Latest news with #AssimakisKomninos
Express Tribune
a day ago
- Business
- Express Tribune
Meta and TikTok take EU to court over ‘unfair' Digital Services Act levy
Listen to article Meta Platforms and TikTok said a European Union supervisory fee levied on them was disproportionate and based on a flawed methodology, as they took their fight with tech regulators to Europe's second-highest court on Wednesday. Under the Digital Services Act that became law in 2022, the two companies and 16 others are subject to a supervisory fee amounting to 0.05% of their annual worldwide net income aimed at covering the European Commission's cost of monitoring their compliance with the law. The size of the annual fee is based on the number of average monthly active users for each company and whether the company posts a profit or loss in the preceding financial year. Meta told judges at the General Court it was not trying to avoid paying its fair share of the fee, but it questioned how the Commission had calculated the levy, saying it had been based on the revenue of the group rather than of the subsidiary. Meta's lawyer Assimakis Komninos told the panel of five judges the company still did not know how the fee was calculated. He said the provisions in the Digital Services Act, or DSA, "go against the letter and the spirit of the law, are totally untransparent with black boxes and have led to completely implausible and absurd results". ByteDance-owned Chinese online social media platform TikTok was equally critical. "What has happened here is anything but fair or proportionate. The fee has used inaccurate figures and discriminatory methods," TikTok lawyer Bill Batchelor told the court. "It inflates TikTok's fees, requires it to pay, not just for itself, but for other platforms and disregards the excessive fee cap," he said. He accused the Commission of double-counting the companies' users, saying this was discriminatory because users switching between their mobile phones and laptops would then be counted twice. He also said regulators had exceeded their legal power by setting the fee cap at the level of group profits. Commission lawyer Lorna Armati rejected both companies' arguments and defended the Commission's use of group profit as a reference value to calculate the supervisory fee. "When a group has consolidated accounts, it is the financial resources of the group as a whole that are available to that provider in order to bear the burden of the fee," she told the court. "The providers had sufficient information to understand why and how the Commission used the numbers that it did and there is no question of any breach of their right to be heard now, unequal treatment," she said. The Court is expected to issue its ruling next year. The cases are T-55/24 Meta Platforms Ireland v Commission and T-58/24 TikTok Technology v Commission.
Indian Express
2 days ago
- Business
- Indian Express
Meta and TikTok challenge tech fees in second highest EU court
Meta Platforms and TikTok said a European Union supervisory fee levied on them was disproportionate and based on a flawed methodology as they took their fight with tech regulators to Europe's second highest court on Wednesday. Under the Digital Services Act that became law in 2022, the two companies and 16 others are subject to a supervisory fee amounting to 0.05% of their annual worldwide net income aimed at covering the European Commission's cost of monitoring their compliance with the law. The size of the annual fee is based on the number of average monthly active users for each company and whether the company posts a profit or loss in the preceding financial year. Meta told judges at the General Court it was not trying to avoid paying its fair share of the fee, but it questioned how the Commission had calculated the levy, saying it had been based on the revenue of the group rather than of the subsidiary. Meta's lawyer Assimakis Komninos told the panel of five judges the company still did not know how the fee was calculated. He said the provisions in the Digital Services Act, or DSA, 'go against the letter and the spirit of the law, are totally untransparent with black boxes and have led to completely implausible and absurd results'. ByteDance-owned Chinese online social media platform TikTok was equally critical. 'What has happened here is anything but fair or proportionate. The fee has used inaccurate figures and discriminatory methods,' TikTok lawyer Bill Batchelor told the court. 'It inflates TikTok's fees, requires it to pay, not just for itself, but for other platforms and disregards the excessive fee cap,' he said. He accused the Commission of double counting the companies' users, saying this was discriminatory because users switching between their mobile phones and laptops would then be counted twice. He also said regulators had exceeded their legal power by setting the fee cap at the level of group profits. Commission lawyer Lorna Armati rejected both companies' arguments and defended the Commission's use of group profit as a reference value to calculate the supervisory fee. 'When a group has consolidated accounts, it is the financial resources of the group as a whole that are available to that provider in order to bear the burden of the fee,' she told the court. 'The providers had sufficient information to understand why and how the Commission used the numbers that it did and there is no question of any breach of their right to be heard now, unequal treatment,' she said. The Court is expected to issue its ruling next year. The cases are T-55/24 Meta Platforms Ireland v Commission and T-58/24 TikTok Technology v Commission.
The Hindu
2 days ago
- Business
- The Hindu
Meta and TikTok challenge tech fees in second highest EU court
Meta Platforms and TikTok said a European Union supervisory fee levied on them was disproportionate and based on a flawed methodology as they took their fight with tech regulators to Europe's second highest court on Wednesday. Under the Digital Services Act that became law in 2022, the two companies and 16 others are subject to a supervisory fee amounting to 0.05% of their annual worldwide net income aimed at covering the European Commission's cost of monitoring their compliance with the law. The size of the annual fee is based on the number of average monthly active users for each company and whether the company posts a profit or loss in the preceding financial year. Meta told judges at the General Court it was not trying to avoid paying its fair share of the fee, but it questioned how the Commission had calculated the levy, saying it had been based on the revenue of the group rather than of the subsidiary. Meta's lawyer Assimakis Komninos told the panel of five judges the company still did not know how the fee was calculated. He said the provisions in the Digital Services Act, or DSA, "go against the letter and the spirit of the law, are totally untransparent with black boxes and have led to completely implausible and absurd results". ByteDance-owned Chinese online social media platform TikTok was equally critical. "What has happened here is anything but fair or proportionate. The fee has used inaccurate figures and discriminatory methods," TikTok lawyer Bill Batchelor told the court. "It inflates TikTok's fees, requires it to pay, not just for itself, but for other platforms and disregards the excessive fee cap," he said. He accused the Commission of double counting the companies' users, saying this was discriminatory because users switching between their mobile phones and laptops would then be counted twice. He also said regulators had exceeded their legal power by setting the fee cap at the level of group profits. Commission lawyer Lorna Armati rejected both companies' arguments and defended the Commission's use of group profit as a reference value to calculate the supervisory fee. "When a group has consolidated accounts, it is the financial resources of the group as a whole that are available to that provider in order to bear the burden of the fee," she told the court. "The providers had sufficient information to understand why and how the Commission used the numbers that it did and there is no question of any breach of their right to be heard now, unequal treatment," she said. The Court is expected to issue its ruling next year. The cases are T-55/24 Meta Platforms Ireland v Commission and T-58/24 TikTok Technology v Commission.
Mint
2 days ago
- Business
- Mint
Meta and TikTok challenge EU supervisory fee in court over ‘Unfair' calculation: All details
Meta Platforms and TikTok have taken legal action against the European Commission, arguing that a supervisory fee imposed under the European Union's Digital Services Act (DSA) is disproportionate and based on flawed calculations. The challenge was heard on Wednesday by the General Court, Europe's second-highest judicial body. The fee, introduced as part of the DSA which came into effect in 2022, applies to 19 major online platforms, including Meta and TikTok. It is calculated at 0.05 per cent of a company's global net income and is intended to fund the European Commission's oversight of compliance with the legislation. However, both companies are contesting how the fee has been assessed. Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, criticised the methodology, saying the Commission relied on figures from the parent company rather than its EU-based subsidiaries. 'We are not trying to evade our obligations,' Meta's legal representative Assimakis Komninos told the five-judge panel. 'But the way the Commission has calculated the fee remains unclear to us. It lacks transparency, is riddled with inconsistencies, and produces implausible outcomes.' Komninos argued that the approach contradicts the intent of the DSA and leaves companies in the dark about how their dues are determined. TikTok, owned by China's ByteDance, echoed the criticism. Its lawyer, Bill Batchelor, said the fee imposed on TikTok was not only inflated but also unfairly penalised the platform for user behaviour. 'What has happened here is anything but proportionate,' Batchelor said. 'The Commission's method includes duplicated user counts, for example when someone uses TikTok on both a phone and a laptop. This leads to an overestimation of active users and skews the fee unfairly.' He further argued that the Commission had breached its legal limits by basing the fee cap on group-level profits, rather than on the finances of individual entities. In response, Commission lawyer Lorna Armati defended the institution's methodology. She said it was logical to use consolidated accounts when calculating the levy, as the financial strength of the entire group supports the subsidiary's ability to comply with regulatory costs. 'All providers were given enough information to understand the calculation process,' she said, denying any breach of the companies' rights or instances of unequal treatment. The legal challenges are part of two separate cases: T-55/24 Meta Platforms Ireland v Commission and T-58/24 TikTok Technology v Commission. A final ruling from the General Court is expected in 2026. (With inputs from Reuters)
Time of India
2 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
Meta and TikTok challenge tech fees in second highest EU court
Meta Platforms and TikTok said a European Union supervisory fee levied on them was disproportionate and based on a flawed methodology as they took their fight with tech regulators to Europe's second highest court on Wednesday. Under the Digital Services Act that became law in 2022, the two companies and 16 others are subject to a supervisory fee amounting to 0.05% of their annual worldwide net income aimed at covering the European Commission's cost of monitoring their compliance with the law. The size of the annual fee is based on the number of average monthly active users for each company and whether the company posts a profit or loss in the preceding financial year. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Treatment That Might Help You Against Knee Pain Knee pain | search ads Find Now Undo Meta told judges at the General Court it was not trying to avoid paying its fair share of the fee, but it questioned how the Commission had calculated the levy, saying it had been based on the revenue of the group rather than of the subsidiary. Meta's lawyer Assimakis Komninos told the panel of five judges the company still did not know how the fee was calculated. Live Events He said the provisions in the Digital Services Act, or DSA, "go against the letter and the spirit of the law, are totally untransparent with black boxes and have led to completely implausible and absurd results". Discover the stories of your interest Blockchain 5 Stories Cyber-safety 7 Stories Fintech 9 Stories E-comm 9 Stories ML 8 Stories Edtech 6 Stories ByteDance-owned Chinese online social media platform TikTok was equally critical. "What has happened here is anything but fair or proportionate. The fee has used inaccurate figures and discriminatory methods," TikTok lawyer Bill Batchelor told the court. "It inflates TikTok's fees, requires it to pay, not just for itself, but for other platforms and disregards the excessive fee cap," he said. He accused the Commission of double counting the companies' users, saying this was discriminatory because users switching between their mobile phones and laptops would then be counted twice. He also said regulators had exceeded their legal power by setting the fee cap at the level of group profits. Commission lawyer Lorna Armati rejected both companies' arguments and defended the Commission's use of group profit as a reference value to calculate the supervisory fee. "When a group has consolidated accounts, it is the financial resources of the group as a whole that are available to that provider in order to bear the burden of the fee," she told the court. "The providers had sufficient information to understand why and how the Commission used the numbers that it did and there is no question of any breach of their right to be heard now, unequal treatment," she said. The Court is expected to issue its ruling next year. The cases are T-55/24 Meta Platforms Ireland v Commission and T-58/24 TikTok Technology v Commission.
