How to Respond to an AGCM Advertising Complaint in Italy (step-by-step, 2026 Update)

When the Italian Competition Authority, the Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM), contacts your business about an advertising complaint, the clock starts immediately. Understanding how to respond to an AGCM advertising complaint in Italy is critical for any advertiser, sponsor, agency, or brand legal team that operates in the Italian market. With enforcement activity rising sharply in 2026, driven by ambush-marketing investigations linked to the Milano-Cortina 2026 Winter Games and the mandatory roll-out of CONSOB’s DePub platform for financial advertising, the procedural stakes have never been higher.

This guide sets out the complete advertising complaint procedure in Italy: who is affected, what documents you need, the deadlines that matter, likely costs, and the 2026 rule changes every advertiser should factor into their response strategy.

Overview of the AGCM Complaint Process and Who It Applies To

The AGCM is the independent administrative body responsible for enforcing Italy’s rules on unfair commercial practices, misleading advertising, and, since D.L. 16/2020, ambush marketing. An AGCM complaint can be triggered by consumers, competitor businesses, trade associations, or the Authority itself acting on its own initiative (d’ufficio). Institutional triggers have become more common in 2026, particularly around major sporting events.

Any entity whose advertising reaches Italian consumers may receive a complaint. This includes domestic companies, foreign brands targeting Italy through digital channels, media agencies, influencers with Italian audiences, and event sponsors. Complaints are typically filed through the AGCM’s online portal or via certified email (PEC) to protocollo.agcm@pec.agcm.it. The AGCM complaint may arrive as a formal notice requesting information, or as a preliminary communication ahead of a possible investigation. In either case, the advertiser must treat the matter with urgency.

Eligibility and Prerequisites: Who Must Respond and What Qualifies as an AGCM Complaint

Not every consumer grievance reaches the AGCM, and not every AGCM inquiry proceeds to a formal investigation. Understanding the legal tests the Authority applies helps advertisers assess risk and calibrate their response.

When Is an Ad Considered ‘Misleading’?

Under the Italian Consumer Code (Legislative Decree 206/2005, Articles 20–27bis), advertising is considered misleading if it distorts the economic behaviour of the average consumer. The AGCM evaluates whether claims are verifiable and substantiated, whether material information has been omitted, and whether the overall presentation, including images, disclaimers, and fine print, creates a false impression in the mind of the target audience. Comparative advertising that denigrates competitors or creates confusion with a rival’s trademarks also falls within scope.

Ambush Marketing Triggers

D.L. 16/2020 introduced specific prohibitions on ambush marketing in connection with major events in Italy. The legislation targets unauthorised commercial exploitation of event symbols, names, or reputations. In February 2026, the AGCM opened investigations into alleged ambush-marketing conduct connected to the Milano-Cortina 2026 Winter Games, signalling that enforcement under these provisions is now a live risk. Advertisers running campaigns that reference, allude to, or visually associate with major sporting or cultural events should treat any AGCM inquiry as potentially falling under these heightened provisions.

How to Respond to an AGCM Advertising Complaint in Italy: Step-by-Step Procedure

The following numbered steps cover the complete response process, from the moment a complaint or inquiry arrives to a final appeal. The timeline table below summarises responsibilities and typical durations.

Step 1, Immediate Triage (0–48 Hours)

As soon as a complaint or AGCM inquiry is received, the advertiser should take the following actions without delay:

1. Confirm receipt. If the communication arrived via PEC, send a brief acknowledgement confirming the date of receipt and the reference number assigned by the AGCM. Log the matter in your compliance register immediately.
2. Preserve all evidence. Issue an internal litigation-hold notice covering the campaign in question. This means freezing ad creatives, landing pages, server logs, social-media posts, influencer content, and all internal communications (emails, Slack threads, approval chains) related to the advertisement. Evidence destroyed or altered after a complaint arrives will severely damage the company’s position.
3. Notify internal stakeholders. Alert the legal department, the marketing team responsible for the campaign, the PR/communications function, and, where relevant, the advertising agency or influencer partner. If external counsel is already retained, brief them immediately.
4. Consider pausing the campaign. If the complaint concerns a live advertisement, assess whether continuing to run it increases exposure. In many cases, voluntarily pausing or correcting the campaign while the matter is under review demonstrates good faith and reduces the risk of aggravated sanctions.

Step 2, Legal Assessment and Evidence Collection (Days 1–7)

Once the immediate triage is complete, the legal lead should conduct a substantive assessment of the complaint. This involves reviewing the specific claims the AGCM has raised (or that the complainant has alleged), mapping those claims against the actual advertisement, and identifying whether the advertiser has substantiation evidence for every factual assertion made in the ad.

During this phase, assemble the documents needed for the AGCM response (see the full documents checklist below in the Required Documents section). Pay particular attention to gathering:

• The exact ad creative, every version, every format, every platform placement.
• Substantiation files, test results, certifications, clinical data, or survey evidence that support the claims made.
• Targeting and distribution data, campaign manager exports showing who saw the ad, when, and where.
• Contracts and sign-off records, agency agreements, influencer contracts, internal legal approvals.
• Sponsorship agreements, essential where the complaint involves ambush-marketing allegations.

Industry observers expect the AGCM to scrutinise the completeness of evidence submissions more closely in 2026, particularly for campaigns connected to major events.

Step 3, Draft and Submit the Formal Response (Days 7–21)

The formal response is the most consequential document in the advertising complaint procedure in Italy. It should be structured clearly, typically following this format:

1. Executive summary (1 page): a concise statement of the advertiser’s position, the advertisement in question, and the key reasons why the claims are lawful.
2. Factual timeline: a chronological narrative showing when the campaign was developed, approved, published, and (if applicable) paused or modified.
3. Legal arguments: address each AGCM allegation directly. For misleading-advertising complaints, demonstrate that claims are substantiated, disclaimers are adequate, and the overall impression is not deceptive. For ambush-marketing complaints, evidence the legitimate basis for any event references (e.g., valid sponsorship rights).
4. Remedial proposals: if any element of the ad is arguably non-compliant, proactively propose corrections or undertakings. Voluntary remediation can materially reduce any eventual fine.
5. Indexed evidence annex: number every supporting document and cross-reference it in the body of the response.

Submit the response via PEC to the address specified in the AGCM notice, or through the AGCM’s online portal if directed to do so. Keep certified delivery receipts.

Step 4, Engagement, Settlement, and Undertakings (Days 20–60)

After receiving the advertiser’s response, the AGCM may take several paths. It may close the matter without action if satisfied that the advertising was lawful. Alternatively, it may request further information, propose that the advertiser offer formal undertakings (impegni), or escalate to a full investigation. Undertakings, voluntary commitments to modify or withdraw the advertising, are a powerful tool. If accepted by the AGCM, they typically result in no fine being imposed. Negotiate undertakings carefully: they become binding once accepted and are published on the AGCM’s website.

Step 5, Formal Investigation and Decision

If the AGCM opens a formal investigation, the procedure becomes adversarial. The Authority may issue detailed information requests, conduct inspections, and take testimony. The advertiser has the right to present written and oral arguments before the AGCM board issues its final decision. Investigations typically last 60–180 days, though complex cases can take longer. The evidentiary standard is administrative, not criminal, the AGCM must establish on the balance of evidence that the practice was unfair or misleading.

Step 6, Appeals and Post-Decision Steps

An AGCM decision imposing sanctions can be appealed to the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale del Lazio (TAR Lazio), and subsequently to the Consiglio di Stato. The appeal must typically be filed within 60 days of notification of the decision. Administrative law counsel with specific experience in AGCM appeals should be instructed promptly if an appeal is contemplated. Post-decision, the advertiser should also consider reputational remediation, issuing corrective communications, updating advertising materials, and briefing commercial partners.

Required Documents and Information for an AGCM Response

Assembling the correct documentation is essential. The table below lists the documents needed for an AGCM complaint response, together with format and sourcing guidance.

All annexes submitted via PEC should be clearly numbered, labelled with descriptive file names, and referenced in the body of the formal response. The AGCM’s filing guidance specifies that submissions should describe the issue “as clearly and accurately as possible” and include all relevant supporting documents.

Timeline and Key Deadlines for the AGCM Advertising Complaint Procedure

The timeline for an AGCM advertising complaint varies depending on whether the matter is resolved at the preliminary stage or escalates to a formal investigation and appeal. The table below consolidates the key deadlines an advertiser must track.

Missing an AGCM deadline, particularly the deadline for a formal response, can result in the Authority proceeding on the basis of available evidence alone, without the benefit of the advertiser’s arguments. In the worst case, it may also be treated as a failure to cooperate, which can aggravate sanctions.

Costs, Fines, and Financial Exposure

Understanding the potential financial exposure helps advertisers make informed decisions about legal representation, settlement strategy, and risk tolerance. The table below sets out indicative cost ranges based on publicly reported AGCM decisions and typical market rates for Italian advertising law counsel.

These are indicative ranges. The actual fines for misleading advertising imposed by the AGCM depend on the gravity and duration of the infringement, the breadth of consumer impact, and whether the advertiser cooperated during the investigation.

What Changes in 2026: Regulatory Developments Affecting the AGCM Complaint Process

Two developments in 2026 have material implications for how advertisers should prepare and respond to AGCM complaints.

Intensified Ambush-Marketing Enforcement

The AGCM’s enforcement of D.L. 16/2020, the ambush-marketing legislation introduced ahead of major international events hosted in Italy, has moved from theoretical to operational. In February 2026, the Authority opened two investigations into alleged ambush-marketing conduct in connection with the Milano-Cortina 2026 Winter Games. Early indications suggest the AGCM is applying the statutory provisions broadly, covering not only blatant use of event logos but also more subtle associative marketing that creates a false impression of official sponsorship. Advertisers running campaigns around major events should now include a specific ambush-marketing risk assessment as part of their pre-launch compliance checks, and include evidence of that assessment in any AGCM complaint response.

CONSOB DePub for Financial Advertising

From 1 January 2026, certain financial advertising materials must be submitted to CONSOB (Italy’s securities market regulator) via the DePub electronic platform. This mandatory filing requirement applies to marketing material related to offers, admissions to trading, and related financial products. For financial advertisers, DePub submission evidence is now a critical component of any AGCM complaint response, it demonstrates regulatory compliance and good-faith adherence to sectoral filing obligations.

Practical Implications for Advertisers

The likely practical effect of these 2026 changes is twofold. First, advertisers in all sectors should add an ambush-marketing clause to their campaign compliance checklists, verifying that no unauthorised association with protected events is created. Second, financial-sector advertisers should attach DePub submission confirmations as standard evidence in any AGCM response, demonstrating that the advertisement was properly filed with CONSOB before publication.

Common Pitfalls When Responding to an AGCM Advertising Complaint

• Late evidence preservation. Failing to issue a litigation hold within 48 hours risks the loss of server logs, social-media analytics, and internal communications. Implement an automated preservation checklist triggered by any regulatory inquiry.
• Relying solely on agency assurances. Advertisers sometimes assume that because an agency produced the creative, the agency bears all responsibility. The AGCM holds the advertiser responsible. Obtain and retain signed compliance sign-off records from every party in the approval chain.
• Continuing to run a challenged campaign. Allowing a disputed advertisement to remain live while the AGCM matter is pending can aggravate sanctions and undermine any good-faith defence. Establish a standard operating procedure for pausing or correcting live campaigns immediately upon receipt of a complaint.
• Omitting DePub evidence for financial ads. Financial advertisers who fail to include DePub submission confirmation in their AGCM response miss an opportunity to demonstrate full regulatory compliance. Include the DePub receipt as a standard annex.
• Submitting an unstructured response. Responses that lack an executive summary, a clear factual timeline, or an indexed evidence annex are harder for the AGCM to process, and less persuasive. Follow the structured format outlined in Step 3 above.

Sources

1. AGCM, Filing a Complaint / Consumer Protection
2. AGCM, Legal Framework / Consumer Protection
3. CONSOB, Advertising Activity / DePub
4. CyberLaws, D.L. 16/2020 Ambush Marketing Analysis
5. Mondaq, AGCM Ambush Marketing Investigations (2026)
6. KPMG, Italy DePub / CONSOB New Platform for Marketing Material