The recent U.S.-South Korea tariff negotiations concluded on the 31st, excluding significant topics like the Online Platform Act, which had been previously considered for discussion. The platform industry appears to be adopting a wait-and-see approach. The focus was on resolving immediate tariff issues by the day’s deadline, leaving some matters such as the Online Platform Act out of the conversation. However, with upcoming events like the U.S.-South Korea summit, there is a cautious optimism to monitor future discussions.
An official mentioned that the Online Platform Act was first raised by the U.S. Congress and that the South Korean government had initially held off legislative moves before tariff negotiations. Although the topic was discussed, it was not officially tabled, and detailed monitoring of future developments is advisable.
The Online Platform Act, a key presidential campaign promise by President Lee Jae-myung, aims to curb market dominance abuses by large online enterprises through measures like commission limits, prevention of unfair practices, enhancement of contract transparency, and establishment of dispute resolution bodies. It was attempted during the 21st National Assembly but failed due to controversies. Further efforts faced challenges as the Trump administration labeled issues like interconnection fees as “digital trade barriers,” leading to concerns over losing momentum. Additionally, 43 U.S. Congress members recently urged Trump’s negotiation team to address Korea’s Online Platform Act, heightening its significance.
Despite not being part of the current announcement, the momentum behind the law is not believed to have faded. Given the ongoing discussions, predicting the future and conclusion of the matter remains challenging.
The issue of high-precision map data export by big tech companies like Google, another focal point of the tariff talks, was also not addressed. Presidential policy chief Kim Yong-beom clarified that issues concerning the high-precision map data or defense costs were not part of the negotiations, signifying them as separate. The industry believes that the government’s firm stance on classifying high-precision map data as a security issue makes future exports unlikely. Notably, Google requested the export of 1:5,000 high-precision map data from Korea after nine years, but the government postponed the decision until August 11. The matter is also recognized as a critical issue by the U.S. government in tariff negotiations.
A domestic platform industry representative emphasized that security-related issues like the map data or defense costs are not negotiable, suggesting a difficult path forward for data export approval.
Meanwhile, the network usage fee issue, marked by the EU withdrawing its stance in U.S.-EU tariff talks, was also not discussed. The telecommunications industry felt relieved that the contentious issue between American big tech companies and network usage fees did not surface in this negotiation. A representative mentioned that while the network usage fee dispute is substantial and critical for American big tech in Europe, it perhaps lacks the same impact in the Korean market, resulting in its exclusion from discussions.