The European Commission has fined Google €2.95 billion for violating EU antitrust rules by distorting competition in the advertising‑technology industry ('adtech') in its decision published on 5 September 2025.
Investigators found that Google favoured its own online display advertising technology services, disadvantaging competing adtech providers, advertisers, and online publishers. The European Commission has ordered Google to (i) end these self‑preferencing practices and (ii) put in place measures to eliminate its inherent conflicts of interest across the adtech supply chain. Google now has 60 days to inform the European Commission of how it plans to comply.
Google provides a number of adtech services that intermediate between advertisers and publishers to display ads on websites or mobile apps. It operates (i) two ad buying tools, 'Google Ads' and 'DV 360'; (ii) a publisher ad server, 'DoubleClick For Publishers, or DFP'; and (iii) an ad exchange, 'AdX'.
The European Commission's investigation confirmed that Google holds a dominant position in two key adtech markets across the European Economic Area: (i) publisher ad servers through its DFP service, and (ii) programmatic ad buying tools via Google Ads and DV360.
Under Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union ('TFEU'), an undertaking holding a dominant position in a particular market is prohibited from abusing that position, insofar as it may affect trade between EU Member States. Simply holding a dominant position is not, by itself, anti-competitive. However, abuse occurs when the undertaking engages in practices that distort competition, including:
- Imposing unfair prices or other trading conditions.
- Limiting production, markets or technical development.
- Undue discrimination.
- Tying (i.e. making the supply of a product or service required by a customer conditional on the purchase of another product or service).
Such conduct harms competition and consumer choice and may lead to investigations, fines, and orders to change business practices by the European Commission.
The European Commission found that, since at least 2014, Google has breached EU antitrust rules (Article 102 TFEU) by abusing this dominance in two key ways:
- Giving its own ad exchange, AdX, an unfair edge in auctions run by DFP: such as informing AdX of the top bid from rivals so it could win.
- Favouring AdX in Google's own buying tools: Google Ads and DV360 steer bids mainly to AdX and bypassing rival ad exchanges, making AdX more attractive and harder to compete with.
It concluded that Google's conduct was intentional, giving AdX an artificial advantage, locking out competitors, and strengthening Google's control over the adtech supply chain, allowing it to charge higher fees for its services.
The European Commission's finding that Google abused its dominance, through conduct similar to that under investigation by the US Department of Justice, comes just weeks before a key US trial on remedies, scheduled for 22 September 2025. In its June 2021 decision, the French competition authority (the Autorité de la concurrence) also concluded that Google had abused its dominant position in this market; Google did not contest the decision, accepting a fine of €220m and, at that time, agreeing to change its conduct.
In addition, the UK's Competition and Markets Authority ('CMA') has actively been involved in investigating Google's conduct in the adtech sector, focusing on whether it abused its dominant position by favouring its own services in the digital advertising supply chain. The CMA no longer applies EU competition law. Instead, post-Brexit, it enforces the UK's domestic prohibitions under the Competition Act 1998. The concept similar to the EU's abuse of a dominant position is found in the Chapter II prohibition of the Competition Act 1998, which prohibits the abuse of a dominant position by an undertaking which may affect trade within the UK. Following Brexit, there are some important distinctions in the operation of competition law in the UK:
- Although the Competition Act 1998 now operates independently of EU law, a new section 60A was added post-Brexit which provides that competition regulators and UK courts continue to be bound by an obligation to ensure no inconsistency with pre-exit EU competition case law, unless appropriate in specific circumstances (such as differences between markets in the UK and markets in the EU and a principle having been laid down or a decision made by the Court of Justice of the European Union after the end of the transition period).
- The UK's competition regulator, the CMA, enforces these rules domestically, while the European Commission no longer has jurisdiction over UK markets.
- The UK may develop its own approaches and priorities over time, which could diverge from EU competition law in the future.
In a statement of objections issued in September 2024, the CMA provisionally found that Google's self-preferencing practices may have harmed competition in the UK through the operation of both its publisher ad server and buying tools. Alongside this, the UK's Competition Appeal Tribunal has authorised a £13.6 billion opt-out class action on behalf of over 130,000 UK publishers, alleging that Google's practices in the adtech market led to substantial financial harm between 2014 and 2022; the case is ongoing and will be heard in the coming months, likely into 2026.
This suite of worldwide actions signals growing regulatory and legal pressure on Google, reinforcing global scrutiny of its role in digital advertising.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
