Connect with us

Published

on

Policy advocates who have been pushing for new legislation reining in Big Tech’s power have seen their hopes lifted and shattered several times throughout the past few months.

Last week marked one of the brighter notes for those supporting the push for new antitrust laws, when the House passed a package of bills giving enforcers more resources to go after anti-competitive mergers and giving state attorneys general more power over in which courts they can bring antitrust lawsuits.

While the legislation that passed 242-184 is less ambitious in scope than some of the more sweeping proposals making their way through both chambers of Congress, it is cause for hope, according to a new memo from the Tech Oversight Project, a nonprofit that advocates for antitrust reform.

“Big Tech never loses a legislative fight – and they just did,” Executive Director Sacha Haworth said in a memo to allies Thursday that was shared exclusively with CNBC. Recipients included Democratic offices on Capitol Hill, think tanks and a coalition of advocacy organizations, according to the group.

The Tech Oversight Project receives funding, as The Washington Post has reported, from the Omidyar Network, created by regulation advocate and eBay founder Pierre Omidyar, and from the advocacy arm of the Economic Security Project, a nonprofit led by Facebook co-founder Chris Hughes who has called for his former company’s break up.

Haworth, a Democratic political campaign veteran, makes the case that the decisive passage of the legislation last week shows there is still a chance for two other key bills to pass in the lame-duck session later this year. Those bills are the American Innovation and Choice Online Act (AICO) and the Open App Markets Act (OAMA), which would essentially bar large platforms like Amazon, Apple and Google from favoring their own products over rivals that rely on their marketplaces (the latter bill is focused squarely on mobile app stores).

Earlier this summer, antitrust reform advocates looked to the lame duck only as a Hail Mary, since many felt there was still a chance to schedule a vote before the August recess, an informal marker of when midterm electioneering gets into full swing, making it harder to pass new laws. But as the legislative days ticked away, it became clear advocates would need to refocus their sights on the weeks following the midterms.

According to Haworth, last week’s vote provided some reason for optimism.

She notes House Democrats who voted against the package were not among those in the top 20% most competitive districts in the country, based on data from the Cook Political Report. That runs counter to speculation that congressional leaders may be hesitant to schedule a vote on AICO and OAMA to spare Democrats in competitive races from having to vote on an issue that could be used against them.

Haworth goes as far as to say, “if this voting pattern holds, AICO and OAMA will breeze past both chambers with ease.”

She contends Rep. Ken Buck, R-Colo., the key Republican champion of tech antitrust reform in the House, delivered on his promise of “a tidal wave of Republican votes,” despite opposition from other prominent party members like House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., and Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jim Jordan, R-Ohio.

“Despite attempts by Big Tech to discredit Grassley and Buck’s efforts, they proved their hypothesis right: If brought to the full floor, a significant portion of Republicans would cross over to join Democrats in holding Big Tech accountable,” Haworth wrote, referring to Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, who has championed the bills in that chamber.

Haworth wrote that the contradictory reasons given by Jordan and Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., to oppose antitrust reform should prove that “their argument is a red herring meant to muddy the waters.” While Jordan contended the bills on the table would help platforms censor information, Lofgren argued it would do the opposite, making it harder for them to moderate content.

“Democrats have been pretty open about the fact that they want these bills because they believe it will help them censor conservatives,” Jordan spokesperson Russell Dye said in a statement. A spokesperson for Lofgren did not immediately provide a comment.

Adam Kovacevich, CEO of the tech-funded left-of-center advocacy group Chamber of Progress similarly pushed back on Haworth’s critique.

“Our polling this week makes it obvious that voters’ top priority on tech policy is content moderation, an issue which AICOA and the Open Apps Market Act make worse,” he said in a statement. The bills’ Democratic sponsors have said they would not weaken content moderation. “More than a dozen Democrats have raised serious concerns that these bills would stop platforms from taking down harmful content, and that issue still hasn’t been resolved.”

Finally, the memo contends that lame-duck legislation is becoming more common, citing a Pew Research Center article from last year that found a significant percentage of legislation passed in recent years has been in the lame-duck period. In the 116th Congress spanning from 2019 to 2020, for example, nearly 44% of bills passed did so in the lame duck.

“Big Tech and their allies will continue to push the narrative that bipartisan antitrust reform is dead,” Haworth wrote. “Not so fast. While anti-Big Tech advocates remain clear-eyed about the task at hand, the outcome is not set in stone.”

Read the full letter from The Tech Oversight Project below:

Continue Reading

Technology

Here’s what Elon Musk said about tariffs and their potential effect on Tesla

Published

on

By

Here's what Elon Musk said about tariffs and their potential effect on Tesla

U.S. President Donald Trump talks to the media, next to Tesla CEO Elon Musk with his son X Æ A-12, at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., March 11, 2025. 

Kevin Lamarque | Reuters

Elon Musk said on Tuesday that he doesn’t like high or unpredictable tariffs, but any decision on what happens with them “is entirely up to the president of the United States.”

Speaking on his company’s first-quarter earnings call, with tariff-related uncertainty swirling across the economy, Musk said Tesla is in a relatively good position, compared to other U.S. automakers, because it has “localized supply chains” in North America, Europe and China.

Musk said Tesla is the “least-affected car company with respect to tariffs at least in most respects.”

Tesla reported troubling quarterly earnings and sales on Tuesday, including a 20% year-over-year drop in automotive revenue and a 71% plunge in net income. The company also said that it wasn’t providing any guidance for 2025 at least until its second-quarter update.

While Musk is one of President Donald Trump’s closest advisers, tariffs are the one issue where he’s partially broken with the administration. He recently called Peter Navarro, Trump’s top trade adviser, a “moron” and “dumber than a sack of bricks.”

On Tuesday’s call, however, Musk said, “If some country is doing something predatory with tariffs,” or “if a government is providing extreme financial support for a particular industry, then you have to do something to counteract that.”

Tesla’s stock price has been hammered since the president floated his plan for widespread tariffs earlier this month, and that was after the shares plunged 36% in the first quarter, their worst performance for any period since 2022.

Because Tesla manufactures cars that it sells in the U.S. domestically, the company isn’t subject to Trump’s 25% tariff on imported cars. But Tesla counts on materials and supplies from China, Mexico, Canada and elsewhere for manufacturing equipment, automotive glass, printed circuit boards, battery cells and other products.

Musk said he offers his advice to the president on tariffs.

“He will listen to my advice. But then it’s up to him, of course, to make his decision,” Musk said. “I’ve been on the record many times saying that I believe lower tariffs are generally a good idea.”

He added that he’s an advocate for “predictable tariff structures,” as well as “free trade and lower tariffs.”

Musk said Tesla’s energy business faces an “outsized” impact from tariffs because it sources lithium iron phosphate battery cells, used in his company’s cars, from China.

“We’re in the process of commissioning equipment for the local manufacturing of LFP battery cells in the U.S.,” he said. But he said the company can “only serve a fraction of our total installed capacity” with its local equipment.

“We’ve also been working on securing additional supply chain from non-china based suppliers, but it will take time,” he said.

Musk called Tesla the most “vertically integrated car company” but said that there are still plenty of parts and materials that come from other countries. Even though it’s built a lithium refinery in Texas, “we’re not growing rubber trees and mining iron yet,” he said.

WATCH: Tariffs on batteries out of China can end up being really costly

Tariffs on batteries out of China can end up being really costly for tariffs, says Fmr. Tesla President

Continue Reading

Technology

Tesla CEO Musk says time he spends on DOGE will drop ‘significantly’ next month

Published

on

By

Tesla CEO Musk says time he spends on DOGE will drop 'significantly' next month

Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla Inc., in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, D.C., on Feb. 11, 2025.

Aaron Schwartz | Bloomberg | Getty Images

Tesla CEO Elon Musk began his company’s earnings call on Tuesday by saying that his time spent running President Donald Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency will drop “significantly” starting in May.

Musk, who has watched Tesla’s stock tumble by more than 40% this year, said he’ll continue to support the president with DOGE “to make sure that the waste and fraud that we stop does not come roaring back.”

After spending almost $300 million in the 2024 campaign to help return Trump to the White House, Musk created DOGE and joined the administration with a mission to drastically reduce the size and capability of the federal government.

He said he’ll continue to spend a “day or two per week” on government issues “for as long as the president would like me to do so.”

Musk’s commentary came after his company reported disappointing first-quarter results, including a 20% year-over-year slump in automotive revenue and 71% plunge in net income.

In addition to challenges the company already faced, such as competition out of China and an aging fleet of electric vehicles, Tesla has recently been hit with protests in the U.S. and Europe and brand damage due to Musk’s ties to Trump and his support of Germany’s far-right AfD party.

“The protests that you’ll see out there, they’re very organized,” Musk said on Tuesday’s call. He claimed, without evidence, that some people are likely protesting “because they’re receiving fraudulent money” or are “recipients of wasteful largesse.”

On its website, which was last updated on Sunday, DOGE says its cuts have led to an estimated $160 billion in savings. However, Musk’s estimates of savings have been challenged, and DOGE has deleted some of the largest purported savings.

Over that same stretch, Tesla has lost roughly $600 billion in market cap.

DOGE has also made cuts at agencies charged with oversight of his companies. They include the SEC, Federal Aviation Administration and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

The White House said in early February that Musk was serving as a “special government employee,” a designation with fewer requirements when it comes to conflict-of-interest disclosures and ethics policies.

The Department of Justice says the title is for anyone expected to work for the government for 130 days or less in a year. The Trump administration will hit its 130th day at the end of May.

Job cuts from DOGE’s work have come from across the government, at agencies including the Internal Revenue Service, National Park Service, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and the departments of Agriculture, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, and Veterans Affairs, according to the Associated Press.

As of February, staffers from DOGE had pushed top-ranking officials at the Department of Education out of their offices, rearranged the furniture and set up white noise machines to muffle their voices, according to employees at the agency. U.S. senators expressed concern that DOGE had possibly gained access to federal student loan data on tens of millions of borrowers.

Also in February, the Trump administration said that USAID would shut down as an independent agency and be moved under the State Department.

WATCH: Musk needs to recommit to Tesla

Elon Musk needs to recommit to Tesla and say he's leaving Trump administration: Wedbush's Dan Ives

Continue Reading

Technology

Meta could take a $7 billion hit this year because of Trump’s tough China tariffs

Published

on

By

Meta could take a  billion hit this year because of Trump's tough China tariffs

This photo illustration created on Jan. 7, 2025, in Washington, D.C., shows an image of Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Meta, and an image of the Meta logo.

Drew Angerer | AFP | Getty Images


Meta’s core online advertising business could take a $7 billion hit this year due to President Donald Trump’s tough China tariffs impacting retailers in the country.

That’s according to a MoffettNathanson research note published Tuesday that analyzes the potential impact of China-linked retailers like Temu and Shien slashing their Facebook and Instagram advertising budgets amid the U.S. and China trade dispute.

The MoffettNathanson analysts pointed to Meta’s latest annual report in which the company revealed that its China revenue was $18.35 billion in 2024, equating to a little over 11% of total its total sales. Like other analysts, MoffettNathanson believe Temu and Shien comprise the bulk of Meta’s China business, and if those online retailers cut back on their ad campaigns this year, the social networking giant’s 2025 ad sales could be impacted by $7 billion.

Meta did not immediately respond for a request for comment.

There are already signs of a pullback, the analysts wrote, citing a CNBC report about Temu reducing its U.S. advertising spending and seeing a big drop in its Apple App Store rankings following Trump’s China tariffs.

“China’s importance to Meta’s business cannot be overstated,” the analysts wrote in the note. “While Meta does not provide a country-level breakdown of revenue within Europe, we logically can presume that China is Meta’s second-largest revenue source after the United States — a remarkable position for a country where Meta has no users or active platforms.”

Meta could be in even more trouble if the broader markets heads into a recession this year, as some analysts and corporate financial chiefs have predicted. A “truly prolonged economic downturn” combined with the U.S. and China trade dispute “could wipe $23 billion in 2025 advertising revenues off Meta’s books and crush our 2025 earnings by -25%,” the analysts said.

“As noted earlier, we believe Meta is particularly exposed to a pullback in ad spend from Chinese advertisers,” the analysts said. “In a scenario where a recession is triggered or exacerbated by escalating trade tensions, Meta would face a dual headwind: cyclical advertising weakness and a targeted decline in Chinese ad spend.”

The MoffettNathanson analysts still maintain a Buy rating on Meta, said they have but decreased their target price by $185 to $525.

Meta shares have dropped about 19% to $499.36 since Trump was officially sworn in as U.S. president for the second time.

The company reports its first-quarter earnings next Wednesday.

WATCH: Fmr. DOJ antitrust chief: Antitrust enforcement is most important.

Fmr. DOJ antitrust chief: Antitrust enforcement is most important in times of tech inflection points

Continue Reading

Trending