EU strikes a blow against Apple and Google in landmark rulings

In dual landmark rulings, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) found against both Apple and Google in cases regarding corporate tax avoidance and market dominance abuse, respectively, issuing fines totalling more than €15 billion.

In the ongoing battle within the EU to regulate multinational corporations, led by European Union antitrust chief Margrethe Vestager, Apple has been ordered to pay Ireland €13bn ($14.4bn) in back taxes, while Google has been fined €2.4bn ($2.7bn) for antitrust violations.

Vestager, who has made a name for herself going after Big Tech’s tax arrangements within the EU, said in a post on X, “Today is a huge win for European citizens and tax justice.”

One bad Apple

The case against Apple goes back to 2016 when the European Commission accused the company of receiving illegal tax benefits from Ireland.

According to the Commission, Apple’s subsidiaries in Ireland paid a much lower tax rate than other companies — as low as 0.005% in 2014 — a practice that violated EU state aid rules.

The Irish government, however, sided with Apple, arguing that the arrangement was lawful, stating that its low corporate tax rate is an essential tool in attracting foreign investment.

In 2020, the General Court of the CJEU issued a judgement annulling the Commission’s case, but the Commission appealed the judgement, and the Court has now ruled its 2016 decision stands.

In an official statement after the latest judgement, the Irish Department of Finance said: “The Irish position has always been that Ireland does not give preferential tax treatment to any companies or taxpayers.”

Apple vehemently denied the European Commission’s accusations, insisting it complied with both US and Irish tax laws.

“This case has never been about how much tax we pay, but which government we are required to pay it to,” an Apple spokesperson said. “We always pay all the taxes we owe wherever we operate, and there has never been a special deal.”

The iPhone 16 manufacturer maintained that its income was already subject to taxation in the US and that the Commission was trying to rewrite the rules retroactively.

Despite this, the Court ruled in favour of the Commission, and Apple must now repay the taxes.

In Google, we antitrust

The case against Google dates back to 2017 when the European Commission fined the company for abusing its online shopping comparison market dominance.

According to the Commission, Google gave preferential treatment to its own comparison-shopping service, disadvantaging smaller rivals.

The fine was the EU’s largest antitrust penalty ever issued at the time, totalling €2.4bn ($2.7bn) — until 2018, when the EU fined Google €4.3bn ($4.75bn) for abusing the dominant position of its Android mobile operating system to promote Google’s search engine.

Google has consistently contested the EU’s decision, arguing that its practices improved the quality of its services for consumers.

The company adjusted its shopping service in 2017 to comply with the EU’s ruling but continued to appeal the fine.

In a statement, Google said of its adjustments: “Our approach has worked successfully for more than seven years, generating billions of clicks for more than 800 comparison shopping services.”

Despite these efforts, in its latest ruling, the Court solidified the Commission’s stance that Google abused its market position and that it was right to find Google’s conduct “discriminatory” and its appeal “must be dismissed in its entirety.”

Google faces another similar trial in the UK as a London court has argued that Google should pay £13.6bn in a lawsuit over whether it has too much influence on the online advertising market.

Who EU gonna call?

The cases were undoubtedly being closely observed across the EU as a significant moment for Big Tech’s European tax affairs — especially as the EU’s investigations between companies and member states have faced setbacks.

Just last year, Amazon successfully defended its tax arrangements in Luxembourg in a court battle, and the Commission similarly lost a case involving the Netherlands’ tax treatment of Starbucks, though it chose not to appeal.