US: “EU Must Prove that Digital Rules Don’T Penalize US Firms”

The US wants the EU to prove that regulations such as the DSA and DMA do not penalize American tech companies. Otherwise, they should be changed, it says.

Speaking through ambassador Andrew Puzder, the US is pressuring the European Union’s sovereignty. The ambassador to the EU wants Europe to demonstrate that its digital rules do not punish American tech companies or infringe on their right to free speech. Otherwise, according to Puzder, they must be adjusted to ensure a good relationship between the US and the EU in the future.

“Europeans believe that the rules are less restrictive and less targeted than the US thinks. I believe we should sit down together and carefully go through the rules to ensure they don’t penalize US interests,” Puzder told the Financial Times.

Intent to Cause Harm

“Although the legislation may look neutral at first glance, I think that when the intent is to cause economic harm to competitors outside Europe or to help European companies, that’s something the US would strongly protest,” he clarified.

Since President Donald Trump took office, the US has unilaterally scrapped existing trade agreements and replaced them with hefty import tariffs. Trump does this to stimulate the American economy and help US businesses. European goods are subject to a base import tariff of fifteen percent. Trump justifies these tariffs by claiming there is a large trade deficit to the detriment of the US, but that imbalance only exists if services such as those from Big Tech are not counted.

Terms and Responsibility

The DSA and DMA impose conditions on large tech companies serving the European market. The EU curbs monopolistic practices, for example. It is not permitted to hold a large market share in smartphones—like Apple with the iPhone—and then artificially lock down the software ecosystem so that competition on the iOS platform must always pass through Apple’s checkout.

The rules also impose responsibilities regarding the spread of misleading content, fake news, and fraud. According to the US, that runs counter to its definition of free speech, although across the ocean that concept seems rather selective and, in any case, has limited legal weight in the EU.

“Good Deal”

“Europe can pass legislation as it sees fit,” Puzder adds. “But I think it would be good if we understood each other’s points before things go too far.” That sounds milder than reality: the administration Puzder represents believes the intent behind the DMA and DSA is unfair and threatens both additional import duties and targeted personal sanctions when the rules are enforced.

“In my view, the EU is getting a good deal,” Puzder adds, referring to the arrangement under which European goods are subject to fifteen percent import duties, the EU signals a massive intent to purchase energy, waters down green ambitions, and overall should mainly be happy that the tariffs aren’t higher.

Consistent Pushback

Puzder took office this month as US ambassador to the EU under Trump. It’s no surprise that he publicly opposes the DMA and DSA, as they’ve been a thorn in America’s side since their rollout. Although the rules do not specifically target US companies, and European companies are also being investigated, it is true that Apple, Google, X, Meta, and Microsoft face most of the strict rules due to their dominant market share.

The European Commission is currently conducting a consultation round on simplifying its rules. On the sidelines of that process, a tsunami of lobbying is washing into Brussels via the Zenne. The US is throwing its diplomatic weight behind it, and tech companies are vigorously protesting as well. For instance, Apple—known as a notoriously strict gatekeeper of its own ecosystem—deemed it necessary to again publicly oppose the rules, using the unspecified argument of “bad for the consumer.”