I've seen the discussion here about "keeping all the data" and "delete as much as possible" for commercial purposes. IANAL, but I have worked around GDPR relate

I've seen the discussion here about "keeping all the data" and "delete as much as possible" for commercial purposes. IANAL, but I have worked around GDPR related stuff in more than one case, so here is my 50 eurocents: - from the structural point of view: someone pays for a service. then cancels the service (in writing). then demands a deletion of content data(in writing). then ... chargebacks. Now in the court of law, how would the content data be of extra use, when the person clearly had used the service, cancled, and requested deletion? - All the companies I worked with were more concerned with minimizing the retention of personal data, not keeping as much as possible. Storing unneccesary personal data too long is a recipe to generate fines much higher than any sum of chargeback, if brought to a court. In short: The minimization of data and its retention is the intent of the gdpr and I would suggest you work with it from the start, not with the ideas of lawyers "keep everything" because chargebacks. An Example - with arguments for both sides: - https://www.burges-salmon.com/news-and-insight/legal-updates/data-protection/14-million-euro-fine-issued-for-improper-data-retention https://www.burges-salmon.com/news-and-insight/legal-updates... And some tracker with around 1500 cases and fines: https://www.enforcementtracker.com/ https://www.enforcementtracker.com/