Why Europe’s Big Tech Crackdown Could Trigger a US Trade War

Brussels is doubling down on tech enforcement just as Washington’s antitrust drive falters. The result could reshape global technology — but only if Europe survives the coming trade war.

QUICK ANSWER

What’s happening? The EU is intensifying its crackdown on Big Tech in 2026, having fined Google €2.95 billion, Apple €500 million, Meta €200 million and X €120 million in 2025 under the Digital Markets Act and Digital Services Act. Meanwhile, US antitrust efforts are faltering, with judges reluctant to break up tech giants despite landmark monopoly rulings. The Trump administration has threatened tariffs and trade retaliation, calling EU actions “discriminatory” against American companies. Brussels refuses to back down, setting up a potential trade war over who controls the rules governing global technology.

Two Strategies, One Target

The irony is stark. Both sides of the Atlantic are trying to rein in the same handful of technology giants — Google, Apple, Meta, Microsoft and Amazon. But they are pursuing radically different strategies, and increasingly viewing each other as the enemy.

In Brussels, the approach is preemptive regulation. The Digital Markets Act designates “gatekeepers” and imposes obligations upfront: allow app sideloading, enable interoperability, stop self-preferencing. Violations trigger automatic fines of up to 20% of global turnover. Over 60 antitrust cases have been brought against US tech companies across Europe, with national authorities in France, Germany and Italy particularly active.

In Washington, the strategy is structural breakups through traditional antitrust litigation. The Department of Justice wants to split Google’s ad tech business and force the company to divest Chrome. Prosecutors have won landmark rulings that tech companies maintain illegal monopolies. But when it comes to remedies, American judges are proving reluctant to wield the scalpel.

“U.S. federal enforcers have over the past year struggled to convince judges to order tech groups to spin off large parts of their businesses,” notes the Irish Times. The monopoly cases against Apple and Amazon remain pending, but the government’s approach to breaking up tech giants is increasingly in question.

Europe’s Moment of Maximum Leverage

This divergence creates an unprecedented opportunity for European regulatory leadership. While the US struggles with lengthy litigation and judicial reluctance, Europe’s administrative approach can deliver faster results. The Digital Markets Act allows the European Commission to impose binding obligations within months, not years.

The numbers tell the story. 2025 saw a record number of antitrust decisions against tech companies in Europe. The Commission has opened new investigations into whether Meta blocks competing AI developers from using WhatsApp, and how Google uses online content to train its AI systems. Cloud computing competition is under fresh scrutiny.

“The enforcement of EU digital regulations has been made more challenging by the aggressive stance taken by the US administration,” admits antitrust lawyer Damien Geradin, “but when it comes to enforcing its digital rules, there is pay-off to moving forward and achieving outcomes that benefit the European people and business users.”

This regulatory assertiveness comes at a crucial time for European competitiveness. Unlike previous generations of American industrial dominance in steel or automobiles, Big Tech’s power rests on network effects and data advantages that can be directly addressed through regulation. Europe cannot out-innovate Silicon Valley in venture capital or risk-taking, but it can level the playing field through rules.

The Trump Factor

But Europe’s regulatory moment coincides with maximum American resistance. The Trump administration has explicitly framed EU tech rules as economic warfare, threatening tariffs in retaliation for enforcement actions. After the €120 million fine against X for transparency violations, US officials banned former EU Commissioner Thierry Breton from entering America over “censorship” claims.

“The European Union must stop this practice against American Companies, IMMEDIATELY!” Trump wrote after the Google antitrust fine, calling it “discriminatory” and “unfair.” US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer has threatened European tech companies including SAP, Spotify and Mistral with “fees or restrictions” unless Brussels backs down.

The tech companies themselves are pushing back with fierce lobbying on both sides of the Atlantic. Google says EU AI investigations “risk stifling innovation.” Apple has demanded Brussels scrap the Digital Markets Act entirely. Meta accuses the Commission of trying to “handicap successful American business while allowing Chinese and European companies to operate under different standards.”

Geopolitical pressure has emboldened the companies to fight regulations they previously accepted as inevitable.

Europe’s Choice

Brussels faces a stark choice. Cave to American pressure and abandon the regulatory framework that took years to build — or stand firm and risk a trade war that could devastate European exporters.

So far, EU Competition Commissioner Teresa Ribera has chosen confrontation. “We won’t scrap regulations because they inconvenience Silicon Valley,” she told the Financial Times. European officials argue they are exercising the same sovereign right to regulate markets that the US has long claimed for itself.

The stakes extend far beyond tech regulation. If Europe yields to external pressure on its core policy priorities, it signals weakness that could invite challenges across energy security, defense, and trade. “Caving to internal or external pressure on enforcement would be a disaster for the European economy,” warns Mario Marinello of the Brussels-based think tank Bruegel.

But the risks are real. A trade war with America could devastate European automotive and aerospace exports just as companies are struggling with Asian competition and economic uncertainty.

The New Tech Cold War

What emerges is a new form of technological competition — not just between companies, but between regulatory models. Europe’s rules-based approach versus America’s litigation-heavy system. Brussels’ focus on structural remedies versus Washington’s preference for behavioral commitments.

The ultimate irony is that both approaches share the same goal: preventing a handful of tech giants from accumulating unchecked power. But instead of cooperation, we see regulatory nationalism. Instead of coordinated action against monopolies, we see trade threats and diplomatic sanctions.

The winners, as always when enforcers fight each other, may be the very companies both sides are trying to regulated.