US tech giants take aim at News Media Bargaining Code

Elon Musk and other US tech giants are sounding the alarm on Australia’s regulation of digital platforms, warning the Trump administration they face discriminatory trade barriers.

Donald Trump and Elon Musk at the White House. Picture: AFP

You can now listen to The Australian's articles. Give us your feedback.

You can now listen to The Australian's articles.

Jim Chalmers says the Albanese government will make decisions to “protect kids online” amid a pressure campaign from US tech giants aimed at overhauling Australia’s regulation of digital platforms – including the News Media Bargaining Code.

A powerful grouping representing the interests of US tech giants, including Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk, has accused Australia of unfairly targeting them through the News Media Bargaining Code, warning it is costing them at least $140m a year to subsidise “local news businesses”.

Responding to an invitation by United States trade representative Jamieson Greer to identify “unfair trade practices by other countries,” the Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA) lodged a 45-page submission on March 11 taking aim at Australia as well as a host of other nations.

The warning comes amid growing concerns in Canberra over Donald Trump’s trade war, the imposition of steel and aluminium tariffs on Australia, and fears over the future of agricultural and pharmaceutical exports bound for the US.

The Treasurer said the views expressed by the tech giants were “not surprising”, but his priority was to implement the best policy settings for Australians.

“I’m obviously not privy to the conversations that they have with President Trump. From time to time, it’s self-evident that they’re very close with the US administration,” he told Sky News.

“Our focus and our job is to make our case in the US, as we have been doing, but to also make sure that we continue to make the best decisions that we can for Australia.

“And I think a lot of people around the country, not just parents, but including parents, want to make sure that there are appropriate protections for people online. The tech giants won’t always like that. They won’t always agree with that.

“We’ve got to do that job on behalf of the people of Australia, and there’ll be different views about how we go about that as we roll it out.”

In its 45-page submission signed by trade policy manager Amir Nasr, the CCIA panned a range of Australian measures including the News Media Bargaining Code as well as “requirements for US online video providers to fund the development and production of Australian content”.

It blasted the News Media Bargaining Code as a “proposed coercive and discriminatory tax that requires US technology companies to subsidise Australian media companies”.

In addition, the CCIA blasted Canberra’s approach to the management of risks posed by the adoption of new AI models.

“The Australian government is proposing to classify all general-purpose AI models as high risk in a new regulatory regime that would add significant compliance burdens to US companies with AI products and services operating in Australia,” it said.

With its members including heavy industry hitters such as Meta, X, Amazon, Apple, Google, eBay, Uber and Deliveroo, the CCIA’s submission noted that digital products and services were one of the key drivers of America’s export power.

The industry had delivered a “hefty digital trade surplus of $266.8bn for the United States in 2023 – based on $655.5bn in exports of digitally deliverable services”, but the CCIA warned that trade barriers imposed by foreign partners were “calculable”.

“These include instances where foreign governments enact discriminatory taxes, impose unreasonable fines that disproportionately target US companies, or implement schemes that extract money from US companies to subsidise domestic industries, oftentimes their own rivals,” the submission said.

“Australia’s extraction and redistribution of revenue from US digital suppliers to local news businesses is reported to have cost US firms $140 million annually.

“The News Media Bargaining Code requires US online service providers, when designated, to pay Australian news publishers for the links and snippets.

“Currently, the two companies targeted by the law pay $A250 million annually through deals that were coerced through the threat of this law.”

The News Media Bargaining Code was passed by Australian parliament and introduced by the Morrison government in 2021 after a period of negotiation with the key tech companies. Under the framework, Australian media organisations would be compensated for their content that appeared on platforms owned by the tech giants.

A deal would be reached through a bargaining process between Australian media companies and the tech platforms. Any failure to strike a deal would trigger a designation by the government, triggering an arbitrated outcome.

However, Meta opted not to renew its deal with Australian publishers in 2024 – costing Australian media companies tens of millions of dollars. Commencing in January 2025, a “News Bargaining Incentive” was introduced to impose extra charges on large digital platforms that refused to negotiate deals with local publishers.

In its submission, the CCIA said that “with the threat of the new ‘incentive’ tax from the Australian government, this cost ($250m annually) is likely to significantly increase”.

The CCIA also warned that proposed Australian requirements for US online video providers to fund the development and production of Australian content could see companies paying “anywhere between 10 per cent and 20 per cent of their local expenditure on Australian content, with qualifications that will likely make it very difficult for U.S. companies to qualify”.

“Australia’s online video streaming market is estimated to generate up to $2.3bn of annual revenue, with the majority of it earned from US companies,” the CCIA said. “If the Australian government pursues the 20 per cent expenditure mandate it has floated in the past year, that would put this revenue at risk.”

Concern is mounting in Canberra that Mr Trump’s close relationship with tech titans like Mr Musk and Mr Zuckerberg could result in a new pressure campaign being applied to Australia’s regulation of digital platforms – including the government’s world-first legislation banning children under 16 from using social media.

Responding to Anthony Albanese’s introduction of the legislation in November, Mr Musk posted on his X platform: “Seems like a backdoor war to control access to the internet by all Australians.”

In its submission, the CCIA warned the USTR not just to “redress the effects of (trade) barriers, including through the imposition of retaliatory tariffs”.

“The overriding goal should not be restrictions on the foreign products or services, but, rather, removal of the barriers,” it said. “Imposing targeted, reciprocal measures, while on occasion necessary as a negotiating tool, invariably incurs costs and unintended consequences, including raising costs of inputs for both domestic manufacturing, services, and corresponding exports.”

The CCIA urged the USTR to “keep digital priorities front and centre to maximise the most competitive aspects of the United States economy”.