The contrasting antitrust challenges faced by Google in the EU and the US highlight the different regulatory approaches to addressing Google’s monopoly in the markets of online search and digital advertising, specifically in areas like search engine services, search text ads, and ad exchanges. In Europe, the company has encountered fines totalling billions, often linked to long-standing concerns over market abuse. However, the EU’s recent annulment of a €1.5 billion penalty displays potential cracks in its rigorous enforcement. U.S. authorities are pursuing structural remedies, with the Department of Justice (DOJ) advocating for a breakup of Google’s ad technology empire and aiming to issue a plan to reduce Google’s power, as well as imposing hefty fines.

The EU’s antitrust case against Google began in 2009 when Shivaun and Adam Raff founded a price comparison site called Foundem. Unbeknownst to them, Google had moved their website far down in search results due to a spam filter. As a result, their site, which relied on collecting fees when customers clicked on product listings leading to other websites, generated little revenue. This would mark the beginning of a 15-year legal battle against Google for abusing market dominance, ultimately resulting in a £2 billion fine.

In 2019, another antitrust case was opened in the EU, in which the European Commission imposed a €1.5 billion fine on the tech giant for alleged anticompetitive practices related to its AdSense advertising platform. The Commission claimed that Google had manipulated its contracts with publishers, ensuring preferential treatment for its own search engine and blocking competition. The case stemmed from complaints by major publishers like Axel Springer, which argued that Google’s control over the advertising market hindered innovation. Not only did they hold a monopoly in the search business, but they also dominated the advertisement industry. This was due to their acquisition of companies such as DoubleClick and Invite Media, which acted as intermediaries for companies buying and selling ad space. Through this control, Google imposed fees and extra costs, raising prices for both consumers and producers while increasing its own profits.

In a landmark ruling in November 2023, the General Court annulled the fine, citing errors in the Commission’s initial assessment. The court ruled that Google’s practices had not resulted in significant harm to competition or consumers. Despite this win for Google, the European Commission has stated that it is considering appealing the decision to the EU Court of Justice. This ruling marks a critical moment in the ongoing scrutiny of Google’s market dominance in Europe, where regulators are increasingly focused on curbing the influence of Big Tech. Google, which had already made changes to its contracts as early as 2016 in response to concerns, hailed the decision, emphasising its efforts to adjust its business practices. However, the case is far from over, as the Commission’s ongoing investigations—including those into Google’s dominance in search advertising and other sectors—continue to weigh heavily on the company’s operations across the continent.

The U.S. government’s first antitrust case against Google, initiated by the DOJ in 2020, centres on allegations of monopolistic practices in the online search sector. The DOJ accused Google of controlling markets and utilising its dominance to become the world’s default search engine. The case progressed with a trial in September 2023, where the DOJ sought a ruling to break up Google’s online search empire, aiming to force the company to sell Chrome. Throughout the trial, the DOJ emphasised that Google had manipulated the rules to keep competitors at bay, displaying anticompetitive conduct. Closing arguments in November 2023 pushed for accountability, with the DOJ arguing that Google’s practices were anticompetitive and harmed innovation.

In August, a federal judge ruled that Google holds an illegal monopoly in the search market, citing $26 billion in payments made in 2021 to companies such as Apple, Samsung, and others to become the primary search engine on their devices—just one example of Google’s market abuse. In September 2024, the DOJ opened a second antitrust case against Google, this time targeting its advertisement monopoly. They are being tried on the same premise as the EU case: that they bought publisher ad servers, advertiser ad networks, and ad exchanges to control the medium through which ad space transactions occurred, thereby unfairly charging fees and stifling competition. However, the DOJ would not settle for just a series of hefty fines.

The DOJ’s proposed remedies in its two antitrust cases against Google are designed to disrupt its monopoly control over search and search advertising. One of the most striking proposals is the forced sale of Google’s Chrome browser, which the DOJ argues gives Google a significant advantage by funnelling users to its search engine. This sale, along with a requirement to spin off the Chromium open-source project, could reduce Google’s ability to maintain its dominant position. Additionally, the DOJ seeks to make Google syndicate its search results, ranking signals, and query data to competitors at a marginal cost, potentially levelling the playing field. The DOJ also wants to prevent Google from using its platforms to unfairly promote its own search engine, such as making Google Search the default on Android or integrating it into other Google-owned apps.

These remedies aim to foster greater competition, but they could have significant implications for Google’s business model, potentially reducing its advertising revenue and diminishing its competitive edge in the search market.