/
Navigation
Chronicles
Browse all articles
Explore
Semantic exploration
Research
Entity momentum
Nexus
Correlations & relationships
Story Arc
Topic evolution
Drift Map
Semantic trajectory animation
Posts
Analysis & commentary
Pulse API
Tech news intelligence API
Browse
Entities
Companies, people, products, technologies
Domains
Browse by publication source
Handles
Browse by social media handle
Detection
Concept Search
Semantic similarity search
High Impact Stories
Top coverage by position
Sentiment Analysis
Positive/negative coverage
Anomaly Detection
Unusual coverage patterns
Analysis
Rivalry Report
Compare two entities head-to-head
Semantic Pivots
Narrative discontinuities
Crisis Response
Event recovery patterns
Connected
Search: /
Command: ⌘K
Embeddings: large
TEXXR

Chronicles

The story behind the story

← → days · ↑ ↓ browse · Enter similar · o open

Doc: the US is pressing EU officials to revise the Digital Markets Act to focus less on US tech giants and ensure it covers tech companies from outside the US

Politico Samuel Stolton

Context & Ripple Effects

The US push to reshape the Digital Markets Act marks a sharp reversal from 2021, when a draft memo showed Washington and Brussels planning to work together on Big Tech regulation on hate speech and algorithmic amplification. Now, months before EU lawmakers passed the DMA, the US position is that the law's gatekeeper design unfairly concentrates its burden on American firms.

The argument Washington is making — that the DMA should cover tech companies from outside the US — anticipates the fight that follows: [[a:847498|bipartisan US lawmakers later warned Biden that EU rules were targeting American companies while sparing many Chinese and EU ones]], and the US and EU's dueling regulatory approaches went on to split tech companies' attention across separate legal battles.

First-order effects

  • US tech giants designated as DMA gatekeepers gain a formal diplomatic channel to argue for broader coverage that would dilute their relative compliance burden under the law the EU passed in July 2022.
  • EU officials drafting the DMA's final shape face pressure to widen the gatekeeper criteria to non-US firms, a change that would alter which companies fall under the regime's obligations.

Second-order effects

  • If the EU broadened DMA coverage, Chinese and EU platforms would inherit compliance costs that currently concentrate on US firms, changing the law's competitive incidence rather than its intensity.
  • The dispute pushes regulation into transatlantic diplomacy: the same companies end up navigating both US and EU enforcement tracks, and each side's rules become leverage in the other's negotiations.

Third-order effects

The trend: Transatlantic tech regulation is shifting from coordinated rulemaking toward contested jurisdictional scope, with which companies a law covers becoming the central US-EU bargaining point.

Discussion

  • @adamkovac Adam Kovacevich on x
    @Andreas_Schwab ... With respect, the collective position of the Biden Administration is more significant for US-EU relations than the opinion of individual Members of Congress.
  • @viacristiano Cristiano Lima on x
    Interesting. Key question though: How involved, if at all, was the White House in drafting/circulating this paper? https://twitter.com/...
  • @schneideringrid Ingrid Schneider on x
    US government lobbying for GAFAM and against EP's proposals, eg to raise the threshold to 8 billion euros in annual turnover and a market capitalization of 80 billion euros, also wants to lower sanctions. https://twitter.com/...
  • @auerdirk Dirk Auer on x
    Brussels groupthink has so far shielded DMA from real criticism. But press and govs are waking up and pushing back. Bit like⚽️: You beat San Marino 10-0 => pple think you're great. Then world cup arrives & you get smashed => pple realize you were crap all along. That is the DMA h…
  • @auerdirk Dirk Auer on x
    In other words: Brussels bureaucrats are living under a false sense that DMA is a sensible policy tool, because the events of the last two years have diverted focus away from it. That honeymoon is—hopefully—beginning to end.
  • @kkomaitis @kkomaitis on x
    @viaCristiano That was my question as well. And, what the US must understand is that letters like these will only push European politicians towards more strict rules.
  • @andreas_schwab @andreas_schwab on x
    @SamuelStolton @POLITICOEurope As I have been in Washington in December, I can only tell you that there are a lot off different viewpoint within the US-government. This is just one opinion.
  • @apolyakova Dr Alina Polyakova on x
    The clash between Brussels and Washington on tech policy. If you have read the DMA provisions, it's clear that they target US companies exclusively and paper over any national security concerns https://www.politico.eu/...