A group of US lawmakers has urged President Donald Trump to open a formal trade investigation into the European Union's two flagship technology laws, arguing that enforcement has fallen unfairly on American companies and warrants retaliation under US trade powers.
The push, set out in a letter reported on Tuesday, points to a possible Section 301 inquiry, the same mechanism Washington has used to justify tariff threats against trading partners.
At the centre of the complaint sit the Digital Markets Act and the Digital Services Act, the pair of laws Brussels uses to police competition and content on the largest online platforms.
The lawmakers contend that the rules disproportionately hit US firms including Apple, Google, Meta, and Amazon, a characterisation the European Commission has consistently rejected. The letter lands after more than a year of transatlantic friction over the bloc's digital rulebook.
The 💜 of EU tech
The latest rumblings from the EU tech scene, a story from our wise ol' founder Boris, and some questionable AI art. It's free, every week, in your inbox. Sign up now!
In February 2025, Trump signed a memorandum directing agencies to scrutinise foreign rules that he said discriminated against US technology, naming the Digital Markets Act and Digital Services Act specifically.
Tensions sharpened in April 2025, when the Commission fined Apple 500 million euros and Meta 200 million euros for breaching the Digital Markets Act, its first penalties under the law. By April 2026, CNBC reported that EU fines on large technology companies had topped 7 billion dollars over two years.
The lawmakers want the administration to treat that record as an actionable trade barrier. A Section 301 investigation, run by the Office of the US Trade Representative, can lead to tariffs or other restrictions if it concludes that a foreign practice is unreasonable or discriminatory.
And it is the same statute Washington used to justify tariffs on Chinese goods during Trump's first term. The signatories described the EU rules as a de facto tax on American success.
A move against Brussels would not be the trade office's first use of the tool this year. The USTR opened a series of Section 301 investigations across 2026 covering a range of countries and sectors, a record the letter's backers point to as evidence that a digital-rules case is well within reach.
House Judiciary Committee chairman Jim Jordan has been among the most vocal critics, having pressed EU officials for briefings on how the Digital Markets Act is enforced.
Lawmakers in that camp argue the laws hand an advantage to Chinese rivals and raise data-security concerns, claims the Commission disputes.
The request aligns with the posture of the administration's own trade team. US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer has warned that Washington would use every tool at its disposal against EU-style digital rules, and think tanks close to the debate have openly made the case for a Section 301 response.
Brussels has held its ground. The European Commission maintains that both laws apply equally to every company operating in the single market, regardless of where it is based, and describes regulation of its own economy as a sovereign right. It has also linked its approach to commitments made under the EU-US Turnberry trade deal.
Apple and Meta have both challenged their fines, with Apple arguing that the rules force design changes it says could weaken user privacy.
The companies have continued to contest the decisions through the EU courts even as the wider political dispute has hardened.
Neither the White House nor the trade representative's office had issued a formal response to the letter at the time of reporting. The EU delegation in Washington has previously said the bloc engages with US concerns while defending the substance of its rules.
Whether the administration acts is now the open question. Opening a Section 301 case would mark a significant escalation, moving the dispute from rhetoric and fines toward the machinery of a trade fight, and would test the fragile truce the two sides have reached on tariffs.