Sundar Pichai / Google

On August 5, 2024, Judge Amit Mehta issued a 286-page ruling in United States v. Google: "Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly. It has violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act." Google controlled 89.2% of the general search market and 94.9% of mobile search. That dominance was not the product of superior technology — it was the product of $20 billion in annual payments to Apple to guarantee Google as the exclusive default search engine on every iPhone and Safari browser. Similar payments locked up Samsung, Verizon, and Mozilla. The exclusive dealing contracts made it economically irrational for any device maker to offer rival search engines as defaults, eliminating the viable distribution channel that would have allowed competitors to reach scale. The case was filed by the DOJ in October 2020, joined by 30+ state attorneys general. The trial ran nine weeks in fall 2023. In September 2025, the court issued remedies: Chrome was not broken off, but Google was barred from entering new exclusive default agreements and required to share search index data with rivals. The DOJ called the remedies insufficient and filed a cross-appeal in February 2026, seeking structural relief. This is the first finding of illegal tech monopolization since United States v. Microsoft in 2000. The mechanism is identical: use control of the distribution chokepoint to exclude rivals before they can reach scale, then maintain the position through payments rather than merit.

• ▸August 5, 2024: Judge Mehta ruling — "Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly."
• ▸Market share: 89.2% general search; 94.9% mobile search.
• ▸Google paid Apple ~$20B/yr (2022 peak) to be exclusive default on iPhone/Safari. Total default payments to all partners: ~$26B/yr.
• ▸Exclusive agreements with Apple, Samsung, Verizon, and Mozilla barred rival search engines from default positions.
• ▸DOJ filed October 2020; 30+ state AGs joined; trial ran September–November 2023.
• ▸September 2, 2025: Remedies ruling. Chrome not divested. Google barred from new exclusive default deals. Required to share search index data with rivals.
• ▸January 16, 2026: Google filed Notice of Appeal. February 3, 2026: DOJ cross-appeal seeking stronger structural remedies.
• ▸This is the first major antitrust finding against a US tech company since United States v. Microsoft Corp. in 2000.

On April 17, 2025, Judge Leonie Brinkema (E.D. Virginia) found Google liable for illegally monopolizing the publisher ad server and ad exchange markets. In a 115-page decision, the court found Google unlawfully tied its publisher ad server — DoubleClick for Publishers (DFP) — to its ad exchange (AdX), forcing publishers who wanted access to Google's enormous advertiser base to also use Google's ad server, locking out competitors at every layer. The conduct "substantially harmed" publishers and "ultimately, consumers of information on the open web." This is the second federal antitrust monopoly finding against Google in twelve months. The ad tech stack is the invisible plumbing of the modern web: every display ad served on every website passes through it. Google controls the pipe from both ends. Publishers use Google's ad server because they must. Advertisers use Google's tools because that's where publishers are. Google extracts a toll at every transaction. The European Commission had been reaching the same conclusion independently. Its EU fines for antitrust violations now total approximately €11.2 billion across four cases: €2.42B (Google Shopping, 2017), €4.34B (Android exclusionary practices, 2018), €1.49B (AdSense, 2019), and €2.95B (ad tech, September 2025). These fines — the largest antitrust penalties in EU history at the time each was issued — were paid. No executive faced personal liability. The fines amount to less than 4% of Google's annual revenue.

• ▸April 17, 2025: Judge Brinkema — Google illegally monopolized publisher ad server and ad exchange markets. 115-page decision.
• ▸Finding: Google unlawfully tied DFP (ad server) to AdX (ad exchange), foreclosing competition at both layers of the ad tech stack.
• ▸Court: conduct "substantially harmed" publishers and "ultimately, consumers of information on the open web."
• ▸Remedies trial September 2025; DOJ seeks divestiture of AdX and possibly DFP.
• ▸EU fines: €2.42B (2017, Shopping); €4.34B (2018, Android); €1.49B (2019, AdSense); €2.95B (2025, ad tech). Total: ~€11.2B (~$12.5B).
• ▸The 2018 Android fine was the largest antitrust fine in EU history at time of issue.
• ▸All fines paid. Zero executives criminally charged. Google's 2024 annual revenue: $350B.
• ▸Google controls publisher ad servers, ad exchanges, and advertiser tools — a vertical integration that extracts rent at every step of the transaction.

YouTube publicly claimed to be a general-audience platform — a claim that exempted it from the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act, which requires parental consent before collecting personal data from children under 13. Privately, YouTube marketed itself directly to children's product companies as a top destination for child audiences. In presentations to Mattel, Hasbro, and other toy brands, YouTube sales teams told advertisers it was "today's leader in reaching children age 6-11 against top TV channels." YouTube then served those children behavioral targeted advertising — collecting persistent identifiers, viewing histories, and personal data without notifying parents or obtaining consent. Google and YouTube earned approximately $50 million from these ads. The FTC and New York Attorney General investigated, found the evidence unambiguous, and on September 4, 2019, announced a settlement: Google and YouTube would pay $170 million — $136M to the FTC, $34M to New York. It was the largest COPPA settlement in FTC history at the time. The settlement also required YouTube to develop a system for flagging children's content and to stop collecting personal data from viewers of children's videos — requirements that reflected what the law had already required for years, before Google chose to ignore it. No individual was charged. The $50 million in revenue Google earned by violating children's privacy cost the company $170 million and a new compliance system. The ratio — 3.4× — is not a deterrent.

• ▸YouTube publicly claimed to be general-audience, exempting itself from COPPA parental consent requirements.
• ▸YouTube sales teams privately told Mattel, Hasbro, and other toy companies it was "today's leader in reaching children age 6-11 against top TV channels."
• ▸YouTube served behavioral targeted ads on children's content — collecting identifiers, viewing data, and personal information without parental consent. Earned ~$50M from this practice.
• ▸September 4, 2019: $170M settlement ($136M FTC + $34M NY AG). Largest COPPA settlement in FTC history at time of issue.
• ▸Settlement required YouTube to flag children's content, stop collecting personal data on viewers of children's videos, notify channel owners of COPPA obligations.
• ▸No individual executives charged or penalized.
• ▸$50M in revenues; $170M fine. Net deterrence: questionable.

For more than a decade, Google used a tax structure known as the "Double Irish with a Dutch Sandwich" to eliminate corporate taxes on the majority of its non-US revenue. The structure worked through deliberate corporate fiction: Google licensed its intellectual property to a subsidiary incorporated in Ireland but tax-domiciled in Bermuda — a jurisdiction with no corporate income tax. Revenue from Google's global operations flowed through a Dutch subsidiary (the "sandwich"), then onward to the Bermuda entity, landing in a zero-tax jurisdiction while appearing on paper to originate nowhere taxable. In 2019 — the final year Google used the structure before the window closed — the company shifted $75.4 billion in profits out of Ireland through this mechanism, paying effectively zero corporate tax in Ireland, the Netherlands, or the United States on those profits. In 2017 alone, the structure sheltered $23 billion from taxation. The arrangement was entirely legal. Ireland had maintained the loophole specifically to attract US multinationals — Alphabet, Meta, Apple, and others all used it. The EU, under state aid rules, eventually forced Ireland to close the loophole for new entrants in 2015 and for all users by end of 2020. Google restructured in early 2020 and consolidated its IP back to the US — only after the window closed, not as a voluntary act of tax compliance. Total estimated taxes avoided globally during the decade of use: in the tens of billions of dollars. The profits were real. The tax was optional. The law was written to make it so.

• ▸Structure: Google licensed IP to an Irish-incorporated but Bermuda-domiciled subsidiary. Revenue routed through Dutch entity ("sandwich") to Bermuda, landing in a zero-tax jurisdiction.
• ▸2019 (final year): Google shifted $75.4 billion in profits via the structure. Zero corporate tax paid in Ireland, Netherlands, or US on those earnings.
• ▸2017: The structure sheltered $23 billion from taxation in a single year.
• ▸The loophole was explicitly maintained by Ireland to attract US multinationals; legal under both Irish law and US tax treaties.
• ▸EU pressure: Ireland closed the Double Irish for new companies in 2015; required all legacy users to phase out by end of 2020.
• ▸Google restructured in early 2020 — after the deadline, not proactively.
• ▸Total estimated taxes avoided over the decade: tens of billions of dollars.
• ▸Citizens for Tax Justice documented the ongoing structure even post-restructure as "Delaware Alphabet Soup."

In April 2024, Google employees organized peaceful sit-ins at the company's New York City and Sunnyvale offices to protest Project Nimbus — a $1.2 billion joint contract between Google, Amazon, and the Israeli government to provide cloud computing and AI services. The protests were non-disruptive. Nine employees were arrested during office sit-ins. Google placed them on administrative leave and subsequently terminated 28 employees linked to the demonstrations; over 50 workers were ultimately affected. Workers and labor advocates filed unfair labor practice charges with the National Labor Relations Board, alleging the terminations constituted illegal retaliation for protected concerted activity. Workers sought reinstatement, back pay, and a public commitment from Google's leadership that it would not repeat the conduct. Google stated the employees had violated company policy by disrupting work. This was not the first time the NLRB had found Google violated labor law in retaliating against organizers. In December 2020, the NLRB issued a finding that Google had "illegally fired and spied on workers who tried to organize" in 2019 — when the company terminated four employees who were organizing internally against Project Maven (a Pentagon drone AI contract) and sharing salary information as part of an organizing effort. The fired workers did not get their jobs back. Project Nimbus continued. Sundar Pichai's 2024 compensation was $10.73 million. The 2026 prospective package approved by Alphabet's board: $692 million.

• ▸April 2024: Google employees conducted peaceful sit-ins at NYC and Sunnyvale offices protesting Project Nimbus ($1.2B cloud/AI contract with Israeli government).
• ▸9 workers arrested at the sit-ins. 28 workers subsequently fired. 50+ total affected.
• ▸Workers filed NLRB unfair labor practice charges alleging illegal retaliation for protected concerted activity. Sought reinstatement and back pay.
• ▸Google stated workers had violated company policy by "disrupting work and creating a threatening environment."
• ▸Prior pattern — December 2020 NLRB finding: Google "illegally fired and spied on workers who tried to organize" in 2019, when four employees organizing against Project Maven were terminated.
• ▸Project Nimbus continued. Fired workers were not reinstated.
• ▸Sundar Pichai 2024 compensation: $10.73M. Board-approved prospective package (2026): $692M tied to Waymo/Wing milestones.
• ▸Average Alphabet employee 2024 compensation: $331,894.