CEO of Alphabet and Google Sundar Pichai in Warsaw, Poland on March 29, 2022.
Mateusz Wlodarczyk | Nurphoto | Getty Images
The Department of Justice’s latest challenge to Google’s tech empire is an ambitious swing at the company with the potential to rearrange the digital advertising market. But alongside the possibility of great reward comes significant risk in seeking to push the boundaries of antitrust law.
“DOJ is going big or going home here,” said Daniel Francis, who teaches antitrust at NYU School of Law and previously worked as deputy director of the Federal Trade Commission’s Bureau of Competition, where he worked on the agency’s monopoly case againstFacebook.
related investing news
The DOJ’s antitrust chief Jonathan Kanter has indicated he’s comfortable with taking risks, often saying in public remarks that it’s important to bring cases that seek to challenge current conventions in antitrust law. He said he prefers more permanent remedies like breakups compared to promises to change behavior. That sentiment comes through in the DOJ’s request in its latest lawsuit for the court to force Google to spin off parts of its ad business.
Antitrust experts say the Justice Department paints a compelling story about the ways Google allegedly used acquisitions and exclusionary strategies to fend off rivals and maintain monopoly power in the digital advertising space. It’s one that, if the government gets its way, would break apart a business that’s generated more than $50 billion in revenue for Google in the last quarter, potentially opening up an entire market in which Google is currently one of the most important players.
But, they warn, the government will face significant challenges in proving its case in a court system that progressive antitrust enforcers and many lawmakers believe has taken on a myopic view of the scope of antitrust law, especially when it comes to digital markets.
“If they prove the violations they allege, they’re going to get a remedy that’s going to shake up the market,” said Doug Melamed, a scholar-in-residence at Stanford Law School who served at the Antitrust Division, including as acting assistant attorney general, from 1996-2001 during the landmark case against Microsoft. “But it’s not obvious they’re going to win this case.”
Challenges and strengths
Experts interviewed for this article said the DOJ will face the challenge of charting relatively underexplored areas of antitrust law in proving to the court that Google’s conduct violated the law and harmed competition without benefitting consumers. Though that’s a tall order, it could come with a huge upside if the agency succeeds, possibly expanding the scope of antitrust law for digital monopoly cases to come.
“All antitrust cases are an uphill battle for plaintiffs, thanks to 40 years of case law,” said Rebecca Haw Allensworth, an antitrust professor at Vanderbilt Law School. “This one’s no exception.”
But, Allensworth added, the government’s challenges may be different than those in many other antitrust cases.
“Usually the difficulty, especially in cases involving platforms, is market definition,” she said. In this case, the government argued the relevant market is publisher ad servers, ad exchanges, and advertiser ad networks — the three sides of the advertising stack Google has its hand in, which the DOJ said it’s leveraged to box out rivals. “And here, I think that that is relatively straightforward for the DOJ.”
“One way to look at the latest complaint is that it is the newest and most complete draft of a critique that antitrust agencies in the U.S. and abroad have been building against Google for over a decade,” William Kovacic, who served on the Federal Trade Commission from 2006 to 2011 and is now a professor at George Washington Law, said in an email.
Google, for its part, has said the latest DOJ lawsuit “tries to rewrite history at the expense of publishers, advertisers and internet users.” It claims the government is trying to “pick winners and losers” and that its products have expanded options for publishers and advertisers.
Compared to the DOJ’s earlier lawsuit, which argued Google maintained its monopoly over search services through exclusionary contracts with phone manufacturers, this one advances more nontraditional theories of harm, according to Francis, the NYU Law professor and former FTC official. That also makes it more likely that Google will move to dismiss the case to at least narrow the claims it may have to fight later on — a move it did not take in the earlier suit, he added.
“This case breaks much more new ground and it articulates theories, or it seems to articulate theories, that are right out on the border of what existing antitrust prohibits,” Francis said. “And we’re going to find out, when all is said and done, where the boundaries of digital monopolization really lie.”
High risk, high reward?
CEO of Alphabet and Google Sundar Pichai in Warsaw, Poland on March 29, 2022.
Mateusz Wlodarczyk | Nurphoto | Getty Images
DOJ took a gamble with this case. But if it wins, the rewards could match the risk.
“In terms of the potential impact of the remedy, this could be a bigger case than Microsoft,” said Melamed.
Still, Francis cautioned, a court could order a less disruptive remedy, like paying damages if it finds the government was harmed as an advertising purchaser, or simply requiring Google to stop the allegedly illegal conduct, even if it rules in the DOJ’s favor.
Like all antitrust cases, this one is unlikely to be concluded anytime soon. Still, a key decision by the Justice Department could make it speedier than otherwise expected. The agency filed the case in the Eastern District of Virginia, which has gained a reputation as the “rocket docket” for its relatively efficient pace in moving cases along.
“What that signals to me is that, given the timeframe for antitrust litigation is notoriously slow, DOJ is doing everything that they can in their choice of venue to ensure that this litigation moves forward before technological and commercial changes make it obsolete,” Francis said.
He added that the judge who has been assigned the trial, Clinton appointee Leonie Brinkema, is regarded as smart and fair and has handled antitrust cases before, including one Francis litigated years ago.
“I could imagine that both sides will feel pretty good about having drawn Judge Brinkema as a fair, efficient and sophisticated judge who will move the case along in an expeditious way,” Francis said.
Still, there are hardly any judges who have experience with a case like this one, simply because there haven’t been that many digital monopolization cases decided in court.
“So any judge who would be hearing this case is going to be confronting frontier issues of antitrust theory and principle,” Francis said.
Immediate impact
Outside of the courts, the case could have a more immediate impact in other ways.
“From the point of view of strategy, the case adds a major complication to Google’s defense by increasing the multiplicity and seriousness of public agency antitrust enforcement challenges,” said Kovacic, the former FTC commissioner. “The swarming of enforcement at home and abroad is forcing the company to defend itself in multiple fora in the US and in jurisdictions such as the EU and India.”
Regardless of outcomes, Kovacic said the sheer volume of lawsuits and regulation can create a distraction for top management and will likely lead Google to more carefully consider its actions.
“That can be a serious drag on company performance,” Kovacic wrote.
The suit could also lend credence to lawmakers’ efforts to legislate around digital ad markets. One proposal, the Competition and Transparency in Digital Advertising Act, would prohibit large companies like Google from owning more than one part of the digital advertising system, so it couldn’t own tools on both the buy and sell side as it currently does.
Importantly, the bill is sponsored by Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary subcommittee on antitrust. Lee has remained skeptical of some other digital market antitrust reforms, but his leadership on this bill suggests there may be a broader group of Republicans willing to support this kind of measure.
“An antitrust lawsuit is good, but will take a long time and apply to only one company,” Lee tweeted following the DOJ’s announcement, saying he would soon reintroduce the measure. “We need to make sure competition works for everyone, and soon.”
Rep. Ken Buck, R-Colo., who has backed the House version of the bill, called the digital ad legislation “The most important bill we can move forward” in a recent interview with The Washington Post.
“This is clearly the blockbuster case so far from the DOJ antitrust division,” Francis said. “And I think it represents a flagship effort to establish new law on the borders of monopolization doctrine. And at the end of it — win, lose or draw — it’s really going to contribute to our understanding of what the Sherman Act actually prohibits in tech markets.”
Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella speaks during an event commemorating the 50th anniversary of the company at Microsoft headquarters in Redmond, Washington, on April 4, 2025. Microsoft Corp., determined to hold its ground in artificial intelligence, will soon let consumers tailor the Copilot digital assistant to their own needs.
David Ryder | Bloomberg | Getty Images
Microsoft will expand its employee base once again, CEO Satya Nadella told investor Brad Gerstner on a podcast that aired on Friday.
The software maker’s workforce didn’t budge in the 2025 fiscal year, which ended in June. It stood at 228,000, with multiple rounds of layoffs lowering the total number by at least 6,000. In July, Microsoft let go of another 9,000 workers.
“I will say we will grow our headcount, but the way I look at it is, that headcount we grow will grow with a lot more leverage than the headcount we had pre-AI,” Nadella said on the BG2 podcast. OpenAI, which has a broad partnership with Microsoft, introduced its ChatGPT assistant in 2022. Microsoft’s headcount grew by 22% in the 2022 fiscal year.
Employees will figure out how to do their jobs differently, Nadella said, adding that the company wants to ensure they can access artificial intelligence features in Microsoft 365 productivity software and the GitHub Copilot AI coding assistant. Those services draw on AI models from Anthropic and OpenAI.
“It’s the unlearning and learning process that I think will take the next year or so, then the headcount growth will come with max leverage,” he said.
A similar adjustment played out at corporations decades ago, Nadella said. To prepare forecasts, inter-office memos would circulate across multiple sites by fax, and then came email and Excel spreadsheets, he said.
“Right now, any planning, any execution, starts with AI. You research with AI, you think with AI, you share with your colleagues and what have you,” Nadella said.
Amazon’s senior vice president of people experience and technology, Beth Galetti, told workers in a memo that “this generation of AI is the most transformative technology we’ve seen since the Internet, and it’s enabling companies to innovate much faster than ever before (in existing market segments and altogether new ones).”
On the podcast, Nadella talked about a Microsoft executive who deals with networking fiber. As the company ramped up data center operations to meet rising cloud demand, the executive realized she wouldn’t be able to hire all the people she thought she needed, and so she built AI agents to handle maintenance, Nadella said.
“That is an example of you, to your point, a team with AI tools being able to get more productivity,” Nadella told Gerstner, who is founder and CEO of technology investment firm Altimeter Capital.
On Wednesday, Microsoft reported 12% year-over-year revenue growth and showed the widest operating margin since 2002.
Bob Hartheimer, CEO of Tennessee’s Evolve Bank & Trust, was fired after U.S. law enforcement officials caught him propositioning a law enforcement officer posing as a 15-year-old boy on gay dating app Grindr.
On Oct. 19, an employee of the Federal Bureau of Investigation logged onto Grindr while pretending to be a teen boy, and a user called “Tomm” wrote a message to that person saying, “Hey any chance u would hu with an older and chill guy,” according to an affidavit from a special agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigation that was unsealed on Tuesday.
The two discussed getting together in person later in the week, according to the affidavit. On Snapchat, they talked about the sex acts they might perform. “Tomm” asked for a photo of the “boy” without shorts on, and he also sent the undercover agent a picture of himself naked. The FBI was able to obtain an IP address for “Tomm” from Snapchat, as well as an address from Comcast, the affidavit showed.
Hartheimer was arrested in Memphis on Oct. 23 for attempted production of child pornography and transfer of obscene material to a minor, according to a warrant.
Blake Ballin, a lawyer representing Hartheimer, told CNBC on Saturday that Evolve has fired the CEO.
“Bob’s family is aware of the charges,” Ballin wrote in an email. “His family loves and supports him and requests privacy during this difficult period in their lives. We have no further comment at this time.”
The Wall Street Journal reported on Hartheimer’s firing from Evolve Bank on Friday. The bank did not respond to a request for comment from CNBC.
Last year, Evolve was caught up in the bankruptcy of financial technology startup Synapse, which cut off access to a system for handling transactions and account details. Fintech apps such as Yotta worked with Evolve and other banks, with Synapse acting as a middleman.
Synapse’s method of keeping app users’ money in various banks, including Evolve, created accounting problems, and up to $96 million in deposits went missing. Thousands of Americans lost money, CNBC reported.
In 2024, Evolve also suffered a cyberattack, during which hackers obtained customer information and demanded a ransom. The bank said it did not pay any ransom and the data was eventually posted online.
In August, Evolve, founded in 1925, named Hartheimer to replace CEO Scott Stafford, who retired after joining the bank in 2004.
“This is a structural change, demonstrating our continued commitment to doing the hard work to earn back the trust of our customers, employees, regulators, and investors,” Evolve said.
When he was hired, the bank touted Hartheimer’s experience as director of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s Division of Resolutions, as well as his years as a regulatory consultant for fintech companies.
“Over the past four decades, I’ve led, turned around, and advised institutions across the financial landscape,” Hartheimer wrote on his LinkedIn profile.
The bank reported net losses for each of the first three quarters of 2025 after being profitable since 2003, according to data on file with the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council.
— CNBC’s Dan Mangan and Hugh Son contributed reporting.
Disclosure: Comcast is the parent company of NBCUniversal, which owns CNBC. Versant would become the new parent company of CNBC upon Comcast’s planned spinoff of Versant.
The logo of Chinese-owned semiconductor company Nexperia is displayed at the chipmaker’s German facility, after the Dutch government seized control and auto industry bodies sounded the alarm over the possible impact on car production, in Hamburg, Germany, Oct. 23, 2025.
Jonas Walzberg | Reuters
Netherlands-based chipmaker Nexperia is at the heart of a standoff between the European Union, the U.S. and China that has triggered a near-crisis for global automakers.
The Dutch government seized control of Nexperia, owned by the Chinese company Wingtech, in October, citing national security concerns. The move prompted Beijing to block Nexperia products from leaving China.
Meetings are underway in Europe Saturday to attempt to defuse the escalating issue, and Chinese and U.S. authorities appear to be opening up a pathway for Nexperia’s China-based operations to resume exporting critical automotive chips.
Spokespeople for the White House and Nexperia did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
For now, however, the auto industry’s supply chain still hangs in the balance.
The dispute is threatening vehicle production worldwide as automakers warn of looming shortages of the chipmaker’s components, which are critical to basic electrical functions in cars and challenging to replace on short notice.
The battle has unfolded amid heightened scrutiny of Chinese-linked tech firms from Western governments, including the U.S., which recently tightened export-control rules to limit technology transfers to Chinese-owned entities.
Nexperia’s owner, Wingtech, was put on a U.S. blacklist in December 2024 for its alleged role “in aiding China’s government’s efforts to acquire entities with sensitive semiconductor manufacturing capability.”
Here’s what to know about where the dispute stands, and why it matters.
Why are Nexperia chips so important?
Nexperia manufactures billions of so-called foundation chips — transistors, diodes and power management components — that are produced in Europe, assembled and tested in China, and then re-exported to customers in Europe and elsewhere. Around 70% of chips made in the Netherlands are sent to China to be completed and re-exported to other countries.
The chips are basic and inexpensive, but are needed in almost every device that uses electricity. In cars, those chips are used to connect the battery to motors, for lights and sensors, for braking systems, airbag controllers, entertainment systems and electric windows.
While automakers typically have some stockpiles and alternative suppliers, it is difficult to switch supply sources overnight.
What happened and where do things stand?
In September, the Dutch government invoked a Cold War-era law to effectively take control of Nexperia, amid concerns that its Chinese owner was planning to shift intellectual property to another company it owned. A Dutch court also suspended Nexperia CEO, Wingtech founder Zhang Xuezhen, citing mismanagement.
Beijing retaliated weeks later by imposing export controls on certain Nexperia products made in China, escalating tensions and fueling fears of a broader supply chain shock. That prompted the company to tell carmakers it could no longer guarantee supplies.
But signs of a breakthrough have started to emerge.
On Friday, reports said the U.S. plans to announce that Nexperia will resume sending chips under a framework agreement reached during talks between President Donald Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping, citing sources familiar with the matter. And on Saturday, China said it will exempt some Nexperia chips from its export ban. Chinese officials did not specify what those exemptions could entail.
“We will comprehensively consider the actual situation of the enterprise and exempt eligible exports,” The Chinese Commerce Ministry said in a statement.
If finalized, the exemptions could ease immediate pressure on automakers. But the broader dispute over ownership, technology control and security oversight remains unresolved.