Can your hotel offer a lower direct price than on Booking.com?

Updated 6 October 2026

Can an accommodation provider offer a lower price on its official website than the price listed on Booking.com?

Yes.

For properties in the European Economic Area, this freedom is now firmly supported by the Digital Markets Act. For Italian accommodation providers, however, the principle is even older: Italian law has made contractual clauses preventing a property from offering better direct prices, terms or conditions unenforceable since 2017.

The most recent change came in September 2026, when Booking.com implemented additional measures following regulatory dialogue with the European Commission. External prices are now no longer used even when assessing potential eligibility for the Booking Sponsored Benefit, and Booking.com has provided clearer information about its programmes and ranking.

For a hotel, B&B or other accommodation business, the interesting question is therefore no longer simply “am I allowed to be cheaper direct?”.

It is: how should direct pricing, availability and conditions fit into my distribution strategy?

The DMA protects the property’s freedom to differentiate its direct channel

Regulation (EU) 2022/1925, the Digital Markets Act (DMA), sets specific obligations for very large digital platforms designated as gatekeepers.

The European Commission designated Booking Holdings as a gatekeeper for Booking.com on 13 May 2024. Booking.com has had to comply with the relevant DMA obligations since 14 November 2024.

Article 5(3) of the DMA states that a gatekeeper must not prevent business users from offering the same products or services through other online intermediaries or through their own direct online sales channel at different prices or conditions.

The Commission’s guidance on Booking.com goes further in practical terms: accommodation providers in the EEA must be free to offer different prices, availability, inventory and commercial conditions on other channels, including their own website.

For Italian properties, direct-price freedom has existed since 2017

Italy had already addressed the issue before the DMA.

Article 1(166) of Law no. 124 of 4 August 2017, which entered into force on 29 August 2017, makes void any agreement requiring a tourism accommodation business not to offer final customers better prices, terms or other conditions than those offered through third parties.

For an Italian property, therefore, the ability to offer a better direct deal is not a new right created in 2026.

The 2026 development is important because it strengthens the broader European framework and clarifies how Booking.com’s own programmes interact with prices found outside its platform.

It is not only about price

Price parity is the most visible part of the debate, but the property’s freedom is broader.

An accommodation provider may decide to:

• offer a lower direct price;
• keep a similar price but offer more flexible conditions;
• include an additional service for direct bookings;
• make different room inventory available on different channels;
• apply a different commercial strategy to its own website and to OTAs.

The DMA protects the ability to differentiate. It does not tell the property how to use that freedom.

What changed in September 2026?

On 28 September 2026, the European Commission published a factsheet specifically addressing how the DMA protects businesses using Booking.com from parity requirements.

The Commission explained that Booking.com had already removed contractual parity requirements from its EEA terms and that external prices were not used for the default ranking or for eligibility for visibility-enhancing programmes such as Genius, Preferred and Preferred Plus.

One exception remained: external prices could still be taken into account for potential eligibility for the Booking Sponsored Benefit (BSB).

That changed in September 2026.

According to the Commission, Booking.com no longer looks at prices outside Booking.com when assessing whether a property may be eligible for BSB.

Booking.com has also provided clearer information on:

• the performance of Booking Sponsored Benefit;
• Genius, Preferred and Preferred Plus eligibility and programme rules;
• the role of external price scans shown in the Extranet;
• how the default ranking works;
• the fact that external prices are not used as an input for the default ranking.

The Commission also reports that “competitive” and “non-competitive” labels linked to external prices have been removed from the Extranet.

Can Booking.com penalise a property for offering a lower direct price?

The DMA’s prohibition is not limited to an explicit clause saying “you must charge the same price”.

Recital 39 of the DMA explains that measures with an equivalent effect are also relevant, giving examples such as increased commission rates or de-listing a business user’s offers.

This does not mean that every movement in ranking or every change in programme performance automatically represents a DMA infringement.

Booking.com still operates its own ranking and commercial programmes. The key principle is that a property’s freedom to offer different prices or conditions on other channels must not be restricted directly or indirectly through measures equivalent to parity requirements.

The price you set is not always the price the traveller sees

This is one of the most important operational details for accommodation providers.

A property could decide to set:

Direct website: €100
Booking.com: €110

That does not necessarily mean every traveller will always see Booking.com at €110.

Under the Booking Sponsored Benefit, Booking.com can reduce the customer-facing price and fund the difference itself. The Commission states that the property receives the full amount corresponding to the rate it set, while the agreed commission remains unchanged.

As a result, a property may deliberately set a lower direct rate and still find that, in some situations, Booking.com displays a very competitive customer price because the platform is funding the discount.

It is therefore important to separate three concepts:

• the rate set by the property;
• the final price displayed to the traveller;
• the net distribution cost for the property.

Does selling direct at a lower price always make sense?

No. And the DMA does not say that it does.

OTA distribution carries a commission cost, but direct distribution also has costs: the website, booking engine, payment services, advertising, customer acquisition, support and the technology required to operate the channel.

The useful question is not only:

“How much commission do I save?”

It is:

“What does it actually cost me to acquire and manage this booking through each channel?”

A lower direct rate can be an effective strategy, but it should be a deliberate distribution decision rather than an automatic discount equal to the OTA commission.

Lower price or better value?

The property can use its freedom in different ways.

One option is to make the direct rate cheaper. Another is to keep a similar price while making the direct offer more attractive through different conditions or added value.

The strategic question becomes:

“Why should a guest book directly with us?”

Price is one possible answer. It is not the only one.

Does availability have to be the same on Booking.com and on the direct website?

No, not necessarily.

The Commission’s 28 September 2026 factsheet explicitly refers to the property’s ability to offer different prices, availability, inventory and commercial conditions through other online channels, including its own website.

This gives the accommodation provider room to build its own distribution strategy.

It also makes accurate inventory management more important. If a property deliberately allocates different inventory to different channels, it needs to distinguish a commercial decision from a synchronisation error.

This is where a hotel PMS and distribution tools should support the property’s chosen strategy rather than impose one.

Different channels should not mean confusing offers

If the direct website and an OTA show different offers, the property still needs to understand exactly what is being compared.

A non-refundable rate is not the same product as a flexible rate. Breakfast included changes the value of the offer. Different cancellation terms can have a meaningful economic impact.

A direct-booking strategy should therefore not be reduced to checking whether one number is lower than another.

Price, conditions and included services need to remain clear both to the traveller and to the staff who will later manage the booking.

What does this mean for an EEA accommodation provider in 2026?

As of 6 October 2026, an accommodation provider using Booking.com in the EEA can:

1. offer a lower price on its own website;
2. offer different commercial conditions;
3. distribute availability and inventory differently across channels;
4. use the direct channel as an independent part of its distribution strategy;
5. do so without external prices being used for Booking.com’s default ranking or the programme eligibility described by the Commission, including Booking Sponsored Benefit since September 2026.

What the law does not say is that the direct channel must always be cheaper.

The important freedom is the property’s ability to decide.

That is the practical meaning of the end of rate parity.

Official sources

Information verified as of 6 October 2026.

• Regulation (EU) 2022/1925 — Digital Markets Act, particularly Article 5(3) and Recital 39.
• European Commission — “Booking must now comply with the Digital Markets Act”, 14 November 2024.
• European Commission — Factsheet on businesses’ freedom to set prices on and off Booking.com, 28 September 2026.
• Court of Justice of the European Union, Case C-264/23, judgment of 19 September 2024 on rate-parity clauses.
• Italian Law no. 124 of 4 August 2017, Article 1(166) — relevant for accommodation providers operating in Italy.

Time-sensitive note: platform programme rules, contractual terms and regulatory interpretations may change. Accommodation providers should check the current official documentation and their applicable contractual terms before making commercial decisions.

Disclaimer: this article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal, commercial or professional advice. The information reflects the sources verified on the update date shown above. Each accommodation provider remains responsible for its own distribution strategy and should obtain qualified advice where appropriate.