EU imposes another billion-euro fine on Google in the adtech business
Xpert pre-release
Language selection 📢
Published on: September 5, 2025 / Updated on: September 5, 2025 – Author: Konrad Wolfenstein
EU imposes another billion-euro fine on Google in the adtech business – Image: Xpert.Digital
Google's expensive ongoing dispute with the EU: Now comes the next billion-dollar fine
Adtech monopoly? The EU is harshly punishing Google's controversial advertising business
The European Union has imposed another billion-euro fine on tech giant Google. This decision marks the latest step in a years-long dispute between the EU Commission and the US internet giant and underscores Europe's determination to regulate the power of big tech companies.
Suitable for:
The new penalty in the advertising business
The European Commission imposed a fine of €2.95 billion on Google for violating competition rules in the online advertising business. The central allegation is that the US company favored its own online advertising services to the detriment of competing providers. These practices are considered abusive in the field of online advertising technology.
The penalty is specifically aimed at Google's conduct in the so-called adtech industry, a sector that lies at the heart of the modern internet business model. This is the technology used to automatically deliver and display billions of advertisements every day. Google is accused of exploiting its dominant market position in this sector to systematically disadvantage competitors.
The Commission also called on Google to stop its self-favoring practices and take measures to prevent conflicts of interest along the advertising technology supply chain. Google immediately announced its intention to challenge this unjustified penalty.
Historical development of EU antitrust proceedings against Google
This latest penalty is part of a series of antitrust proceedings that the EU Commission has been conducting against Google for years. These disputes began in 2010 and have developed into one of the most significant antitrust battles of the digital era.
It all began in 2017 with a record fine of €2.42 billion for Google's shopping service. The EU Commission found that Google favored its own price comparison service, Google Shopping, in search results and discriminated against competing providers. Specifically, Google presented its own service's results at the top with images and highlighted information, while competing services appeared only as simple blue links further down.
In 2018, the highest single fine to date of €4.34 billion was imposed on the Android operating system. Google was accused of imposing unlawful restrictions on Android device manufacturers. The company required device manufacturers to pre-install Google's search engine and the Chrome browser if they wanted access to the Play Store. In addition, Google prevented manufacturers from selling devices with alternative versions of Android.
In 2019, another fine of €1.49 billion was imposed. This concerned the advertising service AdSense for Search, where Google allegedly unlawfully placed obstacles in the way of other providers.
The EU Commission has already imposed a total of more than eight billion euros in fines on Google. This sum makes Google one of the companies most severely hit by EU antitrust fines in history.
Legal basis of EU antitrust law
The legal basis for these procedures can be found in Articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. Article 101 prohibits restrictive agreements between companies, while Article 102 prohibits the abuse of a dominant market position.
European antitrust law primarily serves to protect the internal market from restrictions and obstructions caused by collusion or abuse of power. Its purpose is to protect interstate trade within the EU from impairments that are detrimental to the realization of the objectives of a single market.
Article 102 specifically covers conduct by dominant undertakings aimed at eliminating competitors or making market entry more difficult. A dominant position in itself is not illegal, but only its abuse. Dominant undertakings have a special responsibility not to abuse their strong position through anti-competitive practices.
The fines can amount to up to ten percent of the affected company's global annual revenue. For Google, with annual revenue of over $350 billion, significantly higher penalties would theoretically have been possible.
The role of Margrethe Vestager
A central figure in these proceedings was the Danish EU Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager, who held the office from 2014 to 2024. Vestager became one of the most well-known EU politicians and was nicknamed "Google Scare" due to her consistent stance against large technology companies.
In addition to leading the proceedings against Google, Vestager also conducted antitrust proceedings against other tech giants such as Apple, Amazon, and Meta. Under her leadership, the EU Commission imposed billions in fines and established Europe as a key regulatory hub for the global technology industry.
Her approach was characterized by the conviction that even the world's most powerful companies must be subject to European competition rules. Vestager repeatedly emphasized that Europe must protect its values and its internal market from unfair practices, even if this leads to conflicts with influential US companies.
After leaving the EU Commission, Vestager's work was widely acclaimed as groundbreaking for international tech regulation. She demonstrated that European regulators are fully capable of countering the power of the largest technology companies.
Google's financial situation and response to the penalties
Despite the heavy fines, Google appears financially unfazed. The Alphabet Corporation, which owns Google, achieved net profits exceeding $100 billion for the first time in 2024. With total revenue of $350 billion, even billion-dollar fines represent only a fraction of the company's profits.
The majority of the group's revenue continues to come from its advertising business, which generated revenues of over $240 billion in 2024. The cloud business is growing at 30 percent annually and reached revenues of $48 billion. This strong financial position allows Google to absorb the EU fines without fundamental changes to its business model.
Google regularly challenges EU rulings in court. In some cases, these appeals have been unsuccessful, such as the Google Shopping decision, which was finally upheld by the European Court of Justice in 2024. In other cases, such as the Android case, Google has been able to obtain at least a slight reduction in the fine.
Our recommendation: 🌍 Limitless reach 🔗 Networked 🌐 Multilingual 💪 Strong sales: 💡 Authentic with strategy 🚀 Innovation meets 🧠 Intuition
From local to global: SMEs conquer the global market with clever strategies - Image: Xpert.Digital
At a time when a company's digital presence determines its success, the challenge is how to make this presence authentic, individual and far-reaching. Xpert.Digital offers an innovative solution that positions itself as an intersection between an industry hub, a blog and a brand ambassador. It combines the advantages of communication and sales channels in a single platform and enables publication in 18 different languages. The cooperation with partner portals and the possibility of publishing articles on Google News and a press distribution list with around 8,000 journalists and readers maximize the reach and visibility of the content. This represents an essential factor in external sales & marketing (SMarketing).
More about it here:
Ad Tech in the Crosshairs: Why Courts View Google as a Monopoly
International developments and US procedures
In parallel with the European proceedings, Google is also facing increasing antitrust problems in the US. US courts have already classified Google as a monopolist in several cases, particularly in the areas of search engines and advertising technology.
A US federal court in Virginia found that Google has established an illegal monopoly in advertising technology. Specifically, it is concerned with the so-called Ad Tech Stack, a technology package valued at approximately $31 billion that automatically controls which banner ads are displayed where on the internet. Google controls both the platforms for advertisers and those for publishers, which leads to conflicts of interest.
In another case, Google was found guilty of manipulating the search engine market. This involved, among other things, paying Apple billions to ensure that the company placed Google Search prominently on its devices. The US Department of Justice even temporarily demanded that the Chrome browser be forked off, but a court rejected this request.
Suitable for:
The Digital Markets Act and new regulatory approaches
With the Digital Markets Act, the EU introduced a new regulatory instrument in 2024 that specifically targets the power of large digital platforms. This law designates particularly powerful platforms as gatekeepers and subjects them to specific obligations.
Google is one of the six designated gatekeepers, along with Apple, Meta, Amazon, Microsoft, and ByteDance. The DMA requires these companies to provide third parties with fair and non-discriminatory access to their platforms and enable interoperability with competing services.
The first enforcement actions under the DMA already demonstrated the EU Commission's commitment to consistently applying the new law. Apple and Meta received the first fines for violations of the DMA in 2025. Apple was fined €500 million for not allowing app developers to redirect users to alternative offerings outside the App Store. Meta received a €200 million fine for its consent-or-pay model.
Impact on the advertising market and the digital economy
The ongoing antitrust proceedings against Google have already led to changes in the digital advertising market. Google has been forced to adapt various business practices and grant competitors greater access to its platforms. However, the fundamental market structures remain largely unchanged.
The advertising technology market remains highly concentrated, with Google continuing to hold a dominant position. Critics argue that the current penalties and regulations are insufficient to create real competition. They call for more structural interventions, such as the separation of different business units or mandatory data portability.
Publishers and advertisers report that they remain heavily dependent on Google's infrastructure. While alternative advertising platforms have gained traction, they still can't match the reach and efficiency of Google's system.
Global regulatory trends
The EU proceedings against Google have had an international impact. Other jurisdictions have initiated similar investigations or tightened existing antitrust laws. The United Kingdom, Australia, and several other countries have developed specific regulations for digital markets.
This development is leading to increasing fragmentation of global digital regulation. Technology companies must adapt to different regional regulatory frameworks, making their business models more complex. At the same time, competition is emerging between different regulatory approaches.
The United States has traditionally pursued a more market-friendly approach, but has recently shown a willingness to intervene more aggressively. This could lead to a convergence of transatlantic regulatory approaches, although different priorities remain.
Technological and economic challenges
Regulating technology companies like Google faces significant challenges. The complexity of digital markets makes it difficult to assess the impact of certain business practices. Furthermore, technologies are evolving faster than regulators can respond.
Artificial intelligence and machine learning are changing the way advertising is displayed and search results are generated. These developments create new opportunities for anti-competitive behavior, but at the same time, they are difficult to regulate because they are often based on complex algorithms that are difficult even for experts to understand.
The General Data Protection Regulation and other data protection laws are already impacting the advertising industry's business models. The combination of antitrust law and data protection regulations could lead to further changes and favor new business models that rely less on the collection of personal data.
Google between compliance, lobbying and impending structural reforms
The dispute between the EU and Google is likely to continue. Further proceedings are pending, and new complaints are being filed regularly. The EU Commission, under the new Competition Commissioner Teresa Ribera, is hinting at a somewhat different approach, placing greater emphasis on ending anti-competitive practices than on hefty fines.
Google will need to further adapt its legal strategies to meet both European and US requirements. The company is already investing significantly in compliance programs and legal representation. At the same time, it is trying to influence the regulatory agenda through lobbying and public communication.
The long-term effects of the antitrust proceedings could be significant. If structural reforms are implemented, this could change the entire ecosystem of the digital advertising market. New players could emerge, and existing business models would have to be reconsidered.
This development demonstrates that Europe is willing to use its regulatory power to shape the digital economy according to its vision. This could make Europe an important standard-setter for global digital regulation and serve as a model for other jurisdictions. At the same time, there is the challenge of not hindering innovation and strengthening the competitiveness of European companies.
Your global marketing and business development partner
☑️ Our business language is English or German
☑️ NEW: Correspondence in your national language!
Konrad Wolfenstein
I would be happy to serve you and my team as a personal advisor.
You can contact me by filling out the contact form or simply call me on +49 89 89 674 804 (Munich) . My email address is: wolfenstein ∂ xpert.digital
I'm looking forward to our joint project.
