The regulator’s strongly-worded letter suggests tech platforms may run afoul of US law if they change privacy or content moderation policies to comply with foreign legislation
The FTC has sent a letter to 12 US-based platforms regarding privacy and speech protections in the context of global platform laws
On 21 August 2025, the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) published a letter sent to US-based tech firms warning of their obligations to uphold privacy and free speech against the backdrop of global platform regulation. The letter, addressed from the office of Andrew Ferguson (Chair, FTC), was sent to 12 firms with international operations, including Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta, Microsoft and X. Opening with a reference to Benjamin Franklin and the foundation of US democracy, Ferguson suggests that foreign legislation, including the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA) and UK’s Online Safety Act (OSA) and Investigatory Powers Act, may undermine the speech and privacy rights of US users. The letter coincides with a statement published by Donald Trump (President, US) threatening tariffs and export restrictions on jurisdictions that maintain various forms of platform regulation, stating that “digital taxes, digital services legislation and digital markets regulation are all designed to harm, or discriminate against, American technology”.
Ferguson suggests companies’ compliance with the UK’s Investigatory Powers Act may be incompatible with US law
Regarding privacy concerns and in an apparent reference to the Investigatory Powers Act, the letter implies that some compliance measures undertaken by tech firms under the UK regulation may result in these firms becoming non-compliant with the US’ Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Act 1914. Under Section 5 of the FTC Act, platforms that access users’ personal data are responsible for ensuring reasonable security measures to protect that data from unauthorised access or disclosure. The letter specifies that firms’ that advertise the use of encryption to protect user data, but fail to employ end-to-end encryption (including in contexts where end-to-end encryption may undermine compliance with laws such as the Investigatory Powers Act) may be deceiving consumers and therefore be held liable under US law. According to Ferguson, firms that weaken encryption or other privacy protection practices in order to comply with foreign regulation would also be expected to disclose this change in policy as a direct result of that foreign regulation. Under these expectations, platforms that would weaken encryption to comply with UK law would be expected to explicitly name the Investigatory Powers Act, or other relevant legislation, as the reason encryption policies were changed.
Platforms that change content moderation policies to comply with online safety laws would be expected to name the relevant laws in a disclosure for users
Though the letter offers less detail on the possible violation of free speech rights, the FTC nonetheless suggests that platforms may also violate Section 5 of the FTC Act by “censoring” user content to comply with global online safety laws. Ferguson argues that the application of regulatory standards imposed by a foreign government but applied to content created by users outside of its jurisdiction, such as the standards set forth in the DSA and OSA, could be considered an unfair or deceptive business practice. Platforms that change content moderation policies to comply with foreign laws would again be expected to specifically disclose which laws resulted in the relevant policy changes. The letter closes by inviting representatives of the addressed tech firms to contact the FTC by 28 August 2025 to discuss how to manage “competing pressures from global regulators”.
The letter was sent within a broader escalation of transatlantic tension that may lead to retaliation or noncompliance
Though disagreement with the online safety and digital markets regulation passed in recent years in the EU, UK and other jurisdictions is not surprising based on prior commitments made by the Trump Administration, the letter suggests an escalation in US efforts to undermine global platform regulation. This escalation also corresponds with statements and lawsuits from smaller US-based platforms, including message board 4chan, declaring they will not cooperate or comply with investigations under the OSA, will refuse to pay any fines issued by Ofcom for non-compliance and will challenge the legality of enforcing UK regulatory standards regarding content that is posted by US users on a domestic platform in federal US court. Despite President Trump’s claims of regulatory bias against US-headquartered tech firms, only three of the 11 ongoing investigations launched by the EC under the DSA targeted the conduct of US platforms. Nonetheless, the US House of Representatives Judiciary Committee is expected to hold a hearing on “Europe's Threat to American Speech and Innovation” on 3 September with invitations issued to Nigel Farage (Leader, Reform UK) and Thierry Breton (former European Commissioner for Internal Market, EC) to testify. While the course of transatlantic debate over platform regulation has evolved quickly, it appears more likely that the US Government may be considering retaliation for enforcing platform laws and US platforms may be more likely to refuse to comply with some regulatory standards.
