China’s market regulator has launched an antitrust investigation into Google, a move widely interpreted as retaliation against the latest U.S. trade restrictions on Chinese goods.
The Chinese State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR) officially announced, “Because Google is suspected of violating the Anti-Monopoly Law of the People’s Republic of China, the State Administration for Market Regulation has initiated an investigation into Google in accordance with the law.”
The investigation follows the Trump administration’s recent decision to impose new 10% tariffs on Chinese imports, citing trade imbalances and security concerns. In response, Beijing has swiftly retaliated by raising tariffs on U.S. coal, oil, and agricultural equipment, while also tightening regulatory pressure on major American companies operating in China.
Google’s Complicated Relationship with China
Google officially pulled its search engine from China in 2010 over censorship disputes, but the company continues to operate in the country through advertising and cloud-based partnerships.
Its Android operating system remains the dominant mobile platform in China, although Google Play services are unavailable, leading Chinese users to rely on local app stores operated by Tencent and Huawei. Huawei in late 2024 launched its Android alternative HarmonyOS NEXT as an attempt to completely shift away from the Google-dominated mobile OS.
Chinese regulators have a history of targeting foreign tech firms under competition laws, previously imposing penalties on Microsoft and Qualcomm. These cases resulted in significant fines and operational changes, raising concerns that Google could face similar regulatory hurdles as part of Beijing’s broader trade retaliation strategy.
Alongside the Google investigation, China has placed PVH Corp., the parent company of Calvin Klein and Tommy Hilfiger, along with biotechnology firm Illumina, on its unreliable entity list. This designation carries serious consequences, including trade restrictions and limitations on hiring foreign staff.
Beijing also implemented a 15% tariff on U.S. coal and liquefied natural gas, as well as a 10% duty on oil and agricultural machinery. These measures directly counter Washington’s recent efforts to restrict China’s influence in key industries.
Technology at the Center of the U.S.-China Conflict
Technology has become a critical battleground in the ongoing tensions between Washington and Beijing. The U.S. has continued to expand trade restrictions targeting China’s semiconductor and AI sectors. A major step in this direction was the ban on exporting high-bandwidth memory (HBM) chips to Chinese firms, a move aimed at crippling Beijing’s ability to train advanced AI models.
Defending these restrictions, former Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo stated, “The semiconductors that power [AI] and the model weights are, as we all know, a dual-use technology. They’re used in many commercial applications but also can be used by our adversaries to run nuclear simulations, develop bio weapons, and advance their militaries.”
Meanwhile, China has been accelerating investments in domestic AI and semiconductor technologies. Companies such as Huawei and Alibaba have ramped up research in AI and cloud services, aiming to reduce reliance on U.S. suppliers. However, these efforts remain heavily constrained by continued U.S. sanctions.
Google’s Role in Cybersecurity and the U.S.-China Dispute
Google has not only found itself at the center of regulatory battles in China but has also plays a role in exposing cybersecurity threats linked to Beijing. The company’s Threat Intelligence Group recently reported how state-backed hacking groups from China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea are increasingly adopting AI-powered techniques to enhance their cyber operations.
AI-generated phishing, reconnaissance, and malware deployment have become more sophisticated due to these advancements.
Beijing has long denied allegations of state-sponsored hacking, but the growing focus on AI-driven cyber threats has fueled concerns in Washington. In response, some U.S. states have begun implementing additional restrictions on China-linked AI tools.
With the rise of DeepSeek, for instance, Texas recently banned the use of Chinese AI applications, citing national security risks. These developments have further deepened the divide between the two nations’ technological ecosystems.
The Google probe aligns with China’s broader efforts to limit foreign influence in its digital markets while fostering domestic technology leaders. With increasing restrictions on semiconductor access, Beijing has been pushing companies like Tencent and ByteDance to lead AI and cloud innovation. Apple is considering integrating Chinese AI models into its local iPhones to comply with regulatory demands.
Beijing’s tightening grip on foreign tech firms highlights its intent to ensure domestic companies can thrive without reliance on U.S. technology. If the Google probe results in fines or operational restrictions, it could discourage other American tech firms from maintaining or expanding their presence in China.
What This Means for Google and U.S. Firms Operating in China
So far, Google has not publicly responded to the investigation. Given the history of similar cases, potential outcomes range from prolonged regulatory proceedings to swift penalties. Previous cases against Microsoft and Qualcomm resulted in heavy fines and forced business adjustments.
The case also raises broader concerns about how U.S. companies will be treated in China moving forward. As regulatory pressure intensifies, many firms may be forced to reconsider their reliance on the Chinese market. Some, like Microsoft, HP, and Dell, have already been adjusting their supply chains in anticipation of further trade restrictions.
As the battle between the U.S. and China over technology dominance continues, regulatory actions like this probe may become increasingly common. Whether this is a one-time move or the beginning of a larger strategy against American tech giants, Google’s position in China has never been more precarious.