US tech giants lobby Trump to tackle Australian social media rules

March 21, 2025

US tech giants lobby Trump to tackle Australian social media rules

By Brad Ryan in Washington DC
14h ago14 hours agoThu 20 Mar 2025 at 7:07pm
Loading…

In short:

The US’s tech lobby has used the Trump administration’s trade review to complain about regulation in Australia, including plans to impose charges on American social media companies to support Australian news outlets.

The sector says Australia is among countries imposing unfair “digital trade barriers”, and it wants the White House to consider that when devising its new tariffs strategy.

What’s next?

The Trump administration warns countries that impose unfair barriers on US companies will face new tariffs on April 2.

America’s big tech sector is lobbying the Trump administration to take up a new fight with the Australian government — over its rules governing social media and streaming services. 

Silicon Valley, whose top executives have cultivated close relationships with Donald Trump, is now pushing the new president to pressure Australia to relax its regulations or risk retaliation.

The Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA), representing the sector, has made a formal submission as part of the White House’s review of US trade policy.

It could lead to a new front in Mr Trump’s trade war, as he mulls whether to impose new tariffs on Australia as part of his mission to create more favourable trade conditions for US companies. 

Donald Trump sits at a desk holding a black folder open with yellow-gold curtains and two flags behind him.
Donald Trump is being lobbied by powerful players as he considers where to take his trade policy next. (Reuters: Elizabeth Frantz)

The CCIA’s submission complains about the Albanese government’s planned “News Bargaining Incentive” — a scheme that would force large social media and search companies to either make commercial deals with news outlets to use their content, or pay a separate charge.

The scheme was announced in December. It will replace an older system, under which Facebook (now Meta) and Google signed deals to pay the ABC and commercial media outlets to compensate for using their content. 

Meta opted out last year. But the new scheme means Meta, and other large social and search platforms, would have to pay whether they use news content or not. 

The government argues the companies, which raise revenue from Australian advertisers, have an obligation to support Australians’ ability to access quality news content.

But the CCIA calls the proposal a “coercive and discriminatory tax that requires US technology companies to subsidise Australian media companies”.

“Currently, the two companies targeted by the law pay $AU250 million annually through deals that were coerced through the threat of this law,” the submission says.

“However, with the threat of the new ‘incentive’ tax from the Australian government (rate yet to be determined), this cost is likely to significantly increase.”

The association also complains about proposed local content quotas for American streaming services. The quotas would force companies like Netflix to fund Australian productions, similar to rules imposed on traditional TV networks.

“Australia’s online video streaming market is estimated to generate up to $2.3 billion ($3.7 billion) of annual revenue, with the majority of it earned from US companies,” the CCIA submission says.

“If the Australian government pursues the 20 per cent expenditure mandate it has floated in the past year, that would put this revenue at risk.”

The federal government announced plans to impose local content quotas on streaming services more than two years ago. But it has more recently backed away from the idea amid questions over how it would fit with the Australia-US free trade agreement.

The CCIA, which advocates for open trade, does not argue for new tariffs on Australia. But it suggests they could be used as a bargaining tool.

“The overriding goal should not be restrictions on the foreign products or services, but, rather, removal of the barriers,” the submission says.

“Imposing targeted, reciprocal measures, while on occasion necessary as a negotiating tool, invariably incurs costs and unintended consequences.”

The submission was lodged with the Office of the US Trade Representative, which has been tasked with helping to devise Mr Trump’s “reciprocal tariffs”.

Those tariffs are due to take effect on April 2, but Mr Trump has not yet outlined the details.

Australia has been trying to persuade the Trump administration not to impose further tariffs on Australian imports, after previous efforts to exclude Australia from tariffs on aluminium and steel were unsuccessful.

Treasurer Jim Chalmers said the position taken by the American tech giants was unsurprising. 

“I’m obviously not privy to the conversations that they have with President Trump from time to time,” he told Sky News. 

“It’s self-evident they’re very close with the US administration. Our focus and our job is to make our case in the US as we have been doing.”

The CCIA represents more than 20 of the tech industry’s big players, including X (formerly Twitter), Meta, Google, Apple and Amazon.

Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos, Sundar Pichai and Elon Musk standing on a stage
Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk were given prime seating at Donald Trump’s inauguration in January. (AP:Julia Demaree Nikhinson)

X owner Elon Musk, who is leading Mr Trump’s “DOGE” cost-cutting operation, has become one of the most influential members of the president’s inner circle.

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Amazon chair Jeff Bezos have also strengthened their previously strained relationships with Mr Trump, announcing new company policies in line with his administration’s priorities and donating, via their businesses, millions of dollars to his inaugural fund.

The three tech leaders were given prominent seats at the presidential inauguration in January, in a display of the industry’s tightened ties with Mr Trump.

The CCIA submission complains about regulation around the world, and takes particular aim at Canada’s proposed digital services tax and the European Union’s regulation regime.