game’s characteristics and distribution model. The most relevant legal acts include:
Key Legal Challenges
The lack of specialised regulation creates uncertainty for businesses. There is no clear distinction between gambling and non-gambling game mechanics. Mechanisms like “loot boxes” can be considered gambling if they meet betting and winning criteria. The cross-border nature of the gaming industry raises issues about jurisdiction, applicable law and regulatory co-operation.
In-Game Purchases, Loot Boxes and Gambling Elements
Bulgarian law does not contain explicit rules on in-game purchases or loot boxes.
Where such mechanisms do not involve gambling elements, they are regulated primarily under consumer protection law.
If loot boxes or similar mechanics involve betting and the possibility of winning real money or valuable items, they may qualify as gambling and fall under the Gambling Act, which imposes strict licensing and operational requirements.
Age Ratings and Content Restrictions
In Bulgaria, the PEGI system is used to categorise video games by age. It is not mandatory, but most developers and distributors use it.
The Gambling Act stops people under 18 from gambling, which can affect games with gambling elements.
The RTA requires that children are protected from harmful content on online video-sharing platforms.
The Child Protection Act stops the distribution of materials that harm children’s development. This can apply to games with violence, pornography or other inappropriate elements.
Industry Codes of Conduct
There are no generally established industry-wide codes of conduct for the video game sector in Bulgaria. Self-regulation is limited and company-specific.
Supervisory Authorities
The gaming industry’s regulatory oversight is fragmented, varying based on the legal issue. The NRA handles gambling activities, including online gambling and games with gambling elements. The CEM supervises media and advertising content, including game-related advertising on media platforms. The CPC enforces consumer rights in relation to the sale and marketing of video games.
Enforcement Powers
The NRA supervises gambling activities, carries out inspections, requests information, imposes fines, revokes licences and orders the cessation of unlawful activities. The CEM supervises compliance with advertising and audiovisual media requirements, monitors content, refers violations to authorities and imposes sanctions on media service providers. The CPC enforces consumer protection legislation, conducts inspections, imposes sanctions for unfair practices and issues binding orders to remedy infringements.
Enforcement Practice
Public information on recent enforcement actions targeting video game companies is scarce, as the sector is not a primary focus. However, the NRA enforces the Gambling Act for illegal gambling, including video games. Also, the CPC regularly sanctions consumer law violations related to the sale and marketing of digital products, including video games.
Game developers in Bulgaria face several recurring intellectual property challenges:
Creators enjoy several mechanisms to protect their intellectual property in virtual environments:
When dealing with digital and virtual assets, the following issues are particularly important:
Bulgaria’s trade mark protection covers virtual goods and services, including in-game items and digital marketplaces. Registered trade marks are protected against unauthorised use in digital environments that could confuse consumers. Using identical or similar trade marks for virtual goods, online games or related services without permission is trade mark infringement.
User-generated content in games and virtual platforms raises several legal concerns:
Bulgaria’s national laws do not specifically regulate social media platforms. Instead, they apply to digital services, data protection, consumer protection and intellectual property. Since Bulgaria is an EU member state, EU social media regulations apply within its borders.
Key applicable laws and regulations include:
Furthermore, within the TMT sector in Bulgaria, self-regulation and co-regulation through codes of conduct and standards are encouraged, where appropriate and suitable. For example, when it comes to consumer protection, the National Council for Self-Regulation (NCSR) has developed National Ethical Rules for Advertising and Commercial Communication, which are applicable to commercial communication realised through social media platforms, including influencer campaigns, which are becoming more popular. Consumers can submit a complaint to the Ethics Committee of the NCSR regarding violations of the National Ethical Rules, which issues a decision on the matter. When the Committee finds a violation, it may issue a decision to remove the advertisement or post.
When it comes to the protection of children, there is no specific law which poses an age restriction to the use of social media. Nonetheless, the regulations concerning the media content available to children and the processing of children’s personal data are stricter.
There is no dedicated regulatory body exclusively overseeing social media platforms. The regulatory oversight is fragmented and depends on the specific legal issue.
The primary authorities exercising oversight over social media in Bulgaria include:
Outside of the regulatory bodies operates the NCSR. The NCSR is an expression of the concept of self-regulation and co-regulation in the media sector in Bulgaria, set out in the RTA. The NCSR monitors compliance by advertisers with the National Ethical Rules for Advertising and Commercial Communication. It reviews complaints and issues recommendations for the amendment of advertising content. After the review of a complaint, the Ethical Commission of the Council comes out with a decision. For failure to comply with the decision, a pecuniary sanction is imposed by the CEM under the RTA.
Key data privacy laws and regulations applicable to telecommunications providers include:
No formal telecoms-specific privacy codes of conduct have legal effect, though all major players have internal ethical codes and policies that affect this sphere.
The main challenges for telecoms companies relate to the dynamic nature of the legislation – at both national and EU levels. New rules and guidelines coming affect ongoing contracts that were concluded under legacy legislation and data that was previously lawfully retained under different legislation.
Bulgarian telecoms follow the standard EU GDPR transfer regime; there is no national-specific international transfer mechanism other than GDPR.
Transfers within the EU/EEA are freely permitted under GDPR (while being subject to the common principles of lawful processing, purpose limitation and confidentiality). Transfers outside the EU/EEA have to comply with a more complicated set of rules, such as:
In Bulgaria, interception and surveillance are tightly regulated. Law enforcement must always get court approval before accessing confidential personal data (traffic data). Without such approval, the telecoms operator must refuse any requests for traffic data.
This framework gives telecoms little control over the process and they’re not responsible for making discretionary decisions. Telecoms must provide all traffic data for which a valid court order has been issued (except where no such data is kept – data was never created or deleted after the statutory retention period expired), and they must refuse to provide traffic data that is not specified in a court ruling. This is a lawful restriction of data subject rights under Article 23 of GDPR. In that sense, telecoms must also not inform data subjects of the existence of disclosure, even when they request it.
Bulgaria does not have a formal data localisation requirement, but due to the limitations on cross-border data transfers, third-party vendors and cloud service providers are usually local or EU/EEA-based.
These companies are considered data processors (or data controllers, depending on their relationship with the telecom) under GDPR, while telecoms are data controllers. Therefore, telecoms should always regulate data transfers with these companies with data processing agreements.
Evolving data privacy regulations affect telecom network infrastructure in multiple ways, such as:
The main legal challenges to protecting user data, managing consent and ensuring data security are balancing overlapping legal regimes. These include the EU and Bulgarian data protection legislation and the ECA, which establish data privacy, confidentiality and secrecy, and national cybersecurity and lawful interception regulations.
Managing consent is also challenging. Data subject consent within the GDPR framework is only relevant when specific, informed and given freely, with the option of easy withdrawal. This can be difficult when managing legacy systems or migrating between systems.
Direct marketing must also comply with data privacy regulations, which only allow it in limited circumstances beyond explicit consent.
Privacy-by-design and security-by-design principles are implemented through legal and DPIA reviews throughout new feature development, especially when they affect tracking, profiling, AI or targeted advertising. Privacy-by-design principles include data minimisation, purpose limitation, separation of core service data from marketing and analytics data, granular consent banners and automated data retention schedules.
GDPR limits data sharing with advertisers, analytics providers and other third parties. Firstly, both parties’ roles must be clearly defined. The telecoms provider is usually a data controller, but advertising and analytics partners can be data processors, independent controllers or joint controllers. Incorrect classification can lead to invalid data processing agreements, enforcement risks and compliance risks. Secondly, advertising and tracking often require data subject consent and opt-out features.
Cybersecurity regulations, such as NIS2, GDPR, DORA and supervisory guidelines, have transformed cybersecurity from a digital media feature to a crucial operational and legal requirement. Recent legislation prioritises risk-based, state-of-the-art security measures, including continuous risk assessments, regular testing, security audits and security-by-design features. This shift necessitates specialised security and legal personnel and increased operational costs.