Switzerland's competition regulator opened a preliminary investigation into Google after the tech giant quietly eliminated the search engine choice screen on Android devices in Switzerland, locking users into Google Search by default while the same option remains available across the European Economic Area.
The move matters because it reveals Google's playbook in miniature: talk openness, then systematically remove alternatives the moment no regulator is forcing your hand. The same company that curates your search results and decides what information you're allowed to see just made it harder for Swiss users to even find a competitor—and didn't bother explaining why.
COMCO, Switzerland's Competition Commission, announced the preliminary investigation on Tuesday. The "Choice Screen" feature prompts users to select their preferred default search engine during initial device setup. It still appears on Android phones across the EEA. In Switzerland, it simply vanished.
The consequence is straightforward: Swiss buyers now get Google Search as their default without being asked. COMCO stated that the removal "could affect the ability of search engine providers and, more broadly, other digital service providers to compete" and "creates an unequal treatment between Swiss users and those in the European Economic Area."
Google confirmed awareness of the investigation. "We look forward to cooperating fully with the authority to address their questions," a spokesperson said. The company has not published any rationale for withdrawing the screen in Switzerland.
The stakes are not abstract. Google commands roughly 82% of the Swiss search market, according to web analytics firm Statcounter. Default settings, as COMCO noted, play a decisive role in digital markets. Remove the choice screen, and rival engines lose visibility at the single moment a user is most likely to reconsider.
TNW reported that this preliminary investigation, called a Vorabklärung, is the lightest tool in the Swiss competition secretariat's kit—no charges, no deadlines, no presumption of wrongdoing. Its only purpose is to determine whether there are indications of unlawful competition under the Swiss Cartel Act. If there are, a full investigation with possible fines and remedies can follow.
The choice screen exists because Brussels forced it into existence—first through the Android antitrust case that produced a €4.1 billion fine Google exhausted its appeals against, and more recently through the Digital Markets Act's obligations for designated gatekeepers. Switzerland sits outside both regimes. It is not in the EEA, and the DMA does not reach it, leaving Swiss regulators to prove abuse of dominance the hard way.
Reuters framed the probe as a standard competition matter. TNW provided the critical context the wire service buried: the choice screen was never a courtesy extended to users. It was a corrective applied to a market. Remove it, and the correction vanishes with it.
The appetite for alternatives is real when users get a reason to look. DuckDuckGo installations jumped 18% after Google reshaped its results page around AI summaries, TNW reported—evidence that people will choose differently when given the chance.
Google didn't remove the choice screen because it was broken. They removed it because they could. The question now is whether a preliminary investigation with no teeth is enough to make them put it back—or whether it takes the kind of regulatory muscle Switzerland simply doesn't have.
