WASHINGTON − Regardless of assurances from President-elect Donald Trump, tech giants like Apple, Google, and Oracle could face significant financial penalties if they do not adhere to the TikTok ban set to activate on Sunday.

The legislation, upheld by the Supreme Court on Friday, mandates that TikTok’s Chinese parent, ByteDance, must divest TikTok’s U.S. assets to continue operating in the country. This law was enacted out of concerns that TikTok’s ownership could allow the Chinese government to access sensitive American personal data and influence the information this demographic receives.

Trump, who will assume office on Monday, has shown interest in finding a resolution that maintains access to the popular app while alleviating national security fears.

“My decision on TikTok will be made in the near future, but I need some time to evaluate the situation. Stay tuned!” Trump remarked on Truth Social on Friday.

Legal analysts informed YSL News that sustaining the app’s operation on Sunday carries considerable risks, irrespective of any promises from Trump.

“Companies like Apple, Google, and so forth need to determine—likely alongside their CEOs and boards—whether they wish to risk violating the law, despite President Trump’s assurances,” Wayne Unger, a law professor at Quinnipiac University, explained to YSL News. “Because his promises are limited in far-reaching effect.”

Apple, Google, and Oracle have not yet responded to inquiries regarding whether they will cease services related to TikTok once the ban takes effect. A representative for TikTok pointed YSL News to a statement from CEO Shou Zi Chew, who expressed hope that Trump would intervene positively on their behalf.

“I appreciate President Trump’s willingness to find a solution to keep TikTok accessible in the United States,” Chew remarked. “Be assured, we are committed to ensuring our platform thrives.”

Understanding the Mechanism of the TikTok Ban

The TikTok ban operates by imposing pressure on various companies to withdraw their support from the app’s functioning in the U.S. This involves major players like Apple and Google, offering access and updates, along with Oracle, which provides internet hosting services.

These companies face the potential for $5,000 fines for each user they assist in accessing TikTok. For Google and Apple, this implies a $5,000 penalty for each user who downloads or updates the app through their platforms, while Oracle could incur a $5,000 fine for aiding any user who simply accesses the app via its services.

According to Alan Rozenshtein, a law professor at the University of Minnesota, “Companies like Oracle could quickly accumulate substantial fines, whereas for Apple and Google, the penalties would accumulate more gradually.”

“The situation would essentially lead to TikTok being shut down as all the associated services cease to function,” Unger stated to YSL News.

The law empowers the U.S. attorney general to pursue legal action against companies to impose fines for past user access, covering a five-year window—meaning fines could arise even after Trump’s presidency ends for user engagement occurring during that period.

While the law permits a presidential extension of 90 days, this is conditional on TikTok demonstrating progress towards selling its U.S. assets and having binding agreements in place.

“This 90-day extension is designed to prevent the ban while we’re in the midst of that process; however, we are not at that stage,” Rozenshtein remarked.

Possible Actions From Trump – And Their Doubts

Reports from CNN and the Washington Post indicated that Trump is contemplating issuing an executive order to pause the ban, giving him time to negotiate a resolution—according to unnamed sources.

However, as Rozenshtein explained, an executive order would not have the legal authority to suspend a law passed by Congress and signed into effect by President Joe Biden in April.

“A presidential directive or order, regardless of its format like Truth Social or a Tweet, holds no legal weight,” Rozenshtein clarified to YSL News. “Executive orders are merely formal announcements lacking genuine power.”

Nonetheless, a promise from Trump may not be completely irrelevant from a legal standpoint. If he committed to companies that he wouldn’t enforce the law, a subsequent lawsuit from an attorney general seeking fines could give rise to a legal defense arguing reliance on that promise.

Yet, whether such a defense would succeed in court remains uncertain, according to Rozenshtein.

“The pressing concern for Apple becomes whether that assurance provides sufficient comfort. I cannot confidently predict the outcome,” he stated.

Additionally, the Justice Department has the option to choose not to enforce the law.

Lisa Monaco, Biden’s deputy attorney general, noted after the Supreme Court’s decision ideally, “Implementation and enforcement of the law after Sunday will evolve gradually.”

Trump’s nominee for attorney general, Pam Bondi, refrained from stating her stance on enforcing the ban during her confirmation hearing on Wednesday.

However, due to the five-year legal window for enforcing the law, the current lack of enforcement by the Justice Department might not provide much solace for the companies involved.

Justin Hurwitz, a senior fellow at the University of Pennsylvania’s law school, commented via email to YSL News that it is “highly improbable” for Apple and Google to risk ignoring compliance given the substantial penalties in play.

“In reality, President Trump possesses very limited options to independently halt the law’s activation,” Hurwitz concluded.

Is a TikTok Ban Permanent?

Even if TikTok ceases operations after Sunday, it could potentially revive shortly afterward. The sell-or-ban legislation allows for the reinstatement of services as soon as a suitable sale occurs, and U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar indicated that such a scenario is quite feasible.

“I believe Congress anticipated a situation resembling a high-stakes standoff—ByteDance arguing that compliance is impossible due to Chinese governmental restrictions,” Prelogar stated earlier this month while defending the law in court hearings on January 10.

“However, as these restrictions come into effect, it may alter what ByteDance is willing to consider and could serve as the necessary push for Congress to compel the divestiture process,” she added.