9 Tech Sector Trends for 2026: Regulation, Resilience, and Recalibration

As we move towards the end of January, some of the trends that will shape the technology sector in 2026 are starting to crystallize. Landmark regulatory regimes are moving from theory into practice, geopolitical uncertainty is reshaping investment decisions, and rapid technological innovation continues to test the boundaries of existing legal frameworks.

For technology companies operating across Europe and beyond, the year ahead will be defined by three intersecting forces: the shift from regulatory design to enforcement, the growing importance of resilience (cyber, operational, and organizational), and a recalibration of growth strategies in response to market pressure and political change.

Below, we explore the key trends we expect to shape the technology sector in 2026.

1. Digital regulation enters the enforcement phase in Europe

Europe’s ambitious digital regulatory agenda is entering a new chapter. For several years, businesses have focused on tracking legislative proposals and preparing for future obligations. In 2026, the grace periods are ending and enforcement is accelerating.

Regulators are expected to increase activity under the Digital Services Act (DSA), Digital Markets Act (DMA), Data Act, Data Governance Act, and related frameworks. For in-scope businesses, this will mean closer scrutiny of governance structures, reporting lines, escalation processes, and day-to-day operational compliance.

Alongside this enforcement push, political debate around the EU’s Digital Omnibus Package is gaining momentum. The Omnibus aims to streamline and recalibrate aspects of the EU’s digital rulebook by reducing duplication and administrative burden across existing legislation, including elements of the AI Act, data protection, data governance, and cybersecurity regimes. The initiative reflects growing concern that overlapping obligations risk undermining innovation and competitiveness, particularly for businesses operating across multiple Member States.

If agreed during 2026, the Omnibus could bring greater coherence between related regimes and, in some areas, more flexible implementation timelines. This could offer welcome clarity for businesses grappling with cross-cutting compliance requirements. However, any simplification is unlikely to result in lighter regulatory scrutiny. As existing regimes mature, regulators are expected to pursue early enforcement cases to set expectations and establish precedent.

For technology businesses, the challenge will be managing this transitional period: preparing for enforcement under the current framework while remaining agile enough to adapt to potential reforms emerging from the Omnibus process.

2. Cybersecurity: a product design and governance imperative

Cyber risk continues to rise in both scale and sophistication. AI-enabled threat actors are increasing the speed and effectiveness of attacks, with ransomware incidents in particular becoming more targeted and more disruptive. In 2026, cybersecurity will no longer be viewed as a purely operational issue, but as a core product, governance, and liability consideration.

Two regulatory developments will drive this shift. First, the Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) will begin to have real impact across the European market. Its mandatory vulnerability handling, secure development and incident reporting obligations will apply to most connected software and hardware products placed on the EU market. For many technology businesses, particularly those operating in consumer electronics and IoT, this represents a fundamental change in how products must be designed, documented, and supported.

Second, we will finally see full implementation of NIS2 across EU Member States. The scope of NIS2 is significantly broader than its predecessor, capturing a wide range of digital service providers, technology suppliers, and critical supply chain participants. Enhanced enforcement powers and meaningful fines mean that cybersecurity maturity will be tested not only in policy documents, but in real-world incidents.

Together, these regimes will require businesses to embed security by design and to take a more rigorous approach to supply chain risk management, contractual flow-downs, and incident response planning. As enforcement activity increases, we expect to see a corresponding rise in cyber-related disputes, regulatory investigations, and follow-on litigation.

3. AI litigation accelerates as courts and regulators test the boundaries of the AI Act

Artificial intelligence remains one of the most transformative — and legally uncertain — areas of technology. While recent years have focused on policy development, 2026 is likely to mark a turning point as disputes and litigation gather pace.

Across multiple jurisdictions, courts are beginning to grapple with claims relating to copyright infringement, misuse of training data, authorship, bias, transparency, and liability for AI-generated outputs. These cases will develop alongside intense political competition between jurisdictions seeking to position themselves as AI and innovation hubs, creating tension between regulatory oversight and economic ambition.

At EU level, the AI Act’s high-risk regime will begin to apply, driving a significant compliance effort for businesses developing or deploying AI systems in regulated contexts. Compliance will extend well beyond technical safeguards, requiring robust internal governance frameworks covering risk assessments, documentation, human oversight, and post-market monitoring.

AI risk will increasingly be assessed through the lens of process and governance, rather than outcomes alone. In disputes and regulatory investigations, a key question is likely to be whether organizations can demonstrate that they took reasonable, proportionate, and well-documented steps to manage AI risk.

4. Technology sector disputes increase amid market and funding pressure

After a prolonged period of expansion, many technology businesses are now operating in a more constrained economic environment. Higher interest rates, cautious investment, and geopolitical instability are placing pressure on valuations, funding models, and strategic priorities.

Historically, such conditions correlate with an increase in disputes and 2026 is likely to follow that pattern. We expect to see growth in technology-related litigation, including contractual disputes arising from failed implementations or service delivery, shareholder and investor claims linked to disclosure, and governance and regulatory enforcement actions followed by civil litigation.

As technology becomes ever more embedded in core business operations, disputes will increasingly involve complex technical evidence, data issues, and overlapping regulatory considerations. Businesses that invest in clear governance, robust documentation, and early dispute risk management will be better placed to contain exposure.

5. Employment law challenges intensify in an AI-enabled workplace

The intersection of technology and employment law will be a growing focus in 2026. AI tools are increasingly used in recruitment, performance management and workforce planning, raising questions around transparency, bias, and accountability.

Employers operating in Europe will need to navigate a complex overlay of AI regulation, data protection requirements, and national employment laws. Ensuring that AI-driven decision-making is explainable, proportionate, and appropriately governed will be critical in managing both legal and reputational risk.

At the same time, continued restructuring across parts of the tech sector is likely to drive increased employment disputes, particularly where technology-driven change intersects with collective consultation, redundancy processes, and employee monitoring.

6. ESG moves from aspiration to accountability for tech businesses

Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) considerations are now firmly embedded in the technology sector’s risk landscape. In 2026, scrutiny of energy use, supply chains, data ethics, and social impact will continue to intensify.

Data centers sit at the center of this debate, at the intersection of technology, energy, and infrastructure policy. Regulatory focus on sustainability, resilience, and national security will shape investment decisions and project development across Europe.

From a governance perspective, boards are increasingly expected to demonstrate active oversight of ESG-related risks, including cyber resilience, data governance, and supply chain integrity. ESG disclosures and public commitments also present growing litigation risk if not supported by robust controls and evidence.

7. Competition law and geopolitical pressures reshape global tech markets

Competition law and geopolitics remain deeply intertwined for the technology sector. Developments in the United States, including shifts in regulatory and executive power, are already influencing competition policy debates in Europe.

EU regulators are likely to maintain a robust stance on market power, data access, and platform behavior, particularly where systemic risk or consumer harm is alleged. At the same time, there is increasing recognition of the need to support European innovation and strategic autonomy in key technology areas.

For multinational technology businesses, navigating divergent competition regimes while maintaining coherent global strategies will remain a central challenge in 2026.

8. Neurotechnology emerges as the next regulatory frontier

Neurotechnology is moving rapidly from the margins into mainstream policy debate. Draft principles published by UNESCO signal growing concern around cognitive liberty, mental privacy, and human enhancement.

While still an emerging field, increased investment and innovation in brain–computer interfaces and related technologies will attract regulatory and ethical scrutiny. Early engagement with governance frameworks will be essential for businesses operating in this space.

9. Infrastructure convergence: data, defence, space, and energy regulation collide

Finally, 2026 will see continued convergence across sectors traditionally treated as distinct. Dual-use technologies increasingly blur the line between civilian and defence applications, while commercial innovation is outpacing traditional public-sector R&D.

This convergence brings legal complexity across data protection, export controls, national security, cyber resilience and corporate governance. Boards and senior management will need to adopt a more integrated approach to risk management as infrastructure spans data centers, satellites, energy systems, and digital platforms.

Alongside this broader convergence, the data center market will experience another year of accelerated expansion in 2026, driven by AI‑related compute demand, sovereign cloud strategies, and public‑sector digitalisation. Yet this growth is increasingly constrained by energy availability, grid access limitations, and more interventionist regulatory oversight. Several European Member States are tightening approval processes for new hyperscale projects, linking development consent to demonstrable energy‑efficiency measures, heat‑recovery concepts, and integration with national sustainability objectives. For operators and investors, this introduces a more complex risk calculus where technical design, power procurement strategies, and ESG compliance are now central to project feasibility.

Data centers will continue to be critical infrastructure in regulatory terms, drawing the attention of energy regulators, cybersecurity agencies, and foreign‑investment authorities alike. The combined effect is a market where legal, technical, and geopolitical considerations are deeply intertwined. This requires operators to adopt integrated compliance strategies from the earliest stages of site selection through to long‑term operational governance.

Looking ahead

For technology businesses operating across the UK, EU, and international markets, 2026 will not be about preparing for what is coming next — but about operationalizing what is already here. Regulatory enforcement, dispute risk, and governance scrutiny will intensify, even as policymakers debate how to recalibrate the digital rulebook.

Those that invest in resilience, cross-functional governance, and clear compliance strategies will be best positioned not only to manage risk, but to build trust and seize opportunity as the technology landscape continues to evolve.

Oliver Süme is a partner and co-head of the international Technology Sector Group at Fieldfisher, specializing in Technology, Data Protection, and IT Law. He has more than 25 years of experience in these areas, advising his clients in all legal areas covered by IT and digitalization, in particular in international Data Protection Law and in the area of Artificial Intelligence, IT contract law, as well as in legal issues relating to Cybersecurity, IT Security, and E-commerce. His clients include technology companies, the public sector, and, in particular, international life science companies. Among other things, he recently advised the German Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology on the development of the European cloud and data project "Gaia-X". He is Chairman of the Board of the eco Internet Industry Association and Chair of the Data Economy Committee of the European Internet Service Providers Association (EuroISPA) in Brussels.

John Cassels co-heads the firm's Regulatory Group, specializing in competition law and risk management. His expertise spans all aspects of the UK and EU regimes, including cartel investigations, antitrust litigation, restrictive agreements, dominance issues, alliances, and structural changes such as mergers and acquisitions. Additionally, his work involves advising clients on public procurement, state aid, international trade, and regulatory investigations, with a focus on providing practical, commercial solutions to assess and mitigate real risks.

With experience across a broad range of industries—from water and wastewater to soft drinks—his skills are particularly strong in regulated sectors such as food and beverages, transport, life sciences, and financial/professional services.

A First-Class Honors Degree in Law from the University of Glasgow and a Masters in Law and Economics (Distinction) from the University of Rotterdam further underpin his professional expertise.