9 ms·
EU looks to hit Big Tech in crackdown on US services exports
- zonkerdonker 2y agoThe one example listed in the article was starlink. What other "Big Tech" could even be realistically dinged by this? How do you tariff Adsense from google? Or 3rd party cell phones that run Android? Will they slap an upcharge on netflix or Amazon prime somehow? How does suspending intellectual property rights work, also? That seems like a whole can of worms
- flohofwoe 2y agoOne obvious option would be to add a couple of percent on each transaction in the EU (e.g. each time Apple and Google take their 30% the EU takes 5% or so), that way the requirement to open up the mobile platforms to alternative app stores would also finally make sense, since European app stores wouldn't be affected by the tarrifs.
- zonkerdonker 2y agoSure, that makes sense, make the tax big enough to really hurt if they try to eat it. I guess if IP is off the table as well, nothing to stop someone from pirating every movie on netflix and launching a clone for EU! Im curious for some more details around this. I hope it turns out to be a nice big stick to smack some sense into the US tech oligarchs, and also their orange subordinate
- esperent 2y ago> How do you tariff Adsense from google Well, it's already subject to VAT, so I guess in much the same way as that?
- FirmwareBurner 2y agoVAT means taxes the EU consumers prices, not on Google's profits.
- cjrp 2y agoTrue, but it's collected by Google and passed to the relevant government. So it would be similar (they just wouldn't add it to the price, as VAT is).
- esperent 2y ago> it's collected by Google Not the case in at least some EU countries. Businesses are responsible for calculating the VAT and paying it themselves.
- esperent 2y agoFrom a quick search I cannot find any examples of tariffs applied as a tax on a specific company's profits. They are commonly applied as a surcharge (charge on top of the business or consumer price of a good) on specific goods, which is exactly how VAT works across the EU. Tariffs can be applied in other ways too, such as a surtax (tax on top of another tax). But I don't think tax on profits is common, as that would give the foreign company too much leeway to fudge the numbers.
- zonkerdonker 2y agoI guess it just seems a bit pointless to attempt to tariff what is essentialy a monopoly. Google could pretty easily just pass on 100% of the costs of the tarrifs onto the consumer. Don't get me wrong, I'd love it if more American big corpos paid more taxes, I was just curious what this plan would even look like when/if it's enacted
- AlecSchueler 2y agoPassing the cost onto the consumer is what makes the business look less appealing compared to local alternatives, helping to break the monopoly.
- buyucu 2y agoban starlink, twitter and tesla. put a %26 tax on all advertisement on Meta and Google. Put a similar tax on all Amazon Prime and Netflix subscriptions. That should do the trick.
- jalapenos 2y agoI'm genuinely interested to know: why does the US maintain bases in Europe when they have clearly zero imperial gain from it, the would-be vassal states deriving tribute from the US by robbing their companies rather than the usual reverse? Perhaps someone better versed in geopolitics could explain why the US doesn't absolutely ditch Europe to fend for themselves and exit all military and otherwise engagements with them and fall back to ordinary international trade relationships.
- qeternity 2y agoZero imperial gain? This is a rather incredible claim: why do you say so?
- crvdgc 2y agoMy two cents: isn't this arrangement more of a continuation of the Marshall Plan? If the US did nothing, post-war Europe was likely to fall into the influence of the Soviet. Now even the Soviet has dissolved, there's always the menace of Europe allying with Russia or China (from the US perspective). So it's worth to pay a premium to prevent your opponent from getting the same thing.
- jalapenos 2y agoCan't imagine why they'd ally with Russia, or to what end.
- kaedroho 2y agoThere wasn't any direct threat to Europe between 1990 and 2014, yet the US kept their bases there. The US has been interested/involved in a number of conflicts in the Middle East and North Africa over the last few decades. Europe provides safe and friendly place to station military equipment nearby.
- dns_snek 2y agoWhy do you believe that the EU is attempting to "rob" US companies when it's quite clearly just a tit-for-tat retaliation to tariffs imposed by the US?
- jurmous 2y agoAs an EU citizen, I think we have no choice but to be tough here. Trump’s tariffs aren’t something we asked for, but backing down isn’t an option either—he’ll just keep pushing. Targeting US services, especially big tech, makes sense because it hits where the US is genuinely vulnerable, and Europe can’t match them dollar-for-dollar on goods alone. Look, I’d prefer a cooperative relationship too, but diplomacy clearly hasn’t worked. The US administration needs to understand that actions have consequences, and if this means leveraging our market strength and standing firm, then that’s exactly what we have to do. If the EU doesn’t respond decisively, we’ll only embolden more aggressive policies from Trump’s side. We’ve tried being patient. Now it’s about showing we won’t be pushed around.
- FirmwareBurner 2y ago[flagged]
- Symbiote 2y agoDid you read it? jurmous's points seem to be aligned with the article.
- FirmwareBurner 2y agoWhat makes you think his comment is based on the article? I have read the article and I found it very thin on the details regarding any specifics on what exactly "tariffing big tech" would be, especially that StarLink mentioned in the article is not really "big tech" in EU, but more of a niche ISP. Which is why I believe he didn't read it, plus the general trend of HN users to rush to comment without reading the articles that's a meme at this point, which only results in low quality emotionally charged rants being upvoted to the top even though they have little to do with the article in the topic. And the actual big-tech would be more difficult to tariff since their products don't cross any customs like star link, but are all sold by companies registered in the EU, same how example Fords are also manufactured in the EU to get around tariffs.
- 2y ago
- isodev 2y agohttps://archive.is/WZ7Kf https://archive.is/WZ7Kf
- buyucu 2y agoyou have to stand up to a bully. if you don't, it will get worse.
- djohnston 2y agoOne of the EU's primary revenue streams is periodically (annually?) being "tough" on Big Tech. If you can't build - regulate, or something like that.
- M2Ys4U 2y agoThe EU's budget is about €190bn. Fines for Big Tech companies last year totalled €8bn. So that's ~4%. It’s not insignificant, but I wouldn't exactly call it a primary revenue stream. VAT brings in 3x as much money. Import duties bring in about 5x that. And about half of the budget comes directly from the member states.
- belter 2y agoRevolutionary idea: Respect the local business laws.
- belter 2y agoWhich ones here were unfair? "Tech fines tracker" - https://proton.me/tech-fines-tracker https://proton.me/tech-fines-tracker
- strogonoff 2y agoFrom my limited understanding of economy and international trade law, “tariffs on services” is not a thing. Is that correct? Can it become such?