WASHINGTON, D.C. (10/13/2025) – Following the conclusion of the remedy trial for the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) case against Google’s ad tech, it has become clear that the government’s remedy proposals go far beyond the court’s decision and threaten to undermine competition and chill American innovation.
Concerningly, the DOJ’s lawsuit targeting Google for its success in a narrow segment of the advertising ecosystem would drive up costs and limit access to the tools businesses of all sizes rely on. Even the DOJ’s witnesses testified that the government’s remedies would result in “extreme pain,” particularly for the small- and medium-sized businesses that depend on affordable advertising to reach customers.
These proposals come despite warnings from leading tech industry experts who cautioned that heavy-handed remedies would result in less competition, slower economic growth, and fewer choices for consumers.
Below are comments from experts on the risks posed by the government’s proposed remedies in the Google ad tech case:
“The government is seeking a mix of remedies that go far beyond the scope of the judge’s original finding. Advertising is fiercely competitive, and businesses have more options than ever to reach customers. Antitrust remedies should be narrowly tailored to address specific identified harms.”
SIIA:
“The [DOJ’s] proposed “fix” could do more harm than good. Breaking up parts of the digital ad system would shake the foundation of the online economy that countless small businesses rely on. Google’s ad tech has helped keep the online economy vibrant and competitive. The DOJ’s extreme remedies could undermine that progress, raising costs for publishers and consumers while disrupting the innovation that drives the internet.”
“…[D]emanding Google divide up its advertising business…would mean online publishers and small business advertisers would have to grapple with a more complicated ad market, instead of enjoying the integrated suite of services Google provides today. Integrated advertising services are one-stop ad shops for small enterprises and entrepreneurs of all types, and it is their integrated nature that makes them so valuable to their customers. These benefits of scaled firms like Google are all too often ignored by antitrust regulators.”
“True competition in the marketplace, not government-mandated restructuring, is what drives innovation and benefits consumers. Throughout the trial, witnesses explained that the DOJ’s untested proposed remedies would cause harm to the small and medium-sized businesses that depend on affordable ads to reach customers on different mediums. We urge the court to reject the remedies proposed by the government, including a forced divestiture, which would be incredibly disruptive and an unprecedented overreach that would harm the entire digital ecosystem.”
Adam Kovacevich, Chamber of Progress:
“Compelling testimony from a publisher in the Google ad tech trial. [Publishers] value how Google monetizes…content, and worry that any ‘remedy’ would lead to lower performance and monetization.”
The Don’t Break What Works campaign is powered by the Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA). Learn more here.