The EU fines Google €2.95B for abusing its dominance in digital ads, and says its preliminary stance is that Google must divest parts of its ad-tech business
www.politico.com/news/2025/09... Barry Schwartz / @rustybrick.com : Can the EU do what the US could not? [embedded post] Mastodon: @darnell@one.darnell.one : I am siding with Google on this one as they have plenty of competition in the advertising arena thanks to #Meta. — However, the last thing the #UnitedStates 🇺🇸 needs is another trade war with #Europe, which will cause a recession for both parties. … Arie van Deursen / @avandeursen@mastodon.acm.org : > the only way for Google to end its conflict of interest effectively is with a structural remedy, such as selling some part of its Adtech business. — > A US Federal Court recently upheld the main claims of a Department of Justice complaint against Google, which closely mirrored those addressed in our decision … Forums: r/EU_Economics : Trump threatens more tariffs after EU fines Google €2.95B r/europeanunion : Trump threatens retaliation against EU over Google fine - Euractiv r/technology : Google Fined $3.5 Billion by EU Over Ad-Tech Business See also Mediagazer
Context & Ripple Effects
The decision extends a long-running European competition record involving Google: the company previously appealed an EU advertising-practices fine, while the European Court of Justice later upheld a separate shopping-services penalty in a ruling that sustained an earlier Google competition fine.
What distinguishes this case is the Commission’s preliminary preference for a structural remedy. The reported fine addresses alleged digital-ad dominance, while the divestiture stance puts the organization of Google’s ad-tech operations at issue rather than only its conduct.
First-order effects
- Google faces a €2.95B penalty and a regulatory process centered on whether parts of its ad-tech business must be sold.
- Advertisers, publishers, and ad-tech customers using Google’s tools face uncertainty over whether the integrated stack through which they buy, sell, and measure advertising could be reorganized.
Second-order effects
- The preliminary structural-remedy stance gives competing ad-tech providers and publishers a stronger basis to argue for more interoperable, less self-preferencing market arrangements.
- Google is likely to focus its response on contesting both the finding and the necessity of divestiture, echoing its earlier appeal of an EU advertising-practices fine rather than treating the penalty as a stand-alone cost.
Third-order effects
- If regulators sustain structural remedies in ad tech, competition enforcement could shift from fines and behavioral commitments toward separating platforms’ potentially conflicting roles as market operator and participant.
- The case adds to a pattern in which European enforcement tests whether large digital platforms can preserve integrated businesses while meeting competition obligations; the eventual remedy, not the preliminary stance, will determine the precedent.
The trend: European digital-market enforcement is increasingly testing structural remedies where integrated platform businesses are alleged to create conflicts of interest.