Digital policy is now an element of geopolitical tensions, as evidenced by a recent memorandum from the United States (US) government. In April 2025, the US will outline the foreign digital policies it deems to discriminate against US companies and its plans to counter them. By then, foreign governments should understand the digital policies at hand and why they cause tensions. 

If the US views foreign digital policy as a trade issue, digital policy risks becoming a bargaining chip in international negotiations. Recent examples of such negotiations are abundant:

• The US president suggested that tariffs on China could be reduced if China approves the sale of TikTok, while China reportedly delayed the TikTok sale due to US tariffs.

• Officials from the United Kingdom emphasised that “nothing is off the table” in negotiations with the US, including removing its Digital Services Tax. India recently withdrew its levy on digital advertisements, although officials stated that this was not connected to the US.

• Australia is reportedly reconsidering its News Bargaining Incentive, a proposed levy designed to incentivise content remuneration for news media, in view of US scrutiny.

• In the European Union, suggested approaches to counter US pressure range from doubling down on the enforcement of digital policy – including as a reaction to US tariffs – to reassessing legal obligations and enforcement action.

Foreign governments will find themselves between a rock and a hard place when internal pressure adds to this external, international pressure. Internal pressure is poised to mount both when governments give in to US demands and when governments resist US demands. Governments that remove their Digital Services Taxes may well upset their taxpayers, while governments that remove media content remuneration schemes may face a backlash from local media companies. In turn, governments that resist US pressures and maintain their digital policies despite the threat of “retaliation,” may draw the ire of local providers in affected sectors, for example agriculture.

Foreign governments preparing their response face a daunting task because the scope of digital policies that cause geopolitical tensions is broad. In little time, governments must analyse different types of digital policies, with different objectives, overseen by different authorities. For each, governments must consider whether and how to counter US pressure. In such turbulent times, few governments will have the necessary knowledge and resources to address this challenge.

This series serves as a guide to geopolitical tensions in digital policy, building on our database of over 9000 digital policy developments across the globe. First, we dissect the US memorandum and the types of digital policy it mentions. For each digital policy type, we then distill the global state of affairs and explain the cause of geopolitical tensions. Specifically, we cover:

• Taxation of the digital economy

• Online content regulation

• Restrictions on cross-border data flows

• Local content promotion

• Enforcement of digital policy

• Threshold-based obligations in digital policy

Geopolitical tensions are a spreading wildfire, to which no fuel must be added. Our series does not discuss who is right and who is wrong. Instead, we use our neutral database to provide governments with the knowledge necessary to navigate this new era of – digital – geopolitics.