Slater and Gordon invites registration from Australian businesses in investigation into Google’s ad tech practices

Slater and Gordon is investigating alleged anticompetitive practices by Google in the advertising technology sector on behalf of Australian business owners.

The investigation focuses on Google's dominance in online advertising at all levels of the advertising technology 'stack', and whether as a result of that dominance Australians who rely on Google's advertising technology to support their work have been overcharged.

For the average small or medium Australian business, there is little alternative to Google, and no room to challenge the fees Google can extract.

As a result, sellers virtually have no choice but to use Google's advertising services, spending thousands of dollars a month, in addition to having to pay Google a significant commission on every piece of online ad space that they buy.

Businesses have little control or insight into the operation of their ad campaigns, and are unable to tell what Google is doing, how their ads are sold, and how Google takes its fees.

"Across the world, we have seen action being taken against Google for its conduct in advertising. In particular, Google has been found in the US to have illegally acquired and maintained a monopoly in online advertising," Slater and Gordon Practice Group Leader, Ben Hardwick said.

"Google's power in the ad tech industry is so extensive that the vast majority of ads you see online - whether on websites or in search results - will have gone through one of Google's platforms, allowing Google to extract its high fees and earn millions from Australian businesses.

"Google's dominance in online advertising means that Australian businesses have little choice but to bow to Google's demands to keep their businesses running. This is allowing Google to charge a much higher fee (called the 'take rate') than they otherwise would have been able to in a properly competitive market. "Many of these Australian businesses are start-ups or small to medium businesses - the job-creating lifeblood of Australia's economy - who have little choice but to operate and advertise online.

"With their profit margins already cut to the bone these high fees are adding to the cost of doing business," Mr Hardwick said.

Slater and Gordon invites anyone who has taken out advertising on Google or used any of Google's advertising technology in the last six years (whether on Google Ads/AdWords or DV360), to visit Slater and Gordon's website and register their details.

In January 2023 the US Department of Justice (DOJ) sued Google under US antitrust laws for monopolising key digital advertising technologies, which form levels of the "ad tech stack," that are used to buy and sell ads on websites.

The Court found that Google had monopoly power and had engaged in anticompetitive conduct, describing Google as a 'dominant force' with 'unparalleled scale'.

The Court found:

Plaintiffs have proven that Google has willfully engaged in a series of anticompetitive acts to acquire and maintain monopoly power in the publisher ad server and ad exchange markets for open-web display advertising. For over a decade, Google has tied its publisher ad server and ad exchange together through contractual policies and technological integration, which enabled the company to establish and protect its monopoly power in these two markets. Google further entrenched its monopoly power by imposing anticompetitive policies on its customers and eliminating desirable product features.

https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/court-filings/united-states-of-america-et-al-v-google-llc-memorandum-opinion-2025.pdf

While other local actions have focused on the 'publishers' (the websites that host the advertising), this investigation is focusing on the advertisers - the businesses who pay for the advertising.

Google controls significant amounts of technology for both advertising on Google, as well as advertising on websites, through many proprietary algorithm for advertising space, which occurs by auction. As such, Google charges a commission ("take rate") that is higher than other tech platforms.

Slater and Gordon alleges the level of commission charged is only possible because Google forces advertisers and publishers to route the auction of advertising space through Google's technology, and Google have taken deliberate steps to stifle competitive technology.

Slater and Gordon alleges that start-ups, and small to medium businesses are significantly disadvantaged by Google's dominance in the market.

Examples

Example 1.

One online seller told Slater and Gordon they have, for each of its businesses, spent upwards of $6,000 through Google's advertising platforms this year alone. Using Google's ad tech is unavoidable for businesses like this, but for every dollar it spends to attract customers, Google is taking around a 20% cut. That means that when it spends that $6,000 to place its ads, $1,200 is going straight into Google's pocket.*

Example 2.

To get customers through the door, a neighbourhood restaurant can't rely on word of mouth alone and needs to make sure customers are able to find them. They might create an account with Google to ensure that an online search for "restaurants in your area" will show their name in the results. With Google's search engine the default choice for most web users, the restaurant is stuck using Google's ad tech to run their campaign. When that restaurant goes on to pay $500 in a month to get their ads seen, Google is taking $100 of that.*

*actual commissions on individual transactions may vary