Europe prides itself on being a world leader in animal protection, with legal frameworks requiring member states to pay regard to animal welfare standards when designing and implementing policies. However, under REACH — Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) — the EU’s cornerstone regulation on chemical safety, hundreds of thousands of animals are subjected to painful tests every year, despite the legal requirement that animal testing should be used only as a ‘last resort’. With REACH’s first major revamp in almost 20 years forthcoming, lawmakers now face a once-in-a-generation opportunity to drive a genuine transformation of chemical regulation.  When REACH was introduced nearly a quarter of a century ago, it outlined a bold vision to protect people and the environment from dangerous chemicals, while simultaneously driving a transition toward modern, animal-free testing approaches. In practice, however, companies are still required to generate extensive toxicity data to bring both new chemicals and chemicals with long histories of safe use onto the market. This has resulted in a flood of animal tests that could too often be dispensed, especially when animal-free methods are just as protective (if not more) of human health and the environment.  > Hundreds of thousands of animals are subjected to painful tests every year, > despite the legal requirement that animal testing should be used only as a > ‘last resort’. Despite the last resort requirement, some of the cruelest tests in the books are still expressly required under REACH. For example, ‘lethal dose’ animal tests were developed back in 1927 — the same year as the first solo transatlantic flight — and remain part of the toolbox when regulators demand ‘acute toxicity’ data, despite the availability of animal-free methods. Yet while the aviation industry has advanced significantly over the last century, chemical safety regulations remain stuck in the past.   Today’s science offers fully viable replacement approaches for evaluating oral, skin and fish lethality to irritation, sensitization, aquatic bioconcentration and more. It is time for the European Commission and member states to urgently revise REACH information requirements to align with the proven capabilities of animal-free science.   But this is only the first step. A 2023 review projected that animal testing under REACH will rise in the coming years in the absence of significant reform. With the forthcoming revision of the REACH legal text, lawmakers face a choice: lock Europe into decades of archaic testing requirements or finally bring chemical safety into the 21st century by removing regulatory obstacles that slow the adoption of advanced animal-free science.   If REACH continues to treat animal testing as the default option, it risks eroding its credibility and the values it claims to uphold. However, animal-free science won’t be achieved by stitching together one-for-one replacements for legacy animal tests. A truly modern, European relevant chemicals framework demands deeper shifts in how we think, generate evidence and make safety decisions. Only by embracing next-generation assessment paradigms that leverage both exposure science and innovative approaches to the evaluation of a chemical’s biological activity can we unlock the full power of state-of the-art non-animal approaches and leave the old toolbox behind.  > With the forthcoming revision of the REACH legal text, lawmakers face a > choice: lock Europe into decades of archaic testing requirements or finally > bring chemical safety into the 21st century. The recent endorsement of One Substance, One Assessment regulations aims to drive collaboration across the sector while reducing duplicate testing on animals, helping to ensure transparency and improve data sharing. This is a step in the right direction, and provides the framework to help industry, regulators and other interest-holders to work together and chart a new path forward for chemical safety.   The EU has already demonstrated in the cosmetics sector that phasing out animal testing is not only possible but can spark innovation and build public trust. In 2021, the European Parliament urged the Commission to develop an EU plan to replace animal testing with modern scientific innovation. But momentum has since stalled. In the meantime, more than 1.2 million citizens have backed a European Citizens’ Initiative calling for chemical safety laws that protect people and the environment without adding new animal testing requirements; a clear indication that both science and society are eager for change.   > The EU has already demonstrated in the cosmetics sector that phasing out > animal testing is not only possible but can spark innovation and build public > trust. Jay Ingram, managing director, chemicals, Humane World for Animals (founding member of AFSA Collaboration) states: “Citizens are rightfully concerned about the safety of chemicals that they are exposed to on a daily basis, and are equally invested in phasing out animal testing. Trust and credibility must be built in the systems, structures, and people that are in place to achieve both of those goals.”  The REACH revision can both strengthen health and environmental safeguards while delivering a meaningful, measurable reduction in animal use year on year.  Policymakers need not choose between keeping Europe safe and embracing kinder science; they can and should take advantage of the upcoming REACH revision as an opportunity to do both.  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT * The sponsor is Humane World for Animals * The ultimate controlling entity is Humane World for Animals More information here.

The EU wanted to set the record straight Tuesday after U.S. President Donald Trump said Europe is a “decaying” group of countries ruled by “weak” leaders. Trump slammed Europe as poorly governed and failing to regulate migration in an interview with POLITICO’s Dasha Burns that aired Tuesday in a special episode of The Conversation podcast.  “I think they’re weak,” the Republican said, referring to the continent’s presidents and prime ministers, adding, “I think they don’t know what to do. Europe doesn’t know what to do.”  Asked by POLITICO to respond to Trump’s withering assessment, the European Commission’s Chief Spokesperson Paula Pinho mounted a spirited defense of Europe’s leaders.   “We are very pleased and grateful to have excellent leaders, starting with the leader in this house, president of the European Commission von der Leyen, who we are really proud of, who can lead us in the many challenges that the world is facing,” Pinho said.   Pinho also lauded the “many other leaders at the head of the 27 member states that are part of this European project, of this peace project, who are leading the EU with all the challenges that it is facing, from trade to war in our neighborhood.”  She added, “So let me use the opportunity to reiterate what is the sense of many of the millions of citizens in the EU: We are proud of our leaders.”  Europe has repeatedly come under attack from the Trump administration in recent days, with a U.S. national security manifesto suggesting the continent is in civilizational decline, and top officials lambasting the bloc for censorship after the Commission fined Elon Musk’s social media platform X €120 million for breaching transparency rules. 

LONDON — A British police force investigating bribery and money laundering will be expanded amid fears corruption is threatening U.K. national security. The U.K. government on Monday pledged £15 million to expand its “Domestic Corruption Unit” — a body which investigates corruption in local authorities and banks. The announcement came as ministers published a new U.K. anti-corruption strategy setting out more than 100 measures to tackle bribery, money laundering and intimidation. “Corruption threatens our national security, undermines legitimate business and steals money from working people’s pockets,” Security Minister Dan Jarvis said in a press statement issued alongside the anti-corruption document. “Our landmark strategy will take on the rogue actors and insiders who often exploit their positions of power and manipulate the public purse for personal gain,” he added.   The U.K. government wants to crackdown on what it calls “professional enablers” of corruption and crime, which it claims are sometimes working for the benefit of hostile states, such as Russia, or criminal gangs overseas. A plan to strengthen sanctions against bad actors in banking, accountancy and the law were also set out Monday. There will also be increased vetting for new police, prison officer and border security recruits, and staff moving between organizations to stop organized crime groups infiltrating Britain’s frontline services. Ministers are also considering payments for whistleblowers. The U.K. government will host an illicit finance summit next year to tackle the flow of dirty money. It will examine tools such cryptocurrency, which are being used by criminals, those evading sanctions and hostile states. Margaret Hodge, the government’s anti-corruption champion, will also lead a review into asset ownership in Britain, which will aim to track the flow of dirty money into the country. Transparency campaigners and MPs have tentatively supported the strategy, but some have warned that there are glaring omissions. Andrew Mitchell, the former Tory minister who chairs the APPG on Anti-Corruption and Responsible Tax, said that without “full and proper financial transparency” in Britain’s overseas tax havens, “[the] U.K.’s credibility as a global leader on anti-corruption and economic crime will continue to be undermined.”

BRUSSELS — The European Commission said it will “make sure” it receives money owed by Elon Musk’s X after the company was fined €120 million for failing to meet transparency rules. The Commission on Friday said X has breached transparency and deceptive design obligations under the EU’s platforms regulation, the Digital Services Act, and issued the €120 million penalty. The decision set off a cascade of accusations of censorship from U.S. officials, Musk and his supporters, with some suggesting the company should refuse to pay the fine. “X will have to pay that fine. The €120 million will have to be paid. We will make sure that we get this money,” Commission Spokesperson Thomas Regnier told reporters during a daily press briefing, when asked how the EU can ensure that X pays the penalty. He noted X still has the opportunity to challenge the decision in court. “There are procedural steps to take into account, and any decision taken by the Commission can be challenged in front of the Court of Justice of the European Union,” he said. Speaking to POLITICO after the briefing, Regnier called for patience: “Let’s not jump the gun. We have just taken a decision and issued a fine to X. The company now has to pay the fine and [has] 90 days to get back to us.” X has repeatedly gone to court to challenge regulatory decisions it disagrees with. The company has not yet said whether it will appeal Friday’s decision. X has yet to issue an official company response, with its Global Government Affairs account, which voices the company’s views on regulatory matters, reposting U.S. officials’ views. Musk on Saturday threatened action against both the EU and unnamed individuals. “The ‘EU’ imposed this crazy fine not just on [X], but also on me personally, which is even more insane!” he wrote on X. “Therefore, it would seem appropriate to apply our response not just to the EU, but also to the individuals who took this action against me.” The company hasn’t replied to POLITICO’s repeated requests for comment. Regnier also justified the Commission’s continued use of X as a platform for corporate communications, despite the severity of anti-EU comments posted by Musk over the weekend and the platform’s decision to suspend the Commission’s account for paid advertising. The EU executive uses 15 social media platforms and hasn’t made a decision to suspend its use of X, Regnier said. All these platforms are ways to “get in touch to citizens, stakeholders, to do some outreach work, to precisely speak about what we are doing in the EU,” he said. Statements comparing the EU to Nazi Germany are “part of the freedom of speech that we very much praise in the EU,” which “allows even for the craziest statements that you can imagine,” Chief Spokesperson Paula Pinho said. The Commission stopped “using paid advertising or any paid services for X” in 2023 and its regular account remains open, Regnier said. The Commission did not respond to questions as to whether it has heard from U.S. officials directly on the matter since the fine was announced. Regnier said the EU executive remains in touch with the company and that X was informed ahead of the announcement.

Europe’s far-right firebrands are rushing to hitch their fortunes to Washington’s new crusade against Brussels. Senior U.S. government officials, including Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, have launched a raft of criticism against what they call EU “censorship” and an “attack” of U.S. tech companies following a €120 million fine from the European Commission on social media platform X. The fine is for breaching EU transparency obligations under the Digital Services Act, the bloc’s content moderation rule book. “The Commission’s attack on X says it all,” Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán said on X on Saturday. “When the Brusselian overlords cannot win the debate, they reach for the fines. Europe needs free speech, not unelected bureaucrats deciding what we can read or say,” he said. “Hats off to Elon Musk for holding the line,” Orbán added. Tech mogul Musk said his response to the penalty would target the EU officials who imposed it.  “The European Commission appreciates censorship & chat control of its citizens. They want to silence critical voices by restricting freedom of speech,” echoed far-right Alternative for Germany leader Alice Weidel. Three right-wing to far-right parties in the EU are pushing to stop and backtrack the integration process of European countries — the European Conservatives and Reformists, the Patriots for Europe, and the Europe of Sovereign Nations. Together they hold 191 out of 720 seats in the European Parliament. The parties’ lawmakers are calling for a range of proposals — from shifting competences from the European to the national level, to dismantling the EU altogether. They defend the primacy of national interests over common European cooperation. Since Donald Trump’s reelection, they have portrayed themselves as the key transatlantic link, mirroring the U.S. president’s political campaigning in Europe, such as pushing for a “Make Europe Great Again” movement. The fresh U.S. criticism of EU institutions has come in handy to amplify their political agendas. “Patriots for Europe will fight to dismantle this censorship regime,” the party said on X. The ECR group — political home to Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni — issued a statement questioning the enforcement of the DSA following the U.S. criticism. “A digital law that lacks legal certainty risks becoming an instrument of political discretion,” ECR co-chairman Nicola Procaccini said on Saturday after the U.S. backlash. The group supported the DSA when it passed through the Parliament, having said in the past the law would “protect freedom of expression, increase trust in online services and contribute to an open digital economy in Europe.”

LISBON — Ursula von der Leyen’s European Commission should continue to enforce its digital rules with an iron fist despite the outcry from U.S. officials and big tech moguls, co-chair of the Greens in the European Parliament Bas Eickhout told POLITICO. As Green politicians from across Europe gather in the Portuguese capital for their annual congress, U.S. top officials are blasting the EU for imposing a penalty on social media platform X for breaching its transparency obligations under the EU’s Digital Services Act, the bloc’s content moderation rule book. “They should just implement the law, which means they need to be tougher,” Eickhout told POLITICO on the sidelines of the event. He argued that the fine of €120 million is “nothing” for billionaire Elon Musk and that the EU executive should go further. The Commission needs to “make clear that we should be proud of our policies … we are the only ones fighting American Big Tech,” he said, adding that tech companies are “killing freedom of speech in Europe.” The Greens have in the past denounced Meta and X over their content moderation policies, arguing these platforms amplify “disinformation” and “extremism” and interfere in European electoral processes. Meta and X did not reply to a request for comment by the time of publication. Meta has “introduced changes to our content reporting options, appeals process and data access tools since the DSA came into force and are confident that these solutions match what is required under the law in the EU,” a Meta spokesperson said at the end of October. Tech mogul Musk said his response to the penalty would target the EU officials who imposed it. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the fine is “an attack on all American tech platforms and the American people by foreign governments,” and accused the move of “censorship.” “It’s not good when our former allies in Washington are now working hand in glove with Big Tech,” blasted European Green Party chair Ciarán Cuffe at the opening of the congress in Lisbon. Eickhout, whose party GreenLeft-Labor alliance is in negotiations to enter government in the Netherlands, said “we should pick on this battle and stand strong.” The Commission’s decision to fine X under the EU’s Digital Services Act is over transparency concerns. The Commission said the design of X’s blue checkmark is “deceptive,” after it was changed from user verification into a paid feature. The EU’s executive also said X’s advertising library lacks transparency and that it fails to provide access to public data for researchers as required by the law.  Eickhout lamented that European governments are slow in condemning the U.S. moves against the EU, and argued that with its recent national security strategy, the Americans have made clear their objective is to divide Europe from within by fueling far-right parties. “Some of the leaders like [French President Emmanuel] Macron are still desperately trying to say that that the United States are our ally,” Eickhout said. “I want to see urgency on how Europe is going to take its own path and not rely on the U.S. anymore, because it’s clear we cannot.”

The European Commission has lost access to its control panel for buying and tracking ads on Elon Musk’s X — after fining the social media platform €120 million for violating EU transparency rules. “Your ad account has been terminated,” X’s head of product, Nikita Bier, wrote on the platform early Sunday. Bier accused the EU executive of trying to amplify its own social media post about the fine on X by trying “to take advantage of an exploit in our Ad Composer — to post a link that deceives users into thinking it’s a video and to artificially increase its reach.” The Commission fined X on Thursday for breaching the EU’s rules under the Digital Services Act (DSA), which aims to limit the spread of illegal content. The breaches included a lack of transparency around X’s advertising library and the company’s decision to change its trademark blue checkmark from a means of verification to a “deceptive” paid feature. “The irony of your announcement,” Bier said. “X believes everyone should have an equal voice on our platform. However, it seems you believe that the rules should not apply to your account.” Trump administration has criticized the DSA and the Digital Markets Act, which prevent large online platforms, such as Google, Amazon and Meta, from overextending their online empires. The White House has accused the rules of discriminating against U.S. companies, and the fine will likely amplify transatlantic trade tensions. U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick has already threatened to keep 50 percent tariffs on European exports of steel and aluminum unless the EU loosens its digital rules. U.S. Vice President JD Vance blasted Brussels’ action, describing the fine as a response for “not engaging in censorship” — a notion the Commission has dismissed. “The DSA is having not to do with censorship,” said the EU’s tech czar, Henna Virkkunen, told reporters on Thursday. “This decision is about the transparency of X.”

Elon Musk slammed the EU after it slapped a fine on his social media platform X for violating transparency rules, warning his response would target the top officials behind the penalty. “The ‘EU’ imposed this crazy fine not just on [X], but also on me personally, which is even more insane!” the billionaire Tesla CEO wrote on X. “Therefore, it would seem appropriate to apply our response not just to the EU, but also to the individuals who took this action against me.” The rebuke comes after the European Commission on Friday imposed a €120 million fine on Musk’s platform for breaching transparency obligations it faces as a very large online platform under the EU’s Digital Services Act, the bloc’s flagship content moderation law. The EU executive said the platform’s blue checkmark feature was deceptive after it was changed from denoting verified users into a paid feature. It also said X’s advertising library lacks transparency, and that it fails to provide access to public data for researchers. A Commission official said the executive has found three entities behind X; X Holdings Companies, xAI and Elon Musk “at the top.” Commission spokesperson Thomas Regnier said the fine is “for a breach committed by X” but “addressed to the entire corporate structure.” “The EU woke Stasi commissars are about to understand the full meaning of the ‘Streisand Effect,'” Musk fumed. The “Streisand effect” refers to when an attempt to keep something discreet backfires. Musk didn’t elaborate on what form his response to the X levy would take or which individuals he would target directly. The fine on X and its owner has already drawn a sharp rebuke from Washington, with U.S. officials depicting the bloc’s move as an assault on broader free speech rights, with some alleging that U.S. companies were being singled out. Vice President JD Vance criticized the fine after details leaked ahead of time. “The EU should be supporting free speech not attacking American companies over garbage,” Vance said. When asked about Vance’s remarks, the Commission’s Executive Vice President for Tech Sovereignty Henna Virkkunen told reporters: “The DSA is having not to do with censorship, this decision is about the transparency of X.”  Secretary of State Marco Rubio, in a Friday post on the platform, said the fine “isn’t just an attack on [X], it’s an attack on all American tech platforms and the American people by foreign governments. The days of censoring Americans online are over. Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau added to the criticism, saying that the “nations of Europe cannot look to the US for their own security at the same time they affirmatively undermine the security of the US itself through the (unelected, undemocratic, and unrepresentative) EU.” Trump’s EU envoy Andrew Puzder also slammed the penalty. The “excessive €120M fine is the result of EU regulatory overreach targeting American innovation,” Puzder wrote on X. “The Trump Administration has been clear: we oppose censorship and will challenge burdensome regulations that target US companies abroad. We expect the EU to engage in fair, open, & reciprocal trade — & nothing less.” The move adds another layer of tension to the EU’s strained relationship with the Trump administration, with the U.S. president threatening to impose additional tariffs on the bloc if it continues to penalize American tech giants. The topic has been a theme of tense trade talks in recent months, with the U.S. pushing Brussels to scrap the DSA, along with other enforcement measures. While the fine was cautiously praised in Brussels and other European capitals, where officials had worried that the EU executive would bow to demands that it rein in its enforcement of U.S. tech firms, some European politicians more aligned with the U.S. agenda joined in on the criticism. “Nobody elected you,” wrote far-right Dutch firebrand Geert Wilders. “You represent no one. You are a totalitarian institution and can’t even spell the words freedom of speech. We should not accept the fining of [X], but abolish the [Commission].” The fine was only the conclusion of the first part of the EU’s probe into X, which will also look at the content circulated on the platform. X did not immediately respond to request for comment.

BRUSSELS — The European Commission plans to wrap several of its investigations into Big Tech under the bloc’s content moderation law soon, tech chief Henna Virkkunen said Friday. That’s likely to enrage officials in Washington, several of whom said that they consider U.S. companies are being unfairly targeted by Brussels. The European Commission on Friday slapped a €120 million fine on Elon Musk’s X for not complying with transparency obligations under the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA). It was the first-ever fine under the law that makes platforms liable for content moderation. “In the coming months, there will be more decisions coming,” Virkkunen told reporters after a meeting of EU digital affairs ministers in Brussels. “With most of the investigations, we already have published the preliminary findings, and after that, the next step is to encourage those online platforms to comply with our rules,” she said. If they don’t, a non-compliance decision — which could include a fine — would follow. While European politicians expressed cautious praise for the X decision on Friday, the Trump administration reacted with fury. “The European Commission’s $140 million fine isn’t just an attack on @X, it’s an attack on all American tech platforms and the American people by foreign governments,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio posted on X. “The days of censoring Americans online are over.” When asked by POLITICO to respond to the accusation that the EU is unfairly targeting American companies, Virkkunen said that of 10 platforms under formal investigation under the DSA, only three are U.S. companies. French President Emmanuel Macron said last week he felt Brussels was “afraid” of tackling U.S. Big Tech and that an “American offensive” had cowed the European Commission. In a press briefing earlier in the day, Virkkunen said that in the case of X, it had taken too long to go from preliminary findings to a final decision. “I agree that it took a very long time, especially from the preliminary findings, because the preliminary findings on this topics [were] already published in summer 2024,” she said.

BRUSSELS — European politicians expressed cautious praise as Brussels slapped a €120 million fine on Elon Musk’s X on Friday, despite American fury over the decision.  The reaction from national diplomats and lawmakers illustrated broad support as the EU finally crossed a Rubicon and issued its first fine under the EU’s rule book to rein in social media platforms, more than two years after it started its enforcement effort.  The divide between the reaction from European capitals and U.S. Vice President JD Vance — who slammed the move before it was announced — sets up a clash that is set to persist as Brussels turns its attention to more enforcement decisions under the Digital Services Act (DSA), and will likely spill into ongoing transatlantic trade talks. Friday’s decision “sends an important signal that the Commission is determined to enforce the DSA,” said Karsten Wildberger, Germany’s digital minister, during a meeting of EU ministers in Brussels. Polish Digital Minister Dariusz Standerski applauded it as a sign of “strong leadership.” After French President Emmanuel Macron last week expressed outspoken criticism of the EU for slow-walking the conclusions, his digital minister, Anne Le Hénanff, said Friday: “France fully supports this decision … which sends a clear message to all platforms.” She later described it as a “magnificent announcement.” Washington meanwhile was quick out of the gate to slam the move from Brussels, with Vance chiming in half a day before the fine was announced to describe it as a penalty “for not engaging in censorship.” He repeated the U.S. mantra of the past year that the EU’s DSA amounts to censorship and restricted speech. “Once again, Europe is fining a successful U.S. tech company for being a successful U.S. tech company,” said Brendan Carr, the chair of the U.S. Federal Communications Commission, in reaction to the decision. “Europe is taxing Americans to subsidize a continent held back by Europe’s own suffocating regulations.” “The only substantial meaningful fines that have been imposed so far have been against American companies,” Andrew Puzder, the U.S. ambassador to the EU, told Bloomberg Television. “So at some point, if you’re an American company, you’ve gotta sit back and say, look, am I being targeted here?” Asked for a response, the White House directed POLITICO to Vance’s earlier post. Much of the praise in Europe focused on the assessment that the EU didn’t bow to U.S. pressure, neither on the actual fine nor the enforcement steps — even if the move was seen as long overdue. “The Commission held the line,” said Felix Kartte, currently a special adviser to the European Commission.   “It’s important that the EU does not cave to pressure,” said Marietje Schaake, a former MEP and former Commission adviser.  “I am very pleased to see that the Commission is taking serious steps against the intolerable practices we encounter from some of the major tech platforms. Let’s have more of that!” said Danish digital minister Caroline Stage Olsen.  Several European Parliament lawmakers joined the praise but warned this is only the beginning, noting this is the first of several outstanding probes under the DSA, including others against X. Friday’s decision only concerned X’s transparency obligations; X still faces open probes over the spread of illegal content and information manipulation.  In total, 10 investigations into large platforms including Amazon, YouTube, Facebook and Instagram are still up in the air. “This is an important start, but not a breakthrough,” said German Greens lawmaker Alexandra Geese. “As long as the Commission fails to rule on the algorithms, the central level of manipulation remains untouched.”   French liberal lawmaker Sandro Gozi urged that “this long overdue decision must mark a step change,” while Danish Social Democrat Christel Schaldemose said she wanted “far greater transparency” on how the Commission enforces the DSA.  Speaking to reporters Friday, Commission digital chief Henna Virkkunen stressed repeatedly that this is only part of the investigation into X. Acknowledging the criticisms that the EU has been slow to reach this point, she promised that the next decisions would come quicker.   Other observers criticized the size of the X penalty. A fine of €120 million is seen as relatively modest compared to the €2.95 billion fine that Google got for antitrust issues under the bloc’s sister digital law, the Digital Markets Act.   “120m is no deterrent to X,” said Cori Crider, executive director at the Future of Technology Institute. “Musk will moan in public — in private, he will be doing cartwheels.”   “Yes, the fine may seem small,” acknowledged Kartte. The DSA law says fines will take into account “the nature, gravity, duration and recurrence of the infringement” and cannot exceed 6 percent of a company’s annual global turnover.  Commission officials refused to give a clear answer on how they came to the €120 million figure when pressed. A senior official repeatedly said the fine is “proportionate” to the infringement. But how it was calculated can’t be “drilled down to a simple economic formula,” they said. The official said the Commission has found three entities behind X; X Holdings Companies, xAI and Elon Musk “at the top.”   The fine is “for a breach committed by X” but “addressed to the entire corporate structure,” Commission spokesperson Thomas Regnier told reporters.   Based on estimates of company values, that means the upper threshold could have reached as high as €5.9 billion.