Trump administration threatens EU with retaliation over DMA

The EU is once again facing intense criticism from the US. The trigger is the consistent enforcement of the Digital Markets Act and the Digital Services Act against large US tech companies. The Trump administration accuses the European Union of deliberately disadvantaging American firms and is now openly threatening retaliatory measures. The conflict affects not only individual companies, but also the fundamental direction of digital regulation and the economic relationship between the US and the EU.

For years, the EU has pursued the goal of more strictly regulating dominant digital corporations. The Digital Market Authority (DMA) and the Digital Securities Act (DSA) are the central instruments for this. In the US, however, the impression is growing that these laws serve less to protect consumers and primarily target large American providers. The current escalation demonstrates how deep the divide has become and how quickly regulatory policy can turn into a full-blown trade dispute.

Public threats from Washington

The Office of the United States Trade Representative has issued a stark warning to the EU via social media. Should Brussels continue to take action against US companies, countermeasures will be unavoidable. Possible fees and restrictions on foreign services were explicitly mentioned.

Specific European companies were mentioned, including Accenture, DHL, Mistral, SAP, Spotify, and Siemens. The message is clear: the US is prepared to specifically target European service providers if the EU persists in enforcing the DMA and DSA.

Allegations against the EU and its member states

From the US government's perspective, the EU and individual member states have, for years, implemented discriminatory and bullying measures against American service providers. These include lawsuits, special taxes, high fines, and regulatory requirements that primarily affect US companies.

At the same time, it is emphasized that US service companies offer numerous free services to European citizens and provide European businesses with essential business solutions. Furthermore, they secure millions of jobs in Europe and have made direct investments of more than $100 billion. Washington criticizes the fact that these aspects are barely considered in the EU debate and that, despite repeated appeals, there has been no serious dialogue.

Threat of specific countermeasures

Should the EU continue to take measures that restrict the competitiveness of American service providers, the US says it sees no alternative to countermeasures. US law allows, among other things, the imposition of fees or restrictions on foreign services in such cases.

The Trump administration also made it clear that this approach is not limited to the EU. Other countries that introduce similar regulatory models based on the EU example could expect comparable reactions in the future.

Consequences of DMA and DSA for US tech companies

The Digital Markets Act and the Digital Services Act have already had a noticeable impact on the EU market. Apple, Google, Meta, and other large tech companies have had to fundamentally adapt their services in Europe.

At the beginning of the year, Apple was fined €500 million, and Meta €200 million. More recently, the social network X received a €120 million fine for violations of the Data Security Agreement (DSA). Back in September, Google was fined €2.95 billion for antitrust violations related to its adtech business.

Criticism in the US House of Representatives

Parallel to the government's announcements, a hearing was held in the Judiciary Committee of the US House of Representatives. The topic was the threat that discriminatory foreign regulations modeled on the DMA pose to innovation and competition in the USA.

Witnesses included Shanker Singham, CEO of Competere Ltd., law professor Roger Alford from the University of Notre Dame, Aurelien Portuese from the George Washington Competition and Innovation Lab, and Dirk Auer from the International Center for Law and Economics.

During the hearing, Representative Scott Fitzgerald stated that the DMA does not serve to protect consumers. It does not address the question of actual harm or corporate misconduct. Rather, the decisive factor is whether a company is large, successful, and American. In that case, established business practices are prohibited, innovations are classified as a threat, and foreign competitors gain access to data and technologies they themselves never developed or acquired.

Allegations of discrimination

Business associations also voiced sharp criticism. The Computer and Communications Industry Association described the DMA as discriminatory, as it only applies to selected companies. NetChoice stated that the EU, with its legislation, had provided a blueprint for similar regulatory measures worldwide.

Unlike traditional antitrust and competition laws, which apply to all market participants, DMA prohibitions target only specific companies. Critics argue that this creates unequal treatment, giving unnamed, often foreign, competitors an unfair competitive advantage over named American companies.

Trump's stance on the EU

President Donald Trump has repeatedly criticized the EU publicly, calling it very unfair, particularly because of the high fines imposed on Apple and Google. In September, he threatened higher tariffs, which would jeopardize the trade agreement between the US and the EU signed in July 2025.

Trump declared that Apple should get its money back, stressing that the US could not allow American inventiveness to be hampered by European regulation.

Growing tensions between the US and the EU

The conflict between the US and the EU over the Digital Market Access Act (DMA) and the Digital Securities Act (DSA) has escalated significantly. What began as the regulation of digital markets is increasingly developing into a geopolitical and economic dispute. The EU defends its digital laws as necessary for fair competition, while the US sees them as a deliberate disadvantage for American companies. Should the announced retaliatory measures be implemented, transatlantic relations could be permanently damaged. Further developments depend on whether both sides succeed in separating regulation and trade again, or whether the conflict escalates further. (Image: tomwang / DepositPhotos.com)