EU Dismisses Digital Rules Concessions After ‘Lawfare’ Accusation by US

Senior White House trade adviser Peter Navarro said ‘lawfare’ in places such as the EU is being used to ’target' the United States’ largest tech firms.

Peter Navarro, senior White House trade adviser, talks to reporters outside the White House on Feb. 4, 2025. Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

The European Union said on April 9 that it will not make any concessions on its digital and technology rules as part of any trade negotiations.

The statement from the EU came after Peter Navarro, senior trade adviser to President Donald Trump, accused the EU of waging “lawfare” against U.S. tech giants in a Financial Times op-ed on April 7, which called for changes to the “broken” trade system.

“These tools include currency manipulation, value added tax distortions, dumping, export subsidies, state-owned enterprises, IP theft, discriminatory product standards, quotas, bans, opaque licensing regimes, burdensome customs procedures, data localisation mandates and, increasingly, the use of ‘lawfare’ in places like the EU to target America’s largest tech firms,” Navarro stated.

When asked about Navarro’s remarks at a press briefing on April 8, European Commission spokesman Olof Gill said: “As regards our European tech and digital regulation, we’re talking about separate things here.

“And we will not be conflating the two in our negotiations with the U.S.”

The accusation comes as the 27-nation bloc faces 25 percent import tariffs on steel and aluminum and cars as well as the new broader tariffs of 20 percent for almost all other goods under Trump’s policy to apply reciprocal tariffs to countries he says impose high barriers to U.S. imports.

The president recently rejected the EU’s proposals for “zero-for-zero” tariffs on cars and industrial goods and has previously hinted at a showdown with Europe over the regulation of Big Tech.

The Digital Services Act (DSA) and the Digital Markets Act (DMA) form a single set of rules under the Digital Services Act package that apply across the EU.

The DMA is focused on ensuring fair and open digital markets, while the DSA is geared toward more rigorous content moderation, user rights, and ensuring transparency, whether they are established within or outside the EU.

The former regulates the gatekeeper power of the largest digital companies, while the latter requires social media platforms to remove illegal content, conduct risk assessments, prevent illegal and harmful activities online, and curb the spread of “disinformation.”

On April 8, EU antitrust chief Teresa Ribera told the European Parliament that an EU decision on whether Apple and Meta have broken the bloc’s DMA rules aimed at curbing their market power is set to be issued in the coming weeks.

Companies can be fined up to 10 percent of their annual worldwide turnover for a first offense, and for repeated violations, this can increase to 20 percent.

“Decisions could be adopted in the coming weeks,” she told lawmakers when asked about the timing.

“If we do not see willingness to cooperate, we will not shy away from imposing the fines identified by the law.”

Meta reiterated its criticism of the imminent decisions.

“This is not just about fines—it’s about the commission seeking to handicap successful American businesses simply because they’re American, while letting Chinese and European rivals off the hook,” a Meta spokesperson said.

‘Centralized’

The EU’s centralized decision-making and legal framework make it difficult for member states to alter or retract the Digital Services Act, according to German MEP Christine Anderson, who is a politician for the populist conservative party Alternative for Germany.

Anderson previously told The Epoch Times that the European Parliament itself does not propose new legislation; it can only pass it, which limits what politicians can do.

The European Parliament and European Council work together to adopt or amend proposed laws, but the European Commission is the primary proposer.

“What we are doing is, we’re pretty much passing resolution,” she said.

MEPS can send nonbinding resolutions, which express their opinions or requests to the commission or council but do not have legal effect.

She characterized this as “passing a beggar’s letter,” where MEPs write to the commission and say, “Well, it would be nice if you could do this, that, and the other.”

“But they don’t need to do any of that. So the commission is the government,” she said.

She said they’re “the only ones” who can initiate legislation.

Guy Birchall and Reuters contributed to this report.