Connect with us

America

Google avoids breakup in landmark antitrust ruling, faces new restrictions

Published

on

A federal judge has rejected a bid to break up Google for monopolizing online search and advertising markets, instead imposing more modest restrictions to limit the company’s power.

In a closely watched antitrust case pitting the US government against one of the world’s largest technology companies, District Judge Amit Mehta on Tuesday denied the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) request to force Google to divest its Chrome browser and Android products.

However, Mehta agreed with the government that Google must allow competitors to gain a foothold in the market and ordered the company to make more limited changes.

Google will now be required to share some of its search data with rivals and is prohibited from making deals that establish its products, including artificial intelligence, as the “default tools” on mobile devices.

Mehta’s opinion is considered the most significant antitrust ruling concerning the business practices of Big Tech companies since a federal judge’s failed attempt to break up Microsoft in the early 2000s.

Legal experts predict that Google will appeal the decision, which could eventually be reviewed by the Supreme Court. On Tuesday, Google announced that it was concerned by Mehta’s opinion and was reviewing the decision.

The lawsuit, which began during Trump’s first administration, offers a glimmer of hope for other technology companies, including Meta, Amazon, and Apple, that are also facing the risk of being broken up.

This decision was the first of two major antitrust cases Google has faced this year. In the other case, also filed by the Department of Justice, its advertising technology business is at risk of being divested.

The technology sector, particularly the handful of giants that now dominate the digital economy and are the world’s most valuable companies, has faced a series of antitrust pressures under both President Trump and President Joe Biden.

The European Union has also attempted to intervene, using strong online antitrust rules to regulate an industry that the US created and supported with a more “hands-off” approach.

However, it remains unclear how aggressively either government will continue to pursue this issue. Tech CEOs are trying to curry favor with Trump by promising to invest in US projects and donate to his inauguration fund should he win a second term.

Attorney General Pam Bondi praised Judge Mehta’s opinion on Tuesday, stating that the administration “will continue its legal efforts to hold companies accountable for monopolistic practices.”

In Europe, Google received a last-minute reprieve from a penalty for its practice of placing online ads in search results.

The intervention by EU Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič to delay the fine came as Trump threatened to block the sale of chips and other technology to countries he said were discriminating against American companies.

Looming over many of the cases targeting the largest tech companies is the question of how to apply long-standing antitrust law to a new type of business, like Google, that offers its services to consumers for free.

Bill Kovacic, an antitrust law professor at George Mason University who served as chairman of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) at the end of the George W. Bush administration, said this case demonstrates that the federal government can win by applying old competition laws to modern digital markets.

In August 2024, Mehta had ruled that Google illegally captured 90% of the internet search market by partnering with iPhone maker Apple to become the default search provider in the Safari web browser.

This agreement essentially excluded potential competitors. Google had made similar deals with phone manufacturers and mobile carriers like Samsung and Verizon. Mehta also found that Google had illegally monopolized the market for ads displayed alongside search results.

Mehta’s decision also points to how the technology sector has changed since the case began in October 2020, prohibiting Google from making Gemini its default AI product on mobile devices.

The ruling notes that the generative AI (GenAI) market is significantly more competitive than the search market, listing models from competitors such as OpenAI, Microsoft, and Anthropic.

Mehta’s initial ruling was delivered after a 10-week trial, followed by a remedies hearing in April. During the second hearing, the Department of Justice asked Mehta to break up the company to dismantle its illegal monopoly.

Other significant antitrust cases that could fundamentally change how the technology sector operates in America and around the world are also pending.

These lawsuits and investigations have emerged as lawmakers and regulators worry that tech companies will corner the artificial intelligence market just as they have in e-commerce, social media, and online search.

Amazon is set to go to trial in early 2027 over allegations that it stifles competition to defraud sellers and consumers, offering a poor shopping experience filled with confusing ads.

Apple faces allegations that by selling billions of iPhones since 2007, it has locked users into its products through designs intended to increase costs for consumers, developers, and artists. Discovery and evidence gathering in that case will continue until early 2027.

Chipmaker Nvidia is the subject of a Department of Justice investigation over its acquisition of the artificial intelligence startup Run:ai.

America

US national debt hits record $40 trillion as borrowing accelerates

Published

on

The US national debt has reached a record $40 trillion as borrowing expanded at a historic pace.

The development has heightened investor concern over the state of US public finances, despite Donald Trump’s pledge to bring spending under control.

Gross federal debt crossed the threshold on Tuesday, according to Treasury Department data published on Wednesday.

Calculations by the Financial Times show that debt climbed by $3 trillion over the past year, registering the fastest rate of increase in history outside the pandemic period.

Marc Goldwein, senior policy director at the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget think tank, said:

“This is like a giant, flashing ‘check engine’ light. It doesn’t mean your engine will melt down tomorrow, but it is a clear sign that things have gotten quite out of hand. And it’s not just the size of the number; it’s the speed at which we’ve reached it.”

The US national debt has surged over the past two decades, climbing from below $6 trillion at the start of the century (about $12 trillion in 2026 dollar terms) as massive public spending during the financial crisis and the Covid-19 pandemic compounded enormous budget deficits.

In the past 10 years alone, the total debt load has doubled. Debt held by the public—a key gauge tracked by markets that excludes intra-governmental holdings—now exceeds $32 trillion, roughly equal to the size of the US economy.

The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office expects debt held by the public to surpass the post-Second World War record of 106% of GDP by the end of the decade and to reach 120% by 2036.

As borrowing increased, investors began demanding a higher premium to hold US bonds.

This has driven interest rates higher, leaving debt servicing costs larger than national defence spending.

The situation has created unease in Washington. On Wednesday, prior to the release of the debt data, the Treasury Department announced it would double its buybacks of long-term government debt in a bid to halt a recent sell-off.

Last week, the US paid its highest borrowing costs since 2001 to sell 30-year bonds.

Wednesday’s 10-year Treasury auction produced the highest yields since 2007 as investors fretted over the scale of the debt.

Ed Yardeni, president of Yardeni Research, said: “That is an awful lot of money being borrowed. It is going to feed on itself with interest expenses. If interest rates rise because of concerns about the high debt load, that will lead to even more interest expense. It’s a vicious cycle.”

Trump returned to office in 2025 promising to rein in “wasteful” government spending.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent pledged to reduce the budget deficit to 3% of GDP by the end of Trump’s term.

However, measures to trim spending in some areas were offset by broad tax cuts in the president’s signature 2025 fiscal legislation, the “One Big Beautiful Bill”, which will add more than $4 trillion to the debt by 2034.

Trump also requested an increase of more than 50% in annual defence spending, seeking $1.5 trillion in the largest budget request in US history.

The deficit fell to 5.9% of GDP in 2025 from 6.3% the previous year. The CBO expects the deficit to decline to 5.8% this year. The US national debt comprises years of accumulated deficits compounded by interest charges.

Analysts noted that both US political parties missed opportunities during periods of economic expansion to take significant steps toward curbing spending.

Calculations by the Congressional Joint Economic Committee indicate that over the past year, total national debt grew by roughly $7.9 billion a day, or approximately $91,000 per second.

Budget specialists said they hoped crossing the $40 trillion threshold would spur politicians from both parties to take meaningful steps to bring borrowing back under control.

Michael Peterson, head of the Peterson Foundation, a think tank dedicated to returning debt to a sustainable trajectory, said:

“My hope is that this serves as a national alarm and wake-up call to address our fiscal future. If we keep borrowing this much, we are going to face a day of reckoning in financial markets… People will wake up one day and decide: ‘You know what? I’m more worried about the United States now. I’m going to demand higher interest rates, or I’m going to put my money somewhere else.'”

Continue Reading

America

Independent US oil firms set to sign output deals in Venezuela

Published

on

Several independent US oil producers are expected to sign production contracts with Venezuela’s state-owned oil company in the coming days.

According to sources who spoke to Politico on condition of anonymity because details of the event have not yet been made public, a signing ceremony involving several small US producers and Petróleos de Venezuela (PDVSA) was scheduled to take place in Houston on Tuesday (18 August) evening.

One source said Venezuela’s oil minister and the head of PDVSA’s exploration division were scheduled to attend the ceremony. Another source added that the event could be postponed until Wednesday morning.

The White House, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment, was not expected to be officially involved in Tuesday’s ceremony.

However, the development follows a visit by senior officials to Caracas in late April, where they signed memorandums of understanding that established the framework for formal production agreements in the country, which holds some of the world’s largest oil reserves.

Despite the tailwind provided by high crude prices, negotiations had stalled over key details such as dispute resolution, while officials in Caracas contended with two devastating earthquakes in June that claimed thousands of lives.

Venezuela’s interim president, Delcy Rodríguez, announced new regulations last month that offer more favourable fiscal terms to international oil companies.

According to an industry source close to the negotiations, the signing of the contracts comes after the Trump administration renewed pressure on Rodríguez to ensure PDVSA concludes agreements with American firms.

The source said these efforts included outreach by Secretary of State Marco Rubio to discuss how increased oil revenues could assist the country following the devastating earthquake earlier this summer.

The source added:

“Delcy reached a renewed awareness that increased oil production is the way to rebuild after the earthquakes and to achieve what her government wants to do for the people suffering from the earthquakes.”

David Goldwyn, president of the international energy consultancy Goldwyn Global Strategies, said investments from independent oil producers and boosting output from existing fields would serve as the “primary source of new oil growth for the next few years” for Venezuela.

“While the oil majors are trying to buy time to see how the political situation clarifies and whether they can cherry-pick the best assets, independent companies can de-risk their projects in the short term,” Goldwyn said.

However, Goldwyn noted that these investments would add no more than 300,000 barrels per day to the country’s oil production over the next year, falling far short of the multi-million-barrel increase that officials in Caracas and Washington wish to see.

“Until the framework improves, electricity is restored, and the political picture becomes clear, all we will see is incremental production growth,” the strategist said.

Continue Reading

America

US-Brazil rift widens over proposed sanctions and trade tariffs

Published

on

Diplomatic tensions between the two countries remain at a peak as the US government considers new sanctions targeting a judge on Brazil’s Supreme Court.

According to sources familiar with the matter who spoke to the Financial Times (FT), the Trump administration is evaluating new measures against Justice Alexandre de Moraes, whom it sanctioned last year on human rights grounds before subsequently rescinding that decision.

Washington’s renewed focus on the magistrate threatens to widen the rift between Brazil and the US across trade and political spheres, casting a shadow over upcoming elections in Latin America’s largest nation.

A little over a year ago, De Moraes was subjected to sanctions under the Global Magnitsky Act. US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent accused him at the time of engaging in a “repressive censorship campaign, arbitrary detentions that violate human rights, and politicized prosecutions,” including measures directed at former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro.

Bolsonaro, an ally of Donald Trump, was sentenced last year to 27 years in prison for plotting a coup.

However, sanctions targeting the judge, his wife, and a company owned by his family were lifted in December following a meeting and phone conversations between Trump and his Brazilian counterpart, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.

According to a source familiar with the matter who requested anonymity, US interest in De Moraes was revived partly due to a case that ignited a debate over press freedom in Brazil.

The judge authorized police raids against a journalist and two sources as part of an investigation into media coverage concerning a Supreme Court justice and his family.

De Moraes defended the action, arguing that the information in question had been illegally obtained and disclosed, thereby endangering the safety of the justice’s family.

The judge gained global prominence several years ago following a public conflict with Elon Musk, which briefly led to the billionaire’s X platform being blocked in Brazil.

Supporters say he “helped protect Brazilian democracy against a wave of misinformation.”

However, critics, including the Trump administration, view him as violating free speech rights.

“He went after the president’s supporters. Not just Elon Musk, but MAGA supporters in Brazil as well. Even if we want to build good relations with Brazil, it is clear that this man is an adversary,” said a person familiar with the US government’s thinking.

Another person stated that the reimposition of Magnitsky sanctions is “under evaluation,” noting that such sanctions entail the freezing of US-based assets and a prohibition on American companies and individuals conducting business with targeted parties.

While it remains unclear whether or when a decision will be reached, any such move would intensify an escalating retaliatory spiral between the two most populous countries in the Americas.

Tensions initially erupted more than a year ago when Trump imposed a 50% tariff on Brazil while demanding that prosecution proceedings against Bolsonaro be dropped.

That tariff was subsequently invalidated by the US Supreme Court.

A brief period of de-escalation since then has drawn to a close, with the US applying a 25% import tariff on numerous Brazilian products in July.

Last month, Brazil denied entry to two Trump envoys over concerns regarding potential interference in its upcoming October elections. Washington rejects those allegations.

Lula, who is seeking re-election for a fourth presidential term, suggested that the US might act to support his main opponent, Senator Flavio Bolsonaro, the jailed former leader’s son.

The 80-year-old president has also engaged in a sharp public exchange of words with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

On Sunday, thousands of supporters gathered to welcome Lula at a stadium in Sao Bernardo do Campo, an industrial suburb of Sao Paulo, for the official launch of his election campaign.

Lula originally achieved prominence in the area during the late 1970s as a union leader heading metalworkers’ strikes.

Speaking at the venue, Lula said, “I thank the working men and women of this country who believed that someone like themselves could achieve more than someone different from them. As long as I am alive, I will not stop fighting, and I will not allow the right [to prevail].”

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey