Brussels’ Stand on Google’s Ad Tech: A Breakup or Not?
Brussels has asserted that a breakup is the sole solution to fix Google’s ad technology issues. However, a judge who previously ruled on liability has recently refused to mandate such a separation.
The Current Scenario (September 4, 2026)
A year after a €2.95 billion fine, the European Commission remains the sole regulator advocating for Google’s divestiture. Initially, complainants expected this outcome, but their hopes have since faded.
Judge Leonie Brinkema, in the remedies phase of the case, rejected the US Department of Justice’s request to force Google to sell portions of its advertising business on Wednesday. Her decision, made after finding Google liable in April 2025, signifies that a structural divestment isn’t necessary to address the established liability.
The Commission’s Stance
The Commission’s initial stance, from when it imposed the fine a year ago, was that divestment was crucial to resolving the conflict of interest surrounding Google’s digital advertising dominance. However, DG Competition director general Anthony Whelan has expressed the difficulty and political contention inherent in structural remedies, especially when parties have already completed investments. This is a complex case regardless of transatlantic relations.
The Complainants’ Shift in Focus
Perhaps the most significant detail is the shift in perspective among the complainants. Sources involved in the complaint privately admit that achieving a viable divestiture of a US company’s operations within Europe alone is no longer feasible. They now emphasize non-discrimination as the primary concern, marking a substantial retreat from their initial pursuit of a breakup. This suggests that the fight is shifting from ownership to conduct regulations, a terrain Google has consistently favored.
Google’s Compliance Plan
Google submitted a compliance plan in November 2025, proposing changes to its tools rather than a sale. The Commission granted itself an extension to review this proposal thoroughly and is still in the process of assessment. Google is also appealing the Commission’s initial decision at the EU’s General Court, expressing satisfaction with the US ruling.
Conclusion
The waiting game continues, with costs favoring one side more than the other. Campaigners have attempted to quantify these costs, highlighting the impact of the delay.