Tech fines in European Union

This is a state-aid recovery, not a fine. The Commission ordered Apple to repay illegal tax benefits granted by Ireland, which produced effective tax rates as low as 0.005%. After being annulled in 2020, the order was reinstated by the EU's top court in 2024.

The Commission ruled that Google required phone makers to pre-install Search and Chrome as a condition of licensing the Play Store, paid manufacturers for exclusivity, and blocked forked versions of Android. It remains the largest antitrust fine the EU has issued.

The Commission found that Google abused its dominance across the advertising-technology stack by favouring its own ad exchange (AdX) in both its publisher ad server and its ad-buying tools, a conflict of interest across the chain.

The European Commission found that Google abused its search dominance by systematically placing its own comparison-shopping service at the top of results while demoting rival services.

Following a Spotify complaint, the Commission found that Apple banned music apps from telling iPhone users about cheaper subscription options available outside the App Store.

The Commission fined Google for imposing clauses on websites using AdSense for Search that blocked them from displaying rival search ads. In September 2024 the EU General Court annulled the decision, and the Commission has appealed to the Court of Justice.

The European Commission found that Google gave its own shopping, hotel, transport, and sports results preferential ranking over third-party services in Google Search, and separately blocked Android app developers from telling users about cheaper purchase options outside Google Play. The €890M total splits into €460M for the search conduct and €430M for the Play Store conduct.

The Commission penalised Microsoft for charging unreasonable royalties for the interoperability information required by the 2004 decision. On appeal the penalty was trimmed to €860M.

The European Commission found that Meta tied Facebook Marketplace to its social network and imposed unfair conditions on rival online-classifieds services.

The European Commission found that AliExpress fell short of its duty to diligently assess the risk of illegal, unsafe and counterfeit products spreading on its marketplace, and failed to take effective measures to reduce that risk. It is the largest fine issued under the Digital Services Act so far.

The Commission fined Microsoft for breaking a legally binding commitment to show Windows users a browser-choice screen, which silently disappeared for roughly 15 million users. It was the first EU fine for breaching commitments.

In the first Digital Markets Act fine against Apple, the Commission found that Apple prevented developers from freely informing users about, and directing them to, cheaper purchasing options outside the App Store.

In a landmark case, the Commission found that Microsoft abused its Windows dominance by bundling Media Player and withholding interoperability information from rival server-software makers.

The Commission imposed a periodic penalty for Microsoft's failure to comply with the 2004 decision, specifically for not supplying complete interoperability information on reasonable terms.

The Commission ordered Luxembourg to recover tax advantages from Amazon, but EU courts annulled the decision, a ruling made final in 2023. It is included for completeness given its prominence.

The European Commission found that Temu failed to diligently identify, analyse and assess the systemic risk of illegal products being sold to EU consumers on its marketplace. Its 2024 risk assessment relied on general information about e-commerce rather than evidence specific to Temu, understated how often consumers would meet illegal items, and did not assess how recommender systems and influencer programmes could spread them.

In one of the first Digital Markets Act fines, the Commission found that Meta's pay-or-consent model forced Facebook and Instagram users to either pay a subscription or accept full data combination for personalised ads, without a genuine less-data alternative. Meta adjusted the model after the decision.

The European Commission found three transparency breaches at X: the paid blue checkmark deceives users because anyone can buy verified status without being verified, the advertising repository is neither searchable nor complete, and researchers are blocked from the public data the DSA requires platforms to share.