Prosus chief warns that antitrust constraints risk chilling capital flows just as Europe seeks to boost competitiveness

As the year draws to a close, a renewed clash between Europe’s regulators and global investors has erupted over a proposed €15bn investment that could reshape parts of the continent’s digital economy. The chief executive of Prosus, one of the world’s largest technology investors, has publicly criticised European Union antitrust conditions that he says threaten to derail the transaction, arguing that the bloc risks undermining its own ambitions to attract growth capital.

At the heart of the dispute lies a familiar European dilemma: how to reconcile strict competition rules with the urgent need to remain economically competitive in a world where capital is increasingly mobile. Prosus executives say that regulatory hurdles attached to the deal go beyond safeguarding fair competition and instead introduce uncertainty that may deter not only this investment, but future ones as well.

The proposed transaction, valued at roughly €15bn, would channel significant funding into European technology and consumer platforms, according to people familiar with the matter. Prosus, which has deep roots in global internet investments, views Europe as a strategic market with long-term potential. Yet the company’s leadership has voiced frustration at what it describes as an unpredictable regulatory environment that complicates long-term planning.

“Europe wants to be a leader in innovation and digital growth, but the signals sent to investors are often mixed,” the Prosus chief said in remarks to investors and policymakers. While stopping short of accusing regulators of hostility toward foreign capital, he warned that excessive or poorly calibrated conditions could push investment elsewhere, particularly toward the United States and fast-growing Asian markets.

European competition authorities, for their part, defend their approach as essential to preserving open markets. Officials stress that antitrust scrutiny is not designed to block investment, but to prevent excessive concentration of power that could harm consumers and smaller competitors. In recent years, the EU has positioned itself as a global standard-setter in competition policy, particularly in the technology sector.

However, critics argue that the balance may be tipping too far toward caution at a moment when Europe faces sluggish growth and intense global competition. Business groups and some national governments have increasingly questioned whether the current framework adequately accounts for the strategic need to scale European companies and attract patient capital.

The Prosus case has become emblematic of this wider debate. Supporters of the deal note that a €15bn injection would not only provide capital, but also signal confidence in Europe’s market at a time when geopolitical uncertainty and trade fragmentation are reshaping investment flows. They warn that if high-profile investors perceive Europe as overly restrictive, the long-term cost could be a gradual erosion of the continent’s attractiveness.

Economists point out that the EU’s regulatory rigor has long been both a strength and a weakness. Strong rules can foster trust and stability, but they can also slow decision-making and create compliance burdens. In sectors driven by speed and scale, such as digital platforms and advanced services, delays can be decisive.

The timing of the dispute is particularly sensitive. European leaders have repeatedly called for renewed competitiveness, deeper capital markets, and greater strategic autonomy. Policy initiatives aimed at boosting investment sit uneasily alongside high-profile interventions that appear to complicate large-scale deals.

Within Brussels, there is growing recognition that perception matters. Even when regulators believe their actions are justified, the message received by global investors can differ sharply. Some officials privately acknowledge that clearer communication and more predictable timelines could help ease tensions without compromising core competition principles.

For Prosus, the outcome of the €15bn deal remains uncertain. The company has indicated it will continue to engage constructively with regulators, but has also made clear that capital allocation decisions are ultimately global. Europe, it suggests, must compete on clarity and confidence as much as on market size.

As debates over industrial policy and regulation intensify, this confrontation underscores a central question for the EU’s economic future: can Europe maintain its reputation as the world’s toughest regulator while also becoming one of its most attractive destinations for large-scale investment? The answer may shape not only the fate of a single €15bn transaction, but the broader trajectory of European competitiveness in the years ahead.