BRUSSELS — Meta has formally committed to offering EU users a new “third alternative” for advertising on Facebook and Instagram, as it seeks to resolve a high-stakes investigation under the Digital Markets Act. The European Commission announced on Monday that, following a dialogue, the Facebook parent would introduce a “hybrid approach” whereby users can opt for a free service driven by less personalized data. This new model is intended to break the binary choice currently facing users: either consent to full tracking or pay for a subscription. “This is very positive news for consumers in the EU,” said Commission spokesperson Thomas Regnier, noting that the new option — described as a gray zone between full consent and a paywall — is slated for rollout in January 2026. A Meta spokesperson acknowledged the Commission’s statement while defending the economic importance of its data practices. “Personalized ads are vital for Europe’s economy,” the spokesperson said. The main EU consumer lobby group gave a guarded welcome. “We will be very closely analysing what Meta puts out in January, given that it has failed since November 2023 to provide consumers with a fair choice on ads that complies with the law,” said Agustín Reyna, director-general of the European Consumer Organisation (BEUC). The Commission has been in discussions with Meta ever since it issued the U.S. firm with a €200 million fine in April for non-compliance with the Digital Markets Act, which regulates large online platforms. The Commission will now watch closely to monitor the changes, said Regnier, adding that the case is not yet closed. This story has been updated.

LISBON — Ursula von der Leyen’s European Commission should continue to enforce its digital rules with an iron fist despite the outcry from U.S. officials and big tech moguls, co-chair of the Greens in the European Parliament Bas Eickhout told POLITICO. As Green politicians from across Europe gather in the Portuguese capital for their annual congress, U.S. top officials are blasting the EU for imposing a penalty on social media platform X for breaching its transparency obligations under the EU’s Digital Services Act, the bloc’s content moderation rule book. “They should just implement the law, which means they need to be tougher,” Eickhout told POLITICO on the sidelines of the event. He argued that the fine of €120 million is “nothing” for billionaire Elon Musk and that the EU executive should go further. The Commission needs to “make clear that we should be proud of our policies … we are the only ones fighting American Big Tech,” he said, adding that tech companies are “killing freedom of speech in Europe.” The Greens have in the past denounced Meta and X over their content moderation policies, arguing these platforms amplify “disinformation” and “extremism” and interfere in European electoral processes. Meta and X did not reply to a request for comment by the time of publication. Meta has “introduced changes to our content reporting options, appeals process and data access tools since the DSA came into force and are confident that these solutions match what is required under the law in the EU,” a Meta spokesperson said at the end of October. Tech mogul Musk said his response to the penalty would target the EU officials who imposed it. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the fine is “an attack on all American tech platforms and the American people by foreign governments,” and accused the move of “censorship.” “It’s not good when our former allies in Washington are now working hand in glove with Big Tech,” blasted European Green Party chair Ciarán Cuffe at the opening of the congress in Lisbon. Eickhout, whose party GreenLeft-Labor alliance is in negotiations to enter government in the Netherlands, said “we should pick on this battle and stand strong.” The Commission’s decision to fine X under the EU’s Digital Services Act is over transparency concerns. The Commission said the design of X’s blue checkmark is “deceptive,” after it was changed from user verification into a paid feature. The EU’s executive also said X’s advertising library lacks transparency and that it fails to provide access to public data for researchers as required by the law.  Eickhout lamented that European governments are slow in condemning the U.S. moves against the EU, and argued that with its recent national security strategy, the Americans have made clear their objective is to divide Europe from within by fueling far-right parties. “Some of the leaders like [French President Emmanuel] Macron are still desperately trying to say that that the United States are our ally,” Eickhout said. “I want to see urgency on how Europe is going to take its own path and not rely on the U.S. anymore, because it’s clear we cannot.”

The European Commission has lost access to its control panel for buying and tracking ads on Elon Musk’s X — after fining the social media platform €120 million for violating EU transparency rules. “Your ad account has been terminated,” X’s head of product, Nikita Bier, wrote on the platform early Sunday. Bier accused the EU executive of trying to amplify its own social media post about the fine on X by trying “to take advantage of an exploit in our Ad Composer — to post a link that deceives users into thinking it’s a video and to artificially increase its reach.” The Commission fined X on Thursday for breaching the EU’s rules under the Digital Services Act (DSA), which aims to limit the spread of illegal content. The breaches included a lack of transparency around X’s advertising library and the company’s decision to change its trademark blue checkmark from a means of verification to a “deceptive” paid feature. “The irony of your announcement,” Bier said. “X believes everyone should have an equal voice on our platform. However, it seems you believe that the rules should not apply to your account.” Trump administration has criticized the DSA and the Digital Markets Act, which prevent large online platforms, such as Google, Amazon and Meta, from overextending their online empires. The White House has accused the rules of discriminating against U.S. companies, and the fine will likely amplify transatlantic trade tensions. U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick has already threatened to keep 50 percent tariffs on European exports of steel and aluminum unless the EU loosens its digital rules. U.S. Vice President JD Vance blasted Brussels’ action, describing the fine as a response for “not engaging in censorship” — a notion the Commission has dismissed. “The DSA is having not to do with censorship,” said the EU’s tech czar, Henna Virkkunen, told reporters on Thursday. “This decision is about the transparency of X.”

BRUSSELS — European politicians expressed cautious praise as Brussels slapped a €120 million fine on Elon Musk’s X on Friday, despite American fury over the decision.  The reaction from national diplomats and lawmakers illustrated broad support as the EU finally crossed a Rubicon and issued its first fine under the EU’s rule book to rein in social media platforms, more than two years after it started its enforcement effort.  The divide between the reaction from European capitals and U.S. Vice President JD Vance — who slammed the move before it was announced — sets up a clash that is set to persist as Brussels turns its attention to more enforcement decisions under the Digital Services Act (DSA), and will likely spill into ongoing transatlantic trade talks. Friday’s decision “sends an important signal that the Commission is determined to enforce the DSA,” said Karsten Wildberger, Germany’s digital minister, during a meeting of EU ministers in Brussels. Polish Digital Minister Dariusz Standerski applauded it as a sign of “strong leadership.” After French President Emmanuel Macron last week expressed outspoken criticism of the EU for slow-walking the conclusions, his digital minister, Anne Le Hénanff, said Friday: “France fully supports this decision … which sends a clear message to all platforms.” She later described it as a “magnificent announcement.” Washington meanwhile was quick out of the gate to slam the move from Brussels, with Vance chiming in half a day before the fine was announced to describe it as a penalty “for not engaging in censorship.” He repeated the U.S. mantra of the past year that the EU’s DSA amounts to censorship and restricted speech. “Once again, Europe is fining a successful U.S. tech company for being a successful U.S. tech company,” said Brendan Carr, the chair of the U.S. Federal Communications Commission, in reaction to the decision. “Europe is taxing Americans to subsidize a continent held back by Europe’s own suffocating regulations.” “The only substantial meaningful fines that have been imposed so far have been against American companies,” Andrew Puzder, the U.S. ambassador to the EU, told Bloomberg Television. “So at some point, if you’re an American company, you’ve gotta sit back and say, look, am I being targeted here?” Asked for a response, the White House directed POLITICO to Vance’s earlier post. Much of the praise in Europe focused on the assessment that the EU didn’t bow to U.S. pressure, neither on the actual fine nor the enforcement steps — even if the move was seen as long overdue. “The Commission held the line,” said Felix Kartte, currently a special adviser to the European Commission.   “It’s important that the EU does not cave to pressure,” said Marietje Schaake, a former MEP and former Commission adviser.  “I am very pleased to see that the Commission is taking serious steps against the intolerable practices we encounter from some of the major tech platforms. Let’s have more of that!” said Danish digital minister Caroline Stage Olsen.  Several European Parliament lawmakers joined the praise but warned this is only the beginning, noting this is the first of several outstanding probes under the DSA, including others against X. Friday’s decision only concerned X’s transparency obligations; X still faces open probes over the spread of illegal content and information manipulation.  In total, 10 investigations into large platforms including Amazon, YouTube, Facebook and Instagram are still up in the air. “This is an important start, but not a breakthrough,” said German Greens lawmaker Alexandra Geese. “As long as the Commission fails to rule on the algorithms, the central level of manipulation remains untouched.”   French liberal lawmaker Sandro Gozi urged that “this long overdue decision must mark a step change,” while Danish Social Democrat Christel Schaldemose said she wanted “far greater transparency” on how the Commission enforces the DSA.  Speaking to reporters Friday, Commission digital chief Henna Virkkunen stressed repeatedly that this is only part of the investigation into X. Acknowledging the criticisms that the EU has been slow to reach this point, she promised that the next decisions would come quicker.   Other observers criticized the size of the X penalty. A fine of €120 million is seen as relatively modest compared to the €2.95 billion fine that Google got for antitrust issues under the bloc’s sister digital law, the Digital Markets Act.   “120m is no deterrent to X,” said Cori Crider, executive director at the Future of Technology Institute. “Musk will moan in public — in private, he will be doing cartwheels.”   “Yes, the fine may seem small,” acknowledged Kartte. The DSA law says fines will take into account “the nature, gravity, duration and recurrence of the infringement” and cannot exceed 6 percent of a company’s annual global turnover.  Commission officials refused to give a clear answer on how they came to the €120 million figure when pressed. A senior official repeatedly said the fine is “proportionate” to the infringement. But how it was calculated can’t be “drilled down to a simple economic formula,” they said. The official said the Commission has found three entities behind X; X Holdings Companies, xAI and Elon Musk “at the top.”   The fine is “for a breach committed by X” but “addressed to the entire corporate structure,” Commission spokesperson Thomas Regnier told reporters.   Based on estimates of company values, that means the upper threshold could have reached as high as €5.9 billion.

French President Emmanuel Macron said Brussels is too slow in its handling of probes into American Big Tech companies due to U.S. pressure over the EU’s digital laws. “We have cases that have been before the Commission for two years. It’s much too slow,” Macron said Friday in reference to the EU’s content moderation rule book, the Digital Services Act (DSA). The debate around the matter is “not gaining momentum,” Macron told a local town hall event in the Vosges region, and “many in the Commission and member states are afraid to pursue it because there’s an American offensive against the application of directives on digital services and markets.” Macron promised to push for action at the EU level, adding: “We have a geopolitical battle to fight. This is not Russian interference, it is clearly American because these platforms do not want us to bother them.” Macron’s remarks follow a week that saw renewed pressure from the U.S. over the EU’s two tech rulebooks, the DSA and the Digital Markets Act. U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick urged EU ministers on Monday to “reconsider” the rulebooks in exchange for lower U.S. steel and aluminium tariffs, in line with the American playbook of treating the EU’s tech rules as a bargaining chip in a transatlantic trade war. The rules have been a target for the U.S. administration and tech executives ever since President Donald Trump returned to office. Both the EU’s tech chief, Henna Virkkunen, and her competition colleague, Teresa Ribera, came out against the U.S. pressure this week, with the latter accusing Washington of “blackmail.” The European Commission is also under pressure from European Parliament lawmakers, with the Socialists and Democrats group moving to set up an inquiry committee to investigate the EU’s enforcement of digital rules. Responding to Macron’s remarks, European Commission spokesperson Thomas Regnier said: “We have been very clear since the very beginning: We are fully behind our digital legislation and are enforcing it.” He argued that “some cases take a bit more time than others, because the DSA investigations are broad.” “The Commission services are building solid cases, because we have to win them in court,” he said. The EU has investigations open under the DSA into X, Meta, AliExpress, Temu and TikTok. The probes could lead to fines of 6 percent of a company’s annual global turnover, but none have been levied so far.

Interpreters of Brussels, beware. After a public spat with the European Commission in September, Apple now says that it plans to roll out its live translation feature for AirPods in the coming month. “We had to delay the launch while we undertook additional engineering work to comply with European Commission rules,” a spokesperson for Apple said in a statement. The iPhone maker had previously warned that European users would not be able to access the real-time translation feature through their earbuds due to its interpretation of its obligations under the EU’s rulebook for big tech platforms, the Digital Markets Act. The EU rules mandate certain features in Apple’s phones and tablets to ensure interoperability with competitor devices. Apple has challenged those obligations in the EU courts. According to Apple, the firm had to develop a “complicated” solution to comply with the DMA, creating a new audio-routing API so third-party apps and devices could manage simultaneous audio paths.  The firm takes the position that had it shared the feature sooner, it would have been fined and forced to stop shipping products in the EU. The spokesperson said that Apple remained deeply concerned that the European Commission’s “aggressive” interpretations of the rules are putting “users at risk and is bad for innovation.” “In the EU, the aim of our digital legislation is to preserve innovation and freedom of choice,” said a spokesperson for the European Commission. “And this is exactly what we see today.”

BRUSSELS — Tech firms are spending more than ever on lobbying the EU amid mounting opposition to the bloc’s digital rules, according to new analysis. The 733 digital industry groups registered in Brussels now spend €151 million a year pushing their interests, up from €113 million two years ago, per an analysis of disclosures to the EU’s transparency register by two campaign groups. The uptick comes amid attacks from industry against EU laws like the Digital Markets Act and the Digital Services Act — which the Trump administration says discriminate against U.S. companies — and as the European Commission prepares a massive effort to dial back its digital rulebooks. Lobbying spending is concentrated in the hands of tech giants, mainly from the U.S., according to the analysis by Corporate Europe Observatory and LobbyControl, two non-profit campaign groups focused on corporate influence. The ten largest technology spenders — which include Meta, Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, Qualcomm and Google — outspent the top ten firms in pharmaceuticals, finance and the automotive industries combined. Amazon, Microsoft and Meta have “noticeably” ramped up their expenditure since 2023, by more than €4 million for Amazon and €2 million for Microsoft and Meta, the analysis said. The Brussels-based lobby group Digital Europe, which includes many U.S.-based tech giants among its members, added more than €1 million to its lobbying budget. Meta, with a budget of more than €10 million, is the overall largest lobby spender in the EU. This is a “precarious moment,” said Bram Vranken, a researcher at Corporate Observatory Europe, arguing that years of progress in limiting the harmful effects of technology and the power of Big Tech risks being reversed. With the deregulation push in Brussels and strong industry support in Washington, “Big Tech is seizing this new political reality to erase a decade of progress to regulate the digital sector,” he said. Tech firms would argue that lobbying is not only about exerting influence but also about ensuring that lawmakers understand the complex realities of the industry to inform their decisions on the rules. “Amazon engages on issues that are important to our customers, sellers, and the diverse range of businesses we operate,” a spokesperson for the U.S. firm said in a statement. “This means we work with organisations like trade associations and think tanks, and communicate with officials at the European Institutions.” MORE LOBBYISTS, MORE MEETINGS The boost in activity is seen not only in higher spending, including on consulting and advisory firms hired to influence digital policy, but also in a rising headcount of registered tech lobbyists. There are now an estimated 890 lobbyists — calculated as full-time equivalents — working to shape the tech agenda, up from 699 in 2023. Of these, 437 have badges allowing them to access the European Parliament freely. Access to the institution has become tougher in recent years in reaction to a series of corruption scandals — including investigations into Huawei that saw the company banned from accessing the Parliament and meeting with the Commission in March. In the first half of 2025, representatives of tech companies declared 146 meetings with Commission staff. Artificial intelligence, including a highly disputed industry code of practice, was the main topic on the agenda. As for lawmakers in Parliament, tech lobbyists declared 232 meetings. Transparency rules for declaring meetings between lobbyists and Commission and Parliament officials have expanded in recent years, but transparency campaigners say they still lack teeth and accountability.

BRUSSELS — What began as a push to free Europe’s businesses from crippling rules has morphed into yet another tactic to appease Donald Trump.  Since taking office, the U.S. president has repeatedly threatened to hike tariffs on EU goods unless the bloc agrees to roll back some of its laws that also apply to American companies. That presents Brussels with a dilemma. If it bows to the U.S. pressure, it risks ending up with strict regulations that only apply to European businesses — potentially destroying their competitiveness. Conversely, if it scraps the rules altogether, it abandons key aims like digital sovereignty and environmental protection. Enter the simplification agenda, Brussels’ new plan to get the best of both worlds. Cutting red tape is one of the few areas of policymaking on which EU countries largely agree; in fact, they want more of it. Later this week, European leaders meeting in Brussels will instruct the European Commission to speed up its work “as a matter of utmost priority, on all files with a simplification and competitiveness dimension,” according to draft conclusions obtained by POLITICO.  Driving home that message, 19 EU leaders — including Friedrich Merz of Germany, Emmanuel Macron of France, Giorgia Meloni of Italy and Donald Tusk of Poland — have issued a presummit appeal for “a systematic review of all EU regulations to identify rules that are superfluous, excessive, or unbalanced.” In a letter, obtained by POLITICO, they also called on Brussels to dismantle outdated rules, demanded a “constant stream” of simplification measures and urged self-restraint when it comes to new legislation. Still, the simplification drive is being spun as a way to address some of Washington’s concerns with what it sees as regulatory overreach by Brussels.  “Since Trump is willing to swallow a number of jokes — he doesn’t look too closely at it anyway — if we can say to him, ‘Donald, thank you very much, it’s thanks to you that we’ve cleaned things up a bit,’ why not?” asked Pascal Lamy, a former EU trade commissioner and head of the World Trade Organization. SWEEPING ROLLBACK In a bid to bring struggling European industries back from the brink, Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has made deregulation — or “simplification” — the North Star of her second term. In less than 12 months, her Commission has come up with plans to cut much of the red tape crafted during her first mandate, touching on almost all areas of EU law, from defense and agriculture to digital rules and the environment.  At first, the logic was straightforward: Fewer rules would be good for European companies struggling to remain competitive against their U.S. and Chinese rivals.  Now, the simplification push comes as a diplomatic gesture — to smooth relations with Washington after Trump made it clear that U.S. companies shouldn’t be bound by European rules he has denounced as discriminatory.  Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has made deregulation — or “simplification” — the North Star of her second term. | Thierry Monasse/Getty Images Under the trade deal von der Leyen struck with Trump at his Scottish golf resort in July, the Commission pledged that its green rules would “not pose undue restrictions on transatlantic trade.” The list agreed by the two sides included Europe’s rules on supply chain oversight, sustainability reporting, a carbon border tax and rules aimed at preventing the import of goods produced on deforested land. All have already been the target of simplification measures launched by the Commission.   Explaining the strategy, Danish Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen likened it in an interview with POLITICO to a Kinder Egg — an Italian-made children’s treat with chocolate on the outside and a toy on the inside. Cutting red tape is in Europe’s “own self best interest. But at the same time, it also serves others’ interest as well,” explained Rasmussen, whose country holds the presidency of the Council, the bloc’s intergovernmental branch. Others say it’s not so clear cut.  “We can’t say on the one hand that we’re willing to pay for American strategic protection in terms of tariffs, and on the other hand that we’re not going to change our regulations for that, neither on data, nor on DMA, DSA, nor everything else that Americans criticize about what they see as our hyper-regulation,” Lamy said, referring to the twin pillars of EU tech regulation, the Digital Markets Act and the Digital Services Act.  The Commission stressed that while Washington and Brussels have agreed to look at ways to cut red tape, “this will not lead to a lowering of EU standards or legislation,” said Olof Gill, deputy chief spokesperson for the Commission.  “The EU has been firm on defending our fundamental principle — our legislative framework and our regulatory autonomy are not up for negotiation,” added Gill, whose remit covers trade.  LEADERS JUMP IN The letter from the 19 EU leaders intensifies the pressure on the EU executive from the bloc’s leading economies to keep deregulating — above all from Macron and Merz. Backed by their largest businesses, the two leaders have echoed U.S calls for the EU to ditch its supply chain oversight directive. But the European debate has the added benefit of having — apparently — convinced Trump’s new ambassador to Brussels, Andrew Puzder, that the EU’s drive to slash red tape is in its own essential interest.  “Chancellor Merz and President Macron have both said it should be repealed … not because that’s in America’s best interest. They’re saying it’s the best interest of Germany and France,” Puzder told a recent event in Brussels, referring to the supply chain rules. For a veteran like Lamy, the simplification imperative arose from internal EU pressure following strategy recommendations by former Italian Prime Ministers Mario Draghi and Enrico Letta. The former leaders warned that Europe must become more competitive or face the “slow agony” of decline. “If we look at the history of these simplification packages, they were entirely generated within the EU by pressure from employers,” Lamy said.  But even with the political wind in her sails, delivering on simplification won’t be a pleasure cruise for von der Leyen.  Negotiations on the first simplification package — aimed at cutting green reporting obligations for companies — nearly destroyed the coalition of political groups that elected her to a second term, while efforts to simplify Europe’s farming policy and budget have sparked another backlash from the agriculture sector.  National calls for massive cuts to EU rules have also drawn criticism from EU decision-makers who are reluctant to see trade talks or corporate interests derail the bloc’s green agenda.  “No one should be mistaken, we will not lower these standards because there is no competitiveness in a race to the bottom,” said Teresa Ribera, the Commission’s No. 2 and top competition regulator. Nor are European lawmakers giving up on the “Brussels effect” — whereby rules set by the EU set a standard for how business is done internationally. That EU rules should apply to foreign companies is “a fundamental element of … Europe’s normative power,” said Pascal Canfin, a centrist member of the European Parliament, who has worked on several of the simplification packages.  Hans von der Burchard and Nette Nöstlinger contributed to this report from Berlin. This story has been updated. 

LONDON — At a couple of pages long, the technology pact the U.S. and the U.K. will sign this week when President Donald Trump lands in London will be easy to miss amid the circus of a state visit. But what will be impossible to ignore is the group of technology heavyweights joining Trump’s entourage. Nvidia boss Jensen Huang, who is hosting a party in London’s King’s Cross on Thursday night, OpenAI’s Sam Altman and Blackstone chief executive Stephen Schwarzman are among those accompanying the U.S. president. Nvidia is due to announce an investment in Britain’s biggest data center, planned for Blyth in northeast England, according to three people familiar with the plans. A subsidiary of Blackstone is leading the project and OpenAI is also involved. It is expected to be billed as a British “Stargate,” similar to a Norwegian version the companies announced in July. The tech pact Trump will agree with Prime Minister Keir Starmer has paved the way for some of that investment, the U.K. embassy in Washington believes. The document focuses on building partnerships — through R&D, procurement and skills — in AI, quantum and space, according to two people briefed on it. A U.K. government spokesperson claimed the pact would “change the lives” of Brits and Americans, while U.K. Technology Secretary Liz Kendall said: “Boosting our tech ties with the U.S. will help us deliver the change people here at home expect and deserve.” A separate agreement on nuclear energy will also come during the state visit, fast-tracking reactor design checks between the two countries. It includes plans to build data centers powered by small modular reactors at the former coal power station in Cottam, Nottinghamshire. MADE IN THE USA  Britain pitched the pact to Washington as a way for Western democracies to beat China in the technology race and set a “gold standard” in digital rulemaking. Yet while the country’s AI strategy talks about sovereignty, with only £2 billion of public money set aside to deliver it, Britain is heavily reliant on U.S. investments and technology to make it happen. Gaia Marcus, director of the Ada Lovelace Institute think tank, warned of increased U.K. reliance on America. “The public deserves to understand who really benefits from these partnerships and what the return will be for taxpayers in years to come,” she said. “We mustn’t just focus on what the figures look like today, if the cost is technological lock-in tomorrow, limiting our ability to seek alternatives in the future.”  Nvidia is due to announce an investment in Britain’s biggest data center, planned for Blyth in northeast England, according to three people familiar with the plans. | Ina Fassbender/Getty Images Chi Onwurah, chair of the House of Commons Science, Innovation and Technology Committee, said: “Whilst I’m pleased that the U.K. is an attractive place for U.S. investment, the U.K. needs to take decisions that are in its long-term strategic interest; true technology sovereignty cannot mean being dependent on one investor or country.” But Keegan McBride, senior policy advisor in emerging technology and geopolitics at the Tony Blair Institute, said the U.K. has little choice as only the U.S. or China were able to provide it with the AI infrastructure it needed to compete. “For the U.K. and for many other countries that want to access frontier AI capabilities, the United States represents the best option,” he said.  The Trump administration, meanwhile, wants to sell American AI “packages” to its allies, pitching them as a form of AI sovereignity. “We are committed to finding a way to enable America’s private companies to meet your national technological needs,” White House tech policy chief Michael Kratsios told APEC members at a conference in South Korea this August.  Another prize for U.S. tech companies is large government contracts. Britain’s defense department announced a £400 million deal with Google Cloud last week, while Nvidia, OpenAI, Anthropic and Google Cloud signed separate partnership agreements with the U.K. government earlier this year.   JUST DON’T MENTION RULES  The U.S.-U.K. tech pact is expected to avoid the thornier issue of online regulation, but it is something the White House has pressured the U.K. government on throughout trade negotiations. Starmer also faces domestic pressure from Nigel Farage, leader of the populist and poll-topping Reform UK party, who compared Britain’s free speech laws to North Korea in the U.S. Congress this month.  Starmer has repeatedly defended Britain’s Online Safety Act, including in front of Trump at his Scottish Turnberry resort in August, while Trump has also attacked the Digital Services Tax and competition regulations.  McBride said: “There is a growing number of regulatory concerns on the side of the United States, particularly regarding censorship and free speech, that could disrupt tech relations between the two countries.”    One person briefed on the agenda for Trump’s visit said: “There are three regulatory pieces that the U.S. is really concerned about in Europe right now. They’re going to be looking … to see some sort of support from the U.K.”  They listed the Digital Services Tax, which the government has repeatedly ruled out ditching, the EU’s Digital Markets Act, and the CSDD (an EU supply chain disclosure reporting standard). “There are people inside the White House that are very set on expanding the U.S.-U.K. relationship as a means to counterbalance the EU, and I think that’s a big part of this trip.” 

Spotify has warned that European users will be unable to enjoy the latest version of its app unless the EU’s Digital Markets Act shows some teeth in dealing with Apple. Apple recently changed its App Store rules in an effort to avoid massive fines from the European Commission for violating its rules on fair competition in the digital realm. However, Spotify claims these changes prevent it from sharing key pricing information with users — unlike in the U.S., where a May order by a federal judge allowed the music streaming giant to launch an app version that freely communicates pricing and promotional information. The feature is vital for selling products like audiobooks. The product has been “enthusiastically embraced” by users stateside, Spotify’s global director of competition policy, Avery Gardiner, said at a Brussels event this week. Gardiner explained that Spotify cannot directly tell its European users how to buy goods like audiobooks under the current conditions of its contract with Apple. On the other hand, pursuing an alternative contract would not be economically viable, she added. “If you can’t tell people how much stuff costs or where to buy it, they don’t buy very much of it,” Gardiner observed, contrasting the situation in Europe with that in the U.S. “The U.S. government has taken decisive action,” she said. “Unfortunately, in Europe, the same cannot be said — the Digital Markets Act has yet to deliver the same results for consumers in Europe.” The Commission has been scrutinizing Apple’s proposal to reform its App Store practices, which came as a direct response to the DMA. If the Commission finds the changes insufficient, Apple could face substantial daily fines in addition to the €500 million penalty it received in April. Gardiner says Spotify is keen to bring the new app version to Europe. Spotify’s warning comes as Apple said that due to the DMA, it was holding off on rolling out a feature to European users that would allow live translation on their AirPods. A Commission spokesperson said the regulation currently permits developers to inform users of better prices, and that the EU executive is seeking feedback from interested third parties regarding Apple’s proposed compliance solution. A spokesperson for Apple said that the current version of the Spotify app in the EU already communicates offers, including pricing information. “Fundamentally, their complaint is about trying to get limited access to all of Apple’s tools without paying for the value Apple provides,” they said. This story has been updated.