A PYMNTS Company

Meta Criticizes EU Regulators for Changing Compliance Demands

By  |  June 29, 2025

Meta Platforms has taken aim at European Union antitrust regulators, accusing them of altering regulatory expectations as the company attempts to meet requirements tied to its controversial “pay-or-consent” business model.

    Get the Full Story

    Complete the form to unlock this article and enjoy unlimited free access to all PYMNTS content — no additional logins required.

    yesSubscribe to our daily newsletter, PYMNTS Today.

    By completing this form, you agree to receive marketing communications from PYMNTS and to the sharing of your information with our sponsor, if applicable, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and Terms and Conditions.

    According to Reuters, the U.S. tech firm voiced frustration with what it described as shifting regulatory standards imposed by the European Commission. Meta contends that despite making substantial efforts to cooperate and modify its operations in response to the EU’s demands, the Commission has unfairly targeted its approach.

    Per Reuters, Meta said it has engaged in constructive dialogue with the Commission and implemented wide-ranging adjustments to its practices. Nevertheless, the company argues that the regulatory body is treating it unequally compared to others in the digital space.

    Read more: Federal Judge Sides with Meta in Authors’ AI Copyright Lawsuit

    “We are confident that the range of choices we offer people in the EU doesn’t just comply with what the EU’s rules require – it goes well beyond them,” a Meta spokesperson stated.

    The dispute centers on the business model that gives users in the European Union the choice to either pay a subscription fee for an ad-free experience or consent to personalized advertising. This model has drawn criticism from privacy advocates and scrutiny from EU authorities over potential violations of data protection and competition laws.

    Reuters reports that Meta believes its model aligns with EU legal frameworks, and the company is pushing back against what it views as a discriminatory interpretation of those rules.

    Source: Reuters