The US DOJ says Google spends “enormous numbers” to be the default search engine on browsers and phones, in the first substantive hearing in its antitrust case
Alphabet Inc.'s Google pays billions of dollars each year to Apple Inc., Samsung Electronics Co. and other telecom giants …
Context & Ripple Effects
This hearing is the first substantive courtroom step in a case that began with the DOJ's October 2020 complaint, which alleged Google paid US mobile carriers over $1B in revenue-sharing to box out rivals and estimated $8B–$12B a year flowing to Apple, with nearly half of Google's 2019 search traffic coming from Apple products [[a:1160850]]. The "enormous numbers" framing at the 2022 hearing set up the disclosures that followed: Google's own search head later testified the company spent $26.3B in 2021 on defaults across browsers, phones and platforms [[a:845651]], and a subsequent filing put the Apple payment alone at $20B for 2022 [[a:864216]].
Why it matters: these payments are the alleged mechanism of monopoly, not a side detail. The same default deals examined here became the basis for the 2024 ruling that Google illegally monopolized search [[a:872421]], and for the DOJ's remedy request to ban default search deals and force a Chrome divestiture [[a:879526]].
First-order effects
- Google's core acquisition cost for search distribution moves from trade secret to sworn evidence, exposing the scale of payments to Apple, Samsung and telecom carriers to the court and the public record.
- Apple, Samsung and the carriers named as payment recipients are now documented parties to the conduct under challenge, with their search revenue-sharing deals subject to scrutiny in the case.
Second-order effects
- If the court restricts or bans default payments, Apple faces the loss of a stream that the DOJ's own filing tied to 17.5% of its operating income in 2020, pressuring it to monetize Safari search differently.
- Rival search engines gain a potential opening: with paid defaults off the table, browser and phone makers could auction or open the default slot, shifting distribution leverage from Google's checkbook to device makers' choices.
Third-order effects
- The pattern points toward search distribution being unbundled from platform ownership — the DOJ's remedies filing for a Chrome sale and a default-deal ban would make the browser and OS entry points contestable rather than purchasable.
- If defaults become open, competition shifts to product merit at the point of choice, a structural change that would define how the next generation of search — and its AI successors — reaches users.
The trend: Search distribution is moving from a market bought through default payments toward one shaped by antitrust remedies, with the DOJ's case determining who controls the entry point to search.