Google must pay 2.95 billion euros for using its dominant online advertising technology to stifle competition in the sector. The European Commission ordered it to explain how it will remedy “inherent conflicts of interest” in its adtech business within 60 days, with asset sales an option. The decision was adopted today at the second attempt, after an earlier effort on Monday was blocked over EU-US trade sensitivities. Google said it would appeal the “unjustified fine.”
Google must pay 2.95 billion euros (around $3.45 billion) for using its dominant online advertising technology to stifle competition in the sector.The European Commission gave it 60 days to explain how it would stop giving its own services an unfair advantage, ordering it to remedy “inherent conflicts of interest” in its adtech supply chain. It believes asset sales are an option, but wants to give Google the chance to propose a remedy first.
The abuse centers on Google’s presence on both sides of the industry that matches publishers and advertisers in placing ads online. In formal charges in July 2024, the commission said Google’s conflict of interest could only be solved through a forced asset sale.
Today it concluded the probe, saying Google’s illegal conduct had started in 2014 and was ongoing today (see here).
The fine was adopted at the second attempt, after an earlier effort on Monday was blocked over EU-US trade sensitivities. EU trade commissioner Maroš Šefčovič had opposed the decision and the US Department of Justice had written to the commission seeking a delay (see here).
With a fine of 2.95 billion euros, the sanction falls short of the highest sanction — 4.3 billion euros — imposed on Google’s Android operating system, but it exceeds the 2.42 billion-euro fine imposed on Google’s search engine. Today’s sanction is just over 0.9 percent of Google’s worldwide group turnover, and was increased by 60 percent due to the company being a repeat offender.
— Adtech markets —
The case focuses on Google’s dominance of the markets for publisher ad servers and ad-buying tools for advertisers. The commission believes this has favored Google’s own ad exchange.
Google offers publishers an ad server called DFP, where websites such as newspapers can offer their online real estate to bidders. On the other side, advertisers can bid to buy such space through the tools Google Ads and DV360. In the middle is the Google exchange AdX.
Today, the commission said Google had “intentionally” given AdX an advantage and this had “reinforced AdX's central role in the adtech supply chain, as well as Google's ability to charge a high fee for its service.”
EU competition commissioner Teresa Ribera said: "Today’s decision shows that Google abused its dominant position in adtech harming publishers, advertisers, and consumers. This behavior is illegal under EU antitrust rules. Google must now come forward with a serious remedy to address its conflicts of interest, and if it fails to do so, we will not hesitate to impose strong remedies."
Lee-Anne Mulholland, Vice President, Global Head of Regulatory Affairs, Google, said: “The European Commission's decision about our ad tech services is wrong and we will appeal.”
“It imposes an unjustified fine and requires changes that will hurt thousands of European businesses by making it harder for them to make money. There’s nothing anticompetitive in providing services for ad buyers and sellers, and there are more alternatives to our services than ever before.”
— Remedy —
The regulator stopped short of ordering an asset divestment itself — such as DFP and AdX — but it said Google needed to “implement measures to cease its inherent conflicts of interest along the adtech supply chain.”
The company must make a proposal within 60 days, and then the commission will see if the remedies go far enough.
“Should they not, subject to Google's right to be heard, the commission will proceed to impose an appropriate remedy,” a press statement said, noting the commission's view that “only the divestment by Google of part of its services would address the situation.”
US antitrust enforcers have filed similar allegations against Google, which were largely upheld by a US judge who is holding hearings this month on how to fix the problem (see here).
Please email editors@mlex.com to contact the editorial staff regarding this story, or to submit the names of lawyers and advisers.