# The Commission fines Google €2.42 billion over Shopping comparison

Date: 2017

## The fact

On 27 June 2017 the European Commission fined Google €2.42 billion for favouring its own comparison-shopping service, a completed abuse decision in [Pichai](/people/sundar-pichai)’s CEO years.

## Context

Neighbouring CEO 2015 is the office. Neighbouring DMA 2023 is later listing. [Vestager](/people/tech-margrethe-vestager) is the commissioner. He did not write TFEU 102.

CEO 2015 is neighbouring office. DMA 2023 is later EU listing. EU ad-tech 2025 is later Commission money.

Sundar Pichai has been CEO of Google since 10 August 2015 and of Alphabet since 3 December 2019. He does not write a Sherman Act complaint, a Commission DMA article, a CAC circular, or a Pentagon contract clause by himself as a civil servant. A keynote is not a completed breakup. A liability opinion is not a Chrome sale. A layoff round is not a unique unemployment coefficient as his personal tally. TPU trains; TSMC and partners fabricate; App Review analogues on Play enforce. Keep those dates separate. An AI Principle PDF is not a completed weapons ban. A settlement is not a verdict. [Larry Page](/people/larry-page) is a different person. Sergey Brin is a different person.

## Evidence and sources

European Commission carries the official instrument or communique. Reuters records the same dated act independently.

## Significance

The path is [antitrust-pressure-in-digital-markets](/drivers/antitrust-pressure-in-digital-markets): a completed Shopping abuse decision is a self-preferencing accountability instrument. A fine is not a completed US breakup.

## What is established and what is not

Established: 27 June 2017 Commission Google Shopping decision, independently reported.

Not established: that comparison sites uniquely recovered, or a unique later CPI coefficient from Brussels.

What would change the picture: a contradictory original with a different date or name, a later repeal, a court that vacated the instrument, or a measured series that can be argued, with lag and alternatives, as a consequence of this instrument rather than of later institutions.

The date is the date of this instrument, not a licence to back-date every later harm or benefit.

Vestager decided. Google appealed. He did not sit as the hearing officer.. A later repeal, court stay, or successor order would be a different Fact with a different date.

Co-authors and later implementers named in Context remain on the file. The Commission fines Google €2.42 billion over Shopping comparison on 2017-06-27 is not a licence to treat every later European Commission communique as this same act. This dossier refuses to average The Commission fines Google €2.42 billion over Shopping comparison into a personality. The contribution described on this Person row is limited to He was CEO of the fined firm. Vestager decided. Google appealed. He did not sit as the hearing officer. That limit is the alternative to treating office-holding as authorship of every later series.

## People

- Sundar Pichai: https://factrail.ai/people/sundar-pichai

## Drivers

- Antitrust Pressure in Digital Markets: https://factrail.ai/drivers/antitrust-pressure-in-digital-markets
- Digital-Platform Power Concentration: https://factrail.ai/drivers/digital-platform-power-concentration

## Sources

- https://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-google-antitrust-idUSKBN19I10K
- https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_17_1784

## Methodology

https://factrail.ai/methodology

Canonical: https://factrail.ai/facts/goog-shopping-2017