Microsoft risks huge fine over “possibly abusive” bundling of Teams and Office

US fears EU only targeting US companies

Stakeholders had four weeks to submit comments. Among those providing feedback, however, was the US Chamber of Commerce (COC), which warned that the EU's updated guidance didn't seem to adhere to case law and would "likely will reduce innovation and lead to higher prices for consumers" when it's adopted. Currently, that is set to happen during the fourth quarter of 2025, the EC's call for comments said.

According to the COC, the EU rushed the comment period and could have missed out on a "meaningful opportunity" to adequately weigh all valid concerns.

"Such a major policy shift deserves more discussion, particularly one that could affect trillions of dollars in commerce and risk fraying transatlantic economic relations," the COC said.

The COC seemed particularly concerned that the EU's upcoming guidance is too lax, allowing enforcement following complaints of potential harms that are unlinked to "actual effects or harm" currently found in markets. On top of that, the EU seemed to be "openly targeting US companies for enforcement," despite "serious concerns" raised by US Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo that EU's stricter digital laws would "disproportionately impact” US tech companies.

"There are growing concerns in the US— among policymakers and in the business community—that the Commission is using competition policy to promote a protectionist agenda," the COC said, suggesting that the EU was seeking to update laws to benefit domestic companies over foreign rivals.

"The proposed guidelines raise questions about whether the Commission intends to utilize its abuse of dominance review solely to exercise significant discretionary authority over American companies without training its review on any European companies," the COC said.

Microsoft did not submit feedback, but Google raised additional concerns that, seemingly contradictory to the EC's purposes, the guidelines depart from case law.

According to Google, case law "has reiterated that anticompetitive effects must be more than merely plausible" and "that any doubt regarding the existence of potential effects must benefit" dominant companies.

Google agreed with the COC that the EU risked "lowering" the "relevant standard for intervention" under TFEU, "particularly given the Commission’s position" that "it is sufficient for effects to be 'potential,' that it is not necessary to conduct a counterfactual analysis, or show 'full causality,' or determine whether the alleged foreclosure effects may be due to competitors’ lesser efficiency or attractiveness."

"A finding of anticompetitive foreclosure should, at a minimum, require establishing that the impugned conduct compromises rivals’ ability and incentive to compete effectively in the market," Google suggested.

The COC warned that the EU's bid to potentially "punish success" would likely "lead to overenforcement against targeted companies" and "increase those firms’ costs, reducing their incentive to innovate."

Just this week, the COC's fears seemed to be substantiated as the EC cracked down on Microsoft and Apple. On Monday, the Commission concluded that Apple may be violating the Digital Markets Act by preventing "app developers from freely steering consumers to alternative channels for offers and content."

"The Digital Markets Act is another discriminatory measure that departs fundamentally from sound competition policy by creating rules without any linkage to actual effects or harm," the COC told the EC.

For Microsoft, the fear of repeat targeting or lowering the standard for enforcement is likely more concerning since Microsoft was already fined by the EU two decades ago over illegal bundling, Reuters reported.

Back then, Microsoft had to fork over $2.4 billion, and now Microsoft risks even higher fines since it's worth more than ever, and fines are based on a percentage of its revenue. In January, Microsoft became the second company ever worth $3 trillion, CNN reported.

For rivals, though, intervention is apparently urgently needed to stop Microsoft's alleged anticompetitive behavior with Teams, as Slack owner Salesforce has argued. Sabastian Niles, Salesforce's president and chief legal officer, told Reuters that Salesforce has pushed the EC to "move towards a swift, binding, and effective remedy to restore a free and fair choice."