Tiktok, Rates and Tests: Everything that happens in technological policy in April

As the date of sale of April 5 of Tiktok approaches, the Americans have returned to where they were before the original January deadline: observe anxiously to see if an important application of social networks is prohibited. But that is far from being the only great event that we will see in the next month. April is full of transcendental turns in long -term technological policies stories, some possibly changing the industry, others at risk of failing.

The first two and a half months of President Donald Trump's second mandate were very consistent for the technology industry, which faces real challenges despite the fact that they largely approach Trump. After the chaos of the ftc commissioners dismissed, the Doge dismantling of the federal government and constantly delayed rates, the coming weeks could also be extraordinarily occupied. The deadlines that Trump left slipped, as well as those planned for a long time, such as those who cover Tiktok, new rates and a couple of antitrust cases of Juggernaut that involve apple and goal.

Here is everything you need to know to be prepared.

Trump said Intentionally chosen on April 2 During the day of the innocents of April because it is “a bit superstitious”, but it is still advisable to expect the unexpected for taxes on imported goods. He Official Order Launched last week clarify a 25 percent tariffs on car imports It will enter into force at 12:01 am et on April 3. Has also threatened to implement:

Trump rates They have fluctuated And he stagnated in the midst of setback and discussions with foreign leaders, but the deadline of early April for vehicle imports to the United States has remained so far. Trump has promised a permanent 25 percent tariff on cars and trucks that import the country, while the reciprocal tariffs They are destined to relieve what their Administration views such as imbalances With business partners.

The automatic rate is expected to be applied to both foreign manufacturers and to US automotive companies that manufacture vehicles abroad and import the United States. Experts anticipate that the cost finally raise prices for consumers who buy new cars.

April 5: Tiktok Ban … or extension

Tiktok is still legally obliged to unintentionally from its Matrix Bytedance company, and as with its original January deadline, the clock is exhausted before a prohibition is entered.

Trump signed an executive order that delayed the prohibition of his first day in office, promising not to enforce the Law on Controlled Applications of the United States Protection against Tiktok service providers, <a target="_blank" href="https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/24/technology/tiktok-ban-trump-amazon-apple-google.html”>including companies such as Oracle, Akamai, Fastly, amazon Web Services, Apple and Google, for 75 days. That order was already legally questionable, given that the law that required that the Chinese owner of Tiktok disintegrate that operated in the United States has already entered into force and was confirmed by the Supreme Court. Apple and Google retained when Tiktok returned to their application stores until Attorney General Pam Bondi As reported, he sent them a letter Ensuring that they would be immune to legal consequences under the Trump administration if they did.

Trump has <a target="_blank" href="https://www.reuters.com/technology/trump-says-tiktok-sale-deal-come-before-saturday-deadline-2025-03-30/”>promised a Tiktok sale Agreement before the deadline, but the details remain vague. It is still very possible that it simply extends the arbitrary deadline again, trying to keep the status quo while the treatment is supposedly. But as the Senate Democrats warned, repeated legally unreliable extensions leave Tiktok service providers increasing They responded to requests for comments.

Alternatively, Trump can submit the details of an agreement (by velos per veil) before the deadline. Multiple contestants have thrown their hat into the ring to get Tiktok out of the hands of Bytedance, including the Freedom Project and the perxity of the bag McCourt.

According to the reports, Oracle is in a leadership position for an association with Tiktok to ensure that the Chinese government cannot access the data of US users, but the informed details sound a lot like Project Texas, that US officials previously ruled out as too porous to protect the national security of the United States. It is not clear that this meets the legal requirements for divestment, and even the main Republican in the Select Committee of the House of Representatives about China He has warned that “the Bytedance must completely disin its control of Tiktok and not have a voice in their operations; neither can they share data, content or algorithms.” There is also the question of whether the Chinese government will accept to let any version of a sale occur.

Essentially, according to the options currently on the table, we are probably about to see the beginning of another legal battle around Tiktok.

April 14: Ftc v. Goal starts

The FTC filed its antimonopoly demand against the finish line at the end of 2020, when it was still known as facebook, and the two parties will finally meet in court on April 14 to begin the trial.

For several weeks, Judge James Boasberg will hear testimony on whether target illegally monopolized the personal market of social networks, partly through their instagram and WhatsApp acquisitions, that the FTC alleges that they could have been formidable competitors. If he agrees with the government that Meta broke the law, both parties will return later to discover what should be done, including, potentially, unwind the acquisitions.

It has been a difficult case for the FTC, all the way back to Trump's first mandate, when the original demand was presented with the support of two minority democratic commissioners and the president of the Republican agency. That first complaint, together with a separate lawsuit filed by 48 state and district prosecutors, was expelled by the judge.

But Boasberg left the option for the FTC to try again. The agency filed a complaint amended during the Biden administration under Democratic president Lina Khan, seeking to solve the concerns with the initial complaint. The result was sufficient to advance demand; In November 2024, after Boasberg mainly denied the finishing motion to dismiss, he resolved that the case would move to trial. Now, that trial will begin with the FTC back under republican control.

April 22: The Google search remedies test begins

Also in the DC district court, the second phase of the Google search monopoly trial begins next month. Judge Amit Mehta ruled last summer that Google has illegally monopolized the online general search market, as well as the search text advertisements. Now, Google and the Department of Justice will spend two weeks discussing what changes the judge should impose to remedy the damage created by illegal monopolization (a characterization that Google intends to appeal).

At the end of the Biden Administration, the Department of Justice said that the appropriate remedies would include Google to turn its Chrome browser, a key access point for search engines, syndicate the data that make their search results as powerful and prohibit exclusive offers such as their multimillionaire agreement with Apple. After the Trump administration assumed the position, the Department of Justice maintained many of the same questions, although it modified some, including let Google pay Apple for the agreements not related to the search. Mehta has said that his goal is to issue a decision <a target="_blank" href="https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/06/technology/google-search-antitrust-remedies.html#:~:text=Remedies%20to%20Google’s%20Search%20Monopoly,the%20end%20of%20the%20year.”>For this August.

Apple is not part of the case, but has struggled to play a more important role in the Remedios phase because they fear that their interests are not sufficiently represented by Google. But a Court of Appeals agreed with Mehta that Apple will have to settle for the presentation of reports to explain its point of view, instead of assuming a more active role in the trial.