Tech companies of a certain size have long expected an easy ride from authorities, and for good reason. They always got it. Apple Inc for years abused loopholes to pay virtually zero tax in the EU while generating record profits there, thanks to special treatment from Ireland, where it bases its European headquarters. Alphabet Inc’s Google for years was able to entrench its dominance in search thanks to the special treatment the company gave its own shopping service over competitors.
Now Google and Apple are getting slapped for those blatantly unfair advantages. The EU is forcing Apple to pay 13 billion euros (US$14.4 billion) in back taxes to the Irish government, and Google to pay a 2.4 billion-euro fine for rigging its platform. For both, it is the end of the line on appeals. Of course, the payments are just a cost of doing business — pocket change, really — and the companies can pat their lawyers on the back for dragging the cases out in court for years with endless appeals.
However, the era of protracted cases is fading. The EU is transitioning to a period where its trust busters can be quicker and, as much as you can use the word to describe regulators, nimble, harnessing a more efficient legal framework to combat anticompetitive behavior from the likes of Alphabet, Apple, Meta Platforms Inc, Amazon.com Inc, Microsoft Corp and Nvidia Corp.
Until now, regulators had to be clever about how they used old, outdated rules to pursue their court cases. It is why proceedings took so long to play out. The European Commission based Apple’s Irish tax case on a misuse of state aid, deploying laws that typically do not have anything to do with tax.
Legally, “it was a very creative approach,” EDHEC Business School’s Augmented Law Institute professor Anne Witt said.
At the heart of the case was figuring out how to prove Ireland was giving Apple selective aid, which was also technically challenging to calculate, Witt added.
However, from this year onward, Europe’s authorities have a whizzy new tool, a regulatory innovation as meaningful to antitrust policy as ChatGPT was to generative artificial intelligence. It is the Digital Markets Act (DMA), a law that large tech platforms had to start complying with in March. With any luck, the EU would not be caught on the back foot quite as much, chasing after wrongdoing with investigations that run longer than it takes to put a child through school.
Now the big tech platforms have clear rules they must follow upfront. For instance, the DMA states that Apple and Google must allow their users to uninstall default apps on their devices, such as Apple Maps and Gmail, to promote competition. Google searches also do not highlight results on Google Maps as easily as they did before.
Instead of drawn-out legal battles and appeals, the DMA should also lead to swifter resolution: fines of as much as 10 percent of a company’s worldwide earnings, for instance. Additionally, instead of narrow investigations such as the Google shopping case, the law covers far more ground, applying to everything from app stores to social media.
Spokespeople for Apple and Google said the companies were “disappointed” with the court decisions this week.
However, Margarethe Vestager, the EU’s outgoing competition chief for whom these cases are a validating swan song, said they showed even the most powerful tech companies can be held accountable.
That is a growing sentiment across the Atlantic, where a US judge ruled last month that Google had rigged the search engine market and was a monopolist — and where for the first time in history, the prospect of breaking up a big tech firm (Google) is looking possible. The goal is to eventually create some more room for smaller companies to innovate and enter markets dominated by the giants, and reduce the pressure to sell to those firms.
For the tech monoliths, the payoff for lobbying lawmakers and keeping watchdogs tied up in court is looking less certain as regulations gather momentum. The DMA is one of the most radical approaches yet for keeping monopolistic practices in check, giving Europeans more control than anyone else in the world over what apps they can put on their smartphones and how their data is shared.
How smoothly that transpires through the end of this year and into the next is still an open question, but it is clear that Apple, Google and other big players would have to start waving goodbye to the advantages they have clung to for far too long.
Parmy Olson is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering technology. A former reporter for the Wall Street Journal and Forbes, she is the author of We Are Anonymous.
From the Iran war and nuclear weapons to tariffs and artificial intelligence, the agenda for this week’s Beijing summit between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) is packed. Xi would almost certainly bring up Taiwan, if only to demonstrate his inflexibility on the matter. However, no one needs to meet with Xi face-to-face to understand his stance. A visit to the National Museum of China in Beijing — in particular, the “Road to Rejuvenation” exhibition, which chronicles the rise and rule of the Chinese Communist Party — might be even more revealing. Xi took the members
Taiwan’s higher education system is facing an existential crisis. As the demographic drop-off continues to empty classrooms, universities across the island are locked in a desperate battle for survival, international student recruitment and crucial Ministry of Education funding. To win this battle, institutions have turned to what seems like an objective measure of quality: global university rankings. Unfortunately, this chase is a costly illusion, and taxpayers are footing the bill. In the past few years, the goalposts have shifted from pure research output to “sustainability” and “societal impact,” largely driven by commercial metrics such as the UK-based Times Higher Education (THE) Impact
The inter-Korean relationship, long defined by national division, offers the clearest mirror within East Asia for cross-strait relations. Yet even there, reunification language is breaking down. The South Korean government disclosed on Wednesday last week that North Korea’s constitutional revision in March had deleted references to reunification and added a territorial clause defining its border with South Korea. South Korea is also seriously debating whether national reunification with North Korea is still necessary. On April 27, South Korean President Lee Jae-myung marked the eighth anniversary of the Panmunjom Declaration, the 2018 inter-Korean agreement in which the two Koreas pledged to
I wrote this before US President Donald Trump embarked on his uneventful state visit to China on Thursday. So, I shall confine my observations to the joint US-Philippine military exercise of April 20 through May 8, known collectively as “Balikatan 2026.” This year’s Balikatan was notable for its “firsts.” First, it was conducted primarily with Taiwan in mind, not the Philippines or even the South China Sea. It also showed that in the Pacific, America’s alliance network is still robust. Allies are enthusiastic about America’s renewed leadership in the region. Nine decades ago, in 1936, America had neither military strength
RSS