Art. 35 GDPR · Chapter IV: Controller and processor · Section 3: Data protection impact assessment and prior consultation
Article 35 GDPR: Data protection impact assessment
Text as of 28 October 2026 Reviewed by Sergio Maldonado Elvira on 29 October 2026
Summary (not the official text)
Where processing is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons, the controller must carry out a data protection impact assessment before the processing. The article lists cases in which an assessment is required in particular and sets out its minimum content.
Official text
Where a type of processing in particular using new technologies, and taking into account the nature, scope, context and purposes of the processing, is likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons, the controller shall, prior to the processing, carry out an assessment of the impact of the envisaged processing operations on the protection of personal data. A single assessment may address a set of similar processing operations that present similar high risks.
The controller shall seek the advice of the data protection officer, where designated, when carrying out a data protection impact assessment.
A data protection impact assessment referred to in paragraph 1 shall in particular be required in the case of:
a systematic and extensive evaluation of personal aspects relating to natural persons which is based on automated processing, including profiling, and on which decisions are based that produce legal effects concerning the natural person or similarly significantly affect the natural person;
processing on a large scale of special categories of data referred to in Article 9(1), or of personal data relating to criminal convictions and offences referred to in Article 10; or
a systematic monitoring of a publicly accessible area on a large scale.
The supervisory authority shall establish and make public a list of the kind of processing operations which are subject to the requirement for a data protection impact assessment pursuant to paragraph 1. The supervisory authority shall communicate those lists to the Board referred to in Article 68.
The supervisory authority may also establish and make public a list of the kind of processing operations for which no data protection impact assessment is required. The supervisory authority shall communicate those lists to the Board.
Prior to the adoption of the lists referred to in paragraphs 4 and 5, the competent supervisory authority shall apply the consistency mechanism referred to in Article 63 where such lists involve processing activities which are related to the offering of goods or services to data subjects or to the monitoring of their behaviour in several Member States, or may substantially affect the free movement of personal data within the Union.
The assessment shall contain at least:
a systematic description of the envisaged processing operations and the purposes of the processing, including, where applicable, the legitimate interest pursued by the controller;
an assessment of the necessity and proportionality of the processing operations in relation to the purposes;
an assessment of the risks to the rights and freedoms of data subjects referred to in paragraph 1; and
the measures envisaged to address the risks, including safeguards, security measures and mechanisms to ensure the protection of personal data and to demonstrate compliance with this Regulation taking into account the rights and legitimate interests of data subjects and other persons concerned.
Compliance with approved codes of conduct referred to in Article 40 by the relevant controllers or processors shall be taken into due account in assessing the impact of the processing operations performed by such controllers or processors, in particular for the purposes of a data protection impact assessment.
Where appropriate, the controller shall seek the views of data subjects or their representatives on the intended processing, without prejudice to the protection of commercial or public interests or the security of processing operations.
Where processing pursuant to point (c) or (e) of Article 6(1) has a legal basis in Union law or in the law of the Member State to which the controller is subject, that law regulates the specific processing operation or set of operations in question, and a data protection impact assessment has already been carried out as part of a general impact assessment in the context of the adoption of that legal basis, paragraphs 1 to 7 shall not apply unless Member States deem it to be necessary to carry out such an assessment prior to processing activities.
Where necessary, the controller shall carry out a review to assess if processing is performed in accordance with the data protection impact assessment at least when there is a change of the risk represented by processing operations.
Source: Regulation (EU) 2016/679, Official Journal L 119, 4.5.2016, as corrected. Only the text published in the Official Journal is authentic. © European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu
Text as of 28 October 2026.
This is reference material, not legal advice.
Related recitals
This list is under review.
EDPB guidance
- Guidelines 02/2025 on processing of personal data through blockchain technologies
EDPB 02/2025FinalFirst published 14 April 2025Final version 7 July 2026
Version 2 is final.
- Guidelines on Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) and determining whether processing is 'likely to result in a high risk'
WP248 rev.01FinalEndorsed by the EDPB 25 May 2018
Date is the EDPB endorsement date.
Fines
Amounts are shown in the currency in which the fine was imposed.
- IQVIA Solutions Italy S.r.l: EUR 7,000,000
Garante per la protezione dei dati personali, ItalyDecision of 23 September 2026Appeal status: unknown
Health-analytics firm treated a database of about one million GP patients as anonymous when a persistent identifier made them re-identifiable; no legal basis, no information, no DPIA, weak retention and security.
- Foodinho s.r.l.: EUR 5,000,000
Garante per la protezione dei dati personali, ItalyDecision of 13 November 2024Appeal status: unknown
Glovo-group delivery platform geolocated over 35,000 riders even off shift, used facial recognition for identity checks, made automated decisions (including deactivations) without safeguards, and let other group companies see rider data.
- Meta Platforms Ireland Limited: EUR 405,000,000
Data Protection Commission (Ireland), IrelandDecision of 2 September 2022Appeal status: under appeal
Instagram let 13 to 17 year olds run business accounts that published their phone numbers or emails, and set child accounts to public by default.
- Minister van Financiën (controller for the Belastingdienst, Dutch Tax Administration): EUR 3,700,000
Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens (Dutch Data Protection Authority), NetherlandsDecision of 7 April 2022Appeal status: unknown
Kept an unlawful fraud blacklist (FSV) on about 270,000 people for over six years: no legal basis, inaccurate data, weak security, DPO not involved in the DPIA.
- IAB Europe: EUR 250,000
Autorité de protection des données / Gegevensbeschermingsautoriteit (Belgium), BelgiumDecision of 2 February 2022Appeal status: upheld
The ad-industry Transparency and Consent Framework processed users' preference strings without a legal basis, with vague information, weak safeguards, no records, no DPIA and no DPO.
- Deliveroo Italy s.r.l.: EUR 2,500,000
Garante per la protezione dei dati personali, ItalyDecision of 22 July 2021Appeal status: unknown
Food-delivery platform managed about 8,000 riders through opaque algorithms (booking and work allocation), collected excessive data including location, and lacked a DPIA and proper records.