
China reiterated on Wednesday that any agreement involving TikTok must conform to domestic legal requirements, in response to recent developments surrounding U.S. efforts to force a sale of the popular social media platform’s American operations.
The statement follows U.S. President Donald Trump’s decision last week to extend the deadline for TikTok’s U.S. divestiture by 75 days. According to Reuters, this extension came after negotiations to restructure TikTok’s U.S. assets reportedly stalled, amid growing political and economic tensions between Washington and Beijing.
Beijing has voiced firm opposition to what it perceives as coercive tactics. As per Reuters, a spokesperson for China’s Ministry of Commerce condemned actions that “ignore the laws of the market economy, plunder by force, and damage the legitimate rights and interests of enterprises,” in a statement posted on the ministry’s website. The spokesperson emphasized that any proposed business arrangement involving TikTok must adhere to Chinese law, particularly with respect to the export of technology, which is subject to government review and approval.
Related: TikTok’s US Spin-Off Deal Stalled as China Responds to Trump’s Tariffs
The core of the dispute centers on TikTok’s proprietary algorithm, which drives the platform’s content recommendations. Chinese authorities consider the algorithm integral to ByteDance, TikTok’s parent company. Per Reuters, the technology falls under export control measures implemented by China in 2020, meaning that any transfer of such technology abroad—whether through sale, licensing, or partnership—requires official sanction.
The added scrutiny comes amid broader U.S.-China trade friction, with Washington previously citing national security concerns as a basis for its pressure campaign on TikTok. Beijing, however, appears unwilling to accept any resolution that bypasses its export control framework.
Source: Reuters
Featured News
Trump Administration Steps Up Pressure On EU Digital Laws
May 18, 2025 by
CPI
Elton John Slams UK Government’s AI Copyright Plan as ‘Theft’
May 18, 2025 by
CPI
Anthropic’s Legal Team Blames AI “Hallucination” for Citation Error in Copyright Lawsuit
May 18, 2025 by
CPI
Intel Challenges €376 Million EU Antitrust Fine in Ongoing Legal Battle
May 18, 2025 by
CPI
FTC Chairman Highlights Fiscal Responsibility and Consumer Protection in House Testimony
May 18, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Healthcare Antitrust
May 14, 2025 by
CPI
Healthcare & Antitrust: What to Expect in the New Trump Administration
May 14, 2025 by
Nana Wilberforce, John W O'Toole & Sarah Pugh
Patent Gaming and Disparagement: Commission Fines Teva For Improperly Protecting Its Blockbuster Medicine
May 14, 2025 by
Blaž Višnar, Boris Andrejaš, Apostolos Baltzopoulos, Rieke Kaup, Laura Nistor & Gianluca Vassallo
Strategic Alliances in the Pharma Sector: An EU Competition Law Perspective
May 14, 2025 by
Christian Ritz & Benedikt Weiss
Monopsony Power in the Hospital Labor Market
May 14, 2025 by
Kevin E. Pflum & Christian Salas