Google vs. South Korea: The Long-Running Dispute Over Map Data
In February, Google once again requested detailed map data from South Korea’s National Geographic Information Institute, under the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport. Since 2007, the company has made several attempts to access the country’s high-precision geographic data, but all have been denied due to national security concerns. Given that South Korea is technically still at war with North Korea under the armistice agreement signed in 1953 – as the Korean War was suspended, but never formally ended with a peace treaty – Seoul’s reluctance to give away information about sensitive military sites to a foreign tech giant may be one reason for the denial. However, beyond this concern lies a nearly two decade-old allegation of tax evasion related to Google’s profits generated in South Korea. Now, with President Donald Trump’s “America First” approach signaling a more assertive U.S. stance on shielding its businesses overseas, the American tech giant may finally succeed in its push for access, a move that local map players in the Korean digital market surely oppose.
South Korea’s National Security Argument
South Korea is one of the few countries that require government approval to transfer geographic data abroad, particularly high-precision maps. Under the Act on the Establishment and Management of Spatial Data, Article 16 states, “No person shall take abroad maps, etc. or photos produced for the purpose of a survey, among the results of a fundamental survey, without permission of the Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport,” unless the data is mutually exchanged with foreign governments or approved by a consultative body organized by the Minister, including heads of relevant agencies. This restriction was initially considered necessary due to the military and intelligence risks stemming from South Korea’s unique circumstances following the division of the Korean Peninsula, as detailed geographic data could be exploited by hostile actors, primarily North Korea.
Seoul’s security rationale has gained renewed relevance in light of recent incidents abroad. Amidst the ongoing war in Ukraine, Google Maps published updated imagery revealing the locations of Ukrainian military systems, which, according to Ukrainian authorities, were leveraged by Russian forces. In 2019, Google also accidently exposed Taiwan’s secret military sites, such as Patriot missile bases and intelligence bureaus, through its 3D renderings, which almost certainly was noticed by the Chinese. These cases underscore how high-precision maps can disclose critical infrastructure and strategic locations, and be leveraged by adversaries, reinforcing Seoul’s position as it has consistently denied Google’s requests on national security grounds.
The high-precision map data, created by the National Geographic Information Institute, has already been modified to obscure major national facilities, leading Google to argue that it therefore poses no security threat. However, critics contend that when combined with Google Earth’s satellite imagery, it could expose sensitive information and heighten security risks. Back in 2016, when Google requested local geographic data, the South Korean government agreed to grant permission on the condition that Google would “blur” images of sensitive facilities and store the data on servers within South Korea. But Google then refused, claiming that blurring images would compromise the quality of its services. In its renewed request this time, Google has finally agreed to mask the satellite images, but to proceed, it asked for coordinates of the facilities from the Korean government, which are indeed, classified information.
Protectionism in Disguise?
While Google has been denied access to high-precision geographic data in Seoul, domestic map services have capitalized on their ability to access this data, securing a competitive advantage. Leading local tech companies in mapping, such as Naver, Kakao, and TMAP Mobility, have undoubtedly reaped benefits, offering more accurate and tailored services. Together, these domestic players now account for about 85 percent of the local map service market, solidifying their dominance in the industry. With regulatory backing, these companies have expanded their businesses by utilizing key data, venturing into new sectors, such as ride-hailing, navigation, and autonomous driving. In this context, it is noteworthy that major foreign automakers, such as Volvo, Mercedes-Benz, and BMW, have started integrating the Korean TMAP navigation system into their vehicles sold in the country.
As expected, during a consultation held by the National Geographic Information Institute last month regarding Google’s request, Korean map-tech players voiced strong opposition. They reportedly expressed concerns about the potential dependence of the Korean mapping industry on Google. They also cautioned that granting the request could be perceived as preferential treatment for a specific foreign tech company, setting a precedent for others, such as Apple, which made a similar request in 2023 but was denied. Furthermore, they raised concerns that if a Chinese company were to make a similar request, the government then would then have no basis to refuse.
While the Korean government remains attentive to the interests of its domestic industry, now with President Donald Trump back in the White House, and warning against “discrimination” toward U.S. businesses worldwide, Seoul faces renewed pressure in defending its mapping data restrictions as national security measures. In the 2025 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers produced by the U.S. Trade Representative’s office, it sets out the following concern regarding South Korea’s location-based data:
“Korea’s restrictions on the export of location-based data have led to a competitive disadvantage for international suppliers seeking to incorporate such data into services offered from outside Korea. For example, foreign-based suppliers of interactive services incorporating location-based functions, such as traffic updates and navigation directions, cannot fully compete against Korean companies because locally based competitors typically are not dependent on foreign data processing centers and do not need to export location-based data. Korea is the only significant market in the world that maintains such restrictions on the export of location-based data. While there is no general legal prohibition on exporting location-based data, exporting such data requires a license. As of December 31, 2024, Korea had never approved a license to export cartographic or other location-based data, despite receiving numerous applications from foreign suppliers.”
Given that this report was released just days before Trump’s “Liberation Day” announcement on reciprocal tariffs, and that South Korea was subject to a 25 percent tariff despite an existing bilateral Free Trade Agreement, Seoul’s calculations have become more complex. As Trump made it clear that he wants to make “deals,” along with announcing a 90-day pause on tariffs for all countries except China, South Korea finds itself in a precarious position, weighing national security concerns against mounting pressure to accommodate U.S. demands. After South Korean Trade Minister Jeong In-kyo met with USTR Jamieson Greer for the first time last week, he told the press that Washington appeared open to negotiations, suggesting a potential reduction in the 25 percent tariff, without providing much detail. Yet this could involve concessions on Korean digital regulations, including the issue of sensitive local data export.
Google’s Tax Troubles in Seoul
Against this backdrop, attention in Seoul has turned to why Google remains so unwilling to set up servers in South Korea, which would be sufficient to allow it to gain access to the much-desired geographical data. Google operates several data centers across Asia, including in Singapore, Taiwan, and Japan, with two additional locations currently under development in Malysia and Thailand. It has long been alleged that the tech giant avoids establishing a “fixed place” of business in Korea because this designation would, under Article 94 of the South Korean Corporate Tax Act, make it liable for corporate taxes. Despite Google Korea having operated in Seoul for over 20 years and generating profit, it’s not considered a fixed place of business, as the company claims its major business activities are handled through overseas servers, an explanation Korean tech companies, who must pay corporate taxes, have long decried as unfair.
The debate over global tech companies, primarily American, avoiding corporate taxes by attributing substantial revenue-generating activities to lower-tax jurisdictions has led to discussion and some legislation, particularly in Europe, about digital service taxes. The underlying philosophy is that, regardless of where a company’s fixed place of business is physically located, if it profits from French consumers, for example, it should pay taxes in France. Last September, the European Court of Justice ruled against another U.S. tech giant Apple’s tax arrangements in Ireland, strengthening the push for fair taxation of tech giants operating across multiple jurisdictions. On the other hand, in Seoul, Google Korea recently won its first trial against the Korean tax authorities’ demand for an additional 154 billion KRW (about 108 million USD) in corporate taxes, on the basis that Google was avoiding taxes by channeling revenue through Google’s Singapore subsidiary, where the tax rate is lower.
On top of this, since South Korea’s high-precision geographic data is funded by taxpayers, Google’s request for the data strikes a sour note with many Koreans and Korean businesses. It can easily be framed as: Google wants Korea’s taxpayer-funded data without paying taxes in Korea. In response to the tax avoidance allegations raised again during the parliamentary audit last October, the head of Google Korea stated that the company fully complies with Korean tax laws and international tax agreements. He added, “We make our profits in Korea from ads and sales of hardware,” which accounts for far less than the revenue generated from other sources, including its YouTube and Play Store operations in Seoul. This is why, despite the potential benefits of giving Google access to the data, such as making it easier for international tourists to navigate Korea which could support the nation’s tourism industry, Google has been labeled the villain, as it wants to benefit from taxpayer-funded resources without giving back through tax payments.
America First, Then What Next?
In the midst of all this, Trump is back in power, just in time to reengage in a mission to defend the U.S. big techs facing mounting challenges not only in Seoul, but all over the world. Through a White House memorandum and accompanying fact sheet, Trump made it clear that his administration will take action, including imposing tariffs, to counter “taxes imposed on United States companies by foreign governments, including those that may discriminate against United States companies.” He also made clear that his administration will consider “responsive actions like tariffs to combat the digital service taxes, fines, practices, and policies that foreign governments levy on American companies.” Specifically, on data transfer, the memorandum notes that “foreign legal regimes limit cross-border data flows,” and describes this as a violation of American sovereignty and a restriction on the global competitiveness of U.S. firms.
Emboldened by Trump’s “America First” agenda, Google’s latest request may stand a better chance this time, with U.S. government pressure compelling Korea to give in. Signs of this are already visible in Seoul, with a bill introduced last November to amend the Act on the Establishment and Management of Spatial Data. The amendment proposes adding the Minister of Culture, Sports, and Tourism to the consultative body that decides on exceptions to the ban on exporting geographic data abroad. Currently composed primarily of national security-related agency heads, including the Ministers of Defense, Unification, Foreign and Trade, the new addition is anticipated to bring in a broader industrial and tourism-oriented perspective. While domestically framed as an effort to alleviate inconveniences for foreign visitors, especially those relying on global platforms like Google Maps, the timing and direction of the change hint at a subtle but growing alignment with U.S. interests under the new Trump administration.
At the same time, arguments are growing in Seoul that this decision should be postponed until the next South Korean President is sworn in. Since Trump’s reciprocal tariffs also target nontariff barriers, this issue – along with other domestic digital regulations – could become part of the “package deal” he seeks, and perhaps, in order to lower the 25 percent tariff imposed, the country’s new leader may end up handing over the data, compromising national security for more favorable trade terms with Washington. Following the removal of President Yoon Suk-yeol from office, the election is scheduled for June 3. Now that the ball is in South Korea’s court, the incoming President, whoever it may be, will be tasked with a difficult and high-stakes decision about how to play this negotiating game.