A new report casts light on several European Union regulations wielded to disproportionately harm U.S. companies and consumers and urges the Trump administration to take broad action against them.
As tensions with the EU remain high over President Donald Trump‘s recent moves to acquire Greenland, Consumers Defense released a report giving the president more ammunition for his grievances against the 27-nation bloc. The report, “Fines for Thee, Not for Me: How EU Digital Policies are Targeting Americans,” highlights regulations disproportionately targeting U.S. companies while letting China off the hook, hidden taxes targeting U.S. companies, and EU censorship having a chilling effect on U.S. speech.
The EU justifies the tech laws under “digital sovereignty” but shows an obvious double standard in its implementation, the report suggests.
“The European Union is attempting to achieve so-called ‘digital sovereignty’ by implementing laws and
regulations regarding data privacy, cybersecurity, and digital transactions, each specifically designed to break American dominance in technology. These protectionist schemes are tailored specifically to target large companies, which are almost exclusively American, rather than smaller European companies — or even Chinese competitors,” the report says.
Some of the worst offenders are the Digital Markets Act, the Digital Services Act, and the data privacy rules known as the “General Data Protection Regulation.” The report found that 16 of 25 platforms subject to the DSA’s most cumbersome requirements are based in the United States.
Worse yet, other regulatory proposals targeting or disproportionately affecting U.S. tech companies are in the works. France, Spain, and Italy have backed proposals to enact “Fair Share” fees, which charge large digital content producers a fee to support Europe-based telecom companies that provide access to their content. The Digital Network Act is also set to enact increasing burdens through network fees, IP dispute resolution, and other protectionist measures.
Many EU figures have been open about their targeting of U.S. companies, with one of the most prominent MEPs calling for regulations solely targeting the top U.S. tech companies.
The culminating effect is to discourage investment and harm both American and EU workers through exorbitant fines.
“Altogether, EU legislation targeting digital service platforms could lead to an accumulated loss of $2.2 trillion in digital services revenue and $325 billion in R&D for U.S. companies by 2030. For Europe, this means delays in the rollout of new tech, such as AI applications. EU regulations like DMA played a role in Microsoft’s decision to delay the launch of Copilot in the EU for six months after its U.S. launch, a decision estimated to cost the company as much as $2.3 billion in revenues,” the report says.
In a statement, Consumers Defense Executive Director Sal Nuzzo urged the Trump administration to use every means at its disposal to put an end to the EU’s regulatory targeting of the U.S.
“European tech thrives in America’s open market, but U.S. innovators are smothered by EU regulations abroad. This double standard hurts American competitiveness, opens the door to Communist China, and undermines shared security. The Trump administration should use every trade and enforcement tool to stop Europe from taxing, regulating, and censoring U.S. companies,” he said.
EUROPEANS WOULD BE BETTER OFF IF THEY HAD LISTENED TO TRUMP
Public Policy Solutions President Joe Grogan argued that the practices have little to do with digital “sovereignty” but are really a means of using punitive trade policies to target their most important strategic ally.
“U.S. tech firms lead globally because we cultivate a system of innovation,” he said. “Unfortunately, European countries are increasingly seeking to throw up barriers to U.S. tech companies while extracting billions of dollars to subsidize domestic competitors. Now, they are exporting their model to Latin America. At the same time, they’re opening the door to CCP-connected firms, creating what is both a threat to their trading relationship with the United States and a national security risk of epic proportions.”