.png)
On Friday, December 5, 2025, the European Union took a decisive step in its policy of regulating digital giants by imposing a fine of 120 million euros on X, the social network owned by billionaire Elon Musk.
This penalty is the first fine imposed by the European Commission under the Digital Services Regulation (DSA), marking a historic precedent in the application of this flagship European legislation that came into force two years ago.
Since the takeover of Twitter by Elon Musk in October 2022 for the colossal sum of 44 billion dollars, the platform renamed X has multiplied controversial transformations. The European Commission opened an in-depth investigation as early as 2023 to examine the social network's compliance with new European requirements for transparency and user protection.
The regulation on digital services, adopted on 19 October 2022 and fully applicable since 17 February 2024 for all platforms, imposes reinforced obligations on very large online platforms with more than 45 million monthly active users in the European Union. X is among the 19 platforms and search engines that have been subject to this strict surveillance since August 2023, alongside giants such as Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, YouTube, YouTube or Amazon Store.
The penalty of 120 million euros pronounced by the European Commission sanctions three separate breaches of DSA obligations, all notified to X in July 2024.
The main offense concerns the blue check certification system, which underwent a radical transformation under the Musk era. Historically, these verification badges were awarded free of charge by the former Twitter to users after a rigorous process verifying their identity, authenticity and reputation. This system allowed users to easily identify the official accounts of public figures, government organizations, journalists, or businesses, thus protecting against identity theft and misinformation.
After the purchase of the platform, Elon Musk profoundly modified this system in November 2022 by reserving the blue check marks for paid subscribers of Twitter Blue (now X Premium), without requiring identity verification or reputation verification. This decision created considerable confusion: users can no longer distinguish genuinely authenticated accounts from simple paid subscribers, creating fertile ground for scams, manipulation, and identity theft.
Brussels believes that this misleading design exposes European users to significant risks. Concrete examples illustrate this danger: during the conflict in Sudan, a fake certified account pretended to be the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), falsely announcing the death of their leader. This message was viewed 1.7 million times before the account was deleted. In Kenya, several fake certified accounts have impersonated the Citizen TV Kenya channel to broadcast false information, in particular about the alleged death of a media personality.
The second offense concerns the lack of transparency around the ads shown on the platform. The DSA requires major platforms to provide clear and accessible information on sponsored content, allowing users and researchers to understand who funds ads and according to what criteria they are targeted.
X does not meet these transparency obligations, thus preventing the public and independent researchers from examining the potential risks associated with online advertising, including manipulation of public opinion, misinformation, or abusive targeting of vulnerable populations. This opacity undermines the ability of regulators and researchers to effectively monitor the platform's advertising practices.
The third offense relates to the non-compliance with the obligation to access public data by accredited researchers. Article 40 of the DSA requires very large platforms to provide accredited researchers with facilitated access to their public data in order to allow independent studies on the systemic risks posed by these digital services.
X has put in place considerable obstacles preventing this access. The terms of use of the platform explicitly prohibit eligible researchers from accessing public data independently, including through automatic extraction methods (scraping). Moreover, the procedures put in place by X to request access to data impose unnecessary and disproportionate barriers, effectively compromising research on several systemic risks in the European Union, such as the spread of disinformation, the amplification of hate speech, or foreign interference in democratic processes.
The Vice President of the European Commission in charge of digital affairs, Henna Virkkunen, defended the amount of the penalty in the face of criticism. Theoretically, for each of the three infringements found, the Commission could have imposed a fine of up to 6% of the platform's annual global turnover, i.e. potentially several billion euros.
The European official explained that the fine of 120 million euros was calculated taking into account the nature of the infringements, their severity in terms of the European Union users concerned, and their duration. Brussels considers this amount to be proportionate and adapted to the shortcomings identified during this first procedure. Henna Virkkunen nevertheless recalled that the Commission is not there to impose the highest possible fines, but to ensure compliance with European digital laws.
X now has strict deadlines to comply with the DSA's obligations: 60 business days to comply with article 25 concerning blue checkmarks, and 90 business days to present a detailed action plan on how the platform will act to comply with articles 39 and 40 relating to advertising transparency and data access. In the event of inaction, the company is exposed to additional periodic penalties that would be added to the initial fine.
This sanction comes in a particularly tense geopolitical context between the European Union and the United States. Even before the decision was formalized, US Vice President JD Vance strongly criticized the European approach on X, saying that the European Union should defend freedom of expression instead of attacking American companies. Elon Musk immediately thanked Vance for his support.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio went further by calling this fine an attack on the American people by foreign governments, believing that the sanction was not only aimed at X but at all American technological platforms. These reactions illustrate the growing tensions between Washington and Brussels over the regulation of tech giants.
This year, the Trump administration has intensified criticism of European laws regulating the abuses of technology giants, accusing them of deliberately targeting American champions. At the end of November 2024, American officials visiting Brussels even proposed a form of commercial bargain: relaxing European digital laws in exchange for a reduction in American tariffs on European steel. This proposal was immediately rejected by European officials, who reaffirmed the sovereign right of the European Union to adopt and enforce its own laws.
Faced with accusations of censorship, Vice President Henna Virkkunen strongly replied that the fine against X has nothing to do with any censorship of freedom of expression. She emphasized that the Digital Services Regulation does not regulate the content itself, but the services and systems that make this content available to users. The DSA imposes obligations of transparency, the moderation of illegal content and the protection of users, without infringing legitimate freedom of expression.
This position has been widely welcomed by Member States and European officials. The French Minister for Digital Affairs, Anne Le Hénanff, described this decision as historic, saying that Europe is thus proving that it can move from words to actions. Martin Ajdari, president of the French regulator Arcom, agreed in the same vein, considering that this first sanction sends a determined signal to X as well as to all platforms likely to violate the regulation on digital services.
The Belgian Minister for Digital Affairs, Vanessa Matz, also welcomed this decision, which she considers crucial for the protection of European users against deceptive practices and illegal content online. She emphasized that it is essential to fully implement existing regulatory frameworks before considering any revision, and that this sanction sends a clear signal: platforms must comply with their obligations or face serious financial and legal consequences.
The penalty of 120 million euros only covers the three offenses notified in July 2024. However, the European Union has in the meantime expanded its investigation into X to include other suspicions of non-compliance with its obligations, in particular with regard to the fight against illegal content and disinformation.
Henna Virkkunen said that these investigations are continuing actively and that she expects them to be completed more quickly than the first procedure. A separate investigation is also examining how the platform's recommendation algorithms work, which can amplify certain content in ways that are opaque and potentially manipulative. These new cases could lead to additional sanctions in the coming months.
In the event of serious and repeated violations of the DSA, platforms may be banned from operating on the European market, an ultimate measure that illustrates the European Union's determination to enforce its rules. For the moment, this option has not been mentioned for X, but it remains in the European regulatory arsenal.
The Digital Services Regulation represents one of the European Union's most ambitious legislative projects to frame the digital economy. Proposed in December 2020 by the European Commission, under the impetus of Margrethe Vestager, Vice President in charge of Digital Affairs, and Thierry Breton, Commissioner for the Internal Market, this text aims to create a safer digital space where the fundamental rights of users are protected.
The core principle of the DSA is simple: what's illegal offline should be illegal online. Legislation imposes obligations on online intermediaries that are graded according to their size and impact. Very large platforms and search engines are subject to strengthened obligations, in particular in terms of assessing and mitigating the systemic risks they pose to society.
These obligations include the establishment of mechanisms that allow users to easily report illegal content, transparency on recommendation and moderation algorithms, the prohibition of certain targeted advertising practices (especially those aimed at minors), and access to data for accredited researchers. The DSA also provides for the creation of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) bodies that allow users to challenge platforms' decisions regarding their content or accounts.
Each Member State of the European Union has appointed a Digital Services Coordinator (CSN) responsible for monitoring the application of the regulation at national level. In France, this role was given to Arcom by the law to secure and regulate the digital space (SREN) of May 21, 2024. These 27 national coordinators cooperate within a European Digital Services Committee that provides analyses, conducts joint investigations and issues recommendations on the application of the DSA.
Although 120 million euros represent a considerable sum, the financial impact of this fine is limited in view of Elon Musk's colossal fortune. In October 2025, the billionaire reached the historic milestone of 500 billion dollars in personal wealth, becoming the richest man in modern history. Its wealth is based primarily on its holdings in Tesla, SpaceX, Xai, and other innovative technology companies.
Elon Musk's fortune has grown dramatically in recent years. In March 2020, it was 33 billion dollars; it has since increased by more than 14 times, reaching around 472 billion dollars at the end of October 2025 according to various estimates. This increase is explained by Tesla's stock market surge and the exceptional valuation of SpaceX, estimated at 400 billion dollars.
In this context, the fine of 120 million euros (around $140 million) represents less than 0.03% of Musk's personal wealth. Some observers therefore question the real deterrent nature of this sanction for a man whose wealth exceeds the gross domestic product of many countries. However, the European authorities point out that the ongoing investigations could lead to much heavier sanctions, potentially in the billions of euros if X persists in its breaches.
In addition, the acquisition of Twitter/X represented a risky investment for Elon Musk. According to reports from 2024, the $13 billion in bank loans taken out to finance this acquisition became the worst M&A deal for banks since the 2008-2009 financial crisis. Seven banks involved, including Bank of America and Morgan Stanley, are struggling to sell this debt, as X's advertising business has fallen sharply since the takeover.
Beyond official political positions, this sanction elicits very diverse reactions within the European digital ecosystem. Associations defending digital rights and freedom of expression generally welcome this decision as a necessary step to empower major platforms, while calling for continued vigilance to avoid authoritarian excesses.
Marietje Schaake, a former MEP and technology policy expert, called the decision a question of democratic sovereignty, stressing that Europe must be able to define its own rules to protect its citizens without being pressured from outside. Researchers specializing in the study of social networks also consider that this sanction was necessary in the face of the controversial transformations made by Elon Musk on the platform.
However, some users and content creators express concerns about the practical consequences of this regulation. They fear that overly strict obligations could lead platforms to adopt excessively careful moderation policies, removing legitimate content for fear of sanctions. Others question the real capacity of the European Union to enforce its decisions in the face of technology companies whose economic power and political influence exceed those of many states.
This first sanction under the DSA is part of a long history of European regulation of technological giants. For several years, the European Union has positioned itself as the most active digital regulator in the world, successively adopting the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in 2018, the Digital Markets Act (DMA) in 2022, and now the Digital Services Act (DMA) in 2022, and now the Digital Services Act.
The DMA, which complements the DSA, is specifically aimed at gatekeepers such as Google, Apple, Meta, Amazon or Microsoft, imposing obligations on them to ensure fair competition in digital markets. Several of these giants have already been the subject of significant fines from the European Commission in recent years, including Google, which received several billion euros in fines for abuse of a dominant position.
In parallel with the sanction against X, the European Commission announced that it had accepted commitments from the Chinese platform TikTok regarding its transparency obligations in advertising. This acceptance shows that dialogue and cooperation between platforms and regulators remain possible, although the path of sanctions remains necessary when companies refuse to comply.
The Danish Minister for Digital Affairs, Caroline Stage, who was chairing a meeting of competent European ministers on the day of the announcement, was pleased to note that the Commission is taking serious action against the actions she describes as intolerable by certain major platforms. However, she called for more, believing that European regulation must continue to adapt to technological developments and to the new challenges posed by artificial intelligence, deepfakes and algorithmic manipulations.
Beyond the technical and legal aspects, the sanction against X raises fundamental questions about the role of digital platforms in our modern democracies. These communication infrastructures have become essential public spaces where public opinion is formed, political debates take place and information circulate.
The transformation of Twitter into X under the leadership of Elon Musk illustrates the risks associated with the private control of these digital public spaces. Unilateral decisions by an owner, no matter how wealthy, can profoundly affect the quality of public debate, the flow of reliable information and the protection against manipulation. The change in the certification system, for example, has directly contributed to the increase in misinformation on the platform, as documented by several independent studies.
Election periods are particularly sensitive to these issues. Moreover, in March 2024, the European Commission published specific guidelines concerning risk mitigation measures for electoral processes. Platforms must be particularly vigilant to prevent manipulation campaigns, foreign interference and the massive dissemination of false information that may distort the results of the elections.
The European Union considers that the regulation of digital platforms is not an attack on freedom of expression, but on the contrary a guarantee so that this freedom can be exercised in a healthy, transparent and fair environment. The DSA seeks to strike a delicate balance between user protection, freedom of expression, technological innovation, and democratic sovereignty.
The European approach could inspire other jurisdictions around the world. Several countries are closely monitoring the application of the DSA and are considering adopting similar legislation. Australia, Canada, Brazil and India have already put in place or are preparing regulatory frameworks to better regulate major digital platforms.
However, the European model is facing significant resistance, especially from the United States, which considers these regulations as a threat to its technological champions. The debate opposes two visions: that of an internet largely self-regulated by private actors, favoured by Washington, and that of an internet regulated by democratic public authorities to protect the general interest, defended by Brussels.
China has developed a third path, that of strict state control of digital platforms for surveillance and censorship purposes. This authoritarian model is rejected by both Europe and the United States, despite their differences over the appropriate level of regulation.
The outcome of these transatlantic tensions and the ability of the European Union to enforce its decisions in the face of American giants will largely determine the future of global digital governance. The sanction against X is a crucial test of European credibility and determination in this field.
The historic penalty of 120 million euros imposed on X by the European Commission marks a decisive turning point in the regulation of digital platforms. For the first time, the regulation on digital services is no longer just a theoretical threat but a concrete instrument capable of forcing changes on tech giants.
This decision sends a clear message to all platforms operating on the European market: the obligations of the DSA must be respected, under penalty of significant financial sanctions. It also shows that the European Union is determined to defend its regulatory model despite American political and economic pressures.
The coming months will be decisive in assessing the real effectiveness of this sanction. Will X comply with the obligations imposed? Will ongoing investigations lead to new sanctions? Will other platforms be sanctioned in turn? These questions will gradually be answered and will shape the future of the European digital space.
Beyond the specific case of X, this case raises fundamental questions about the balance between technological innovation, freedom of expression, user protection and democratic sovereignty in the digital age. If the European regulatory model succeeds in the face of resistance, it could become a global reference for reconciling these often contradictory imperatives.
