In a move that would redraw the map of search and browser economics, Perplexity AI has lodged an unsolicited $34.5 billion bid for Google’s Chrome browser, CNBC confirmed Tuesday.
The offer, roughly double Perplexity’s most recent public valuation stretch last month, signals how high strategic stakes have climbed in the race to control the user gateway to the internet.
Perplexity, best known for an AI-first search experience that delivers short answers and links back to source material, has moved aggressively in recent months. The company launched its own AI-powered browser, Comet, and was valued at roughly $18 billion in July after an earlier $14 billion extension. Several investors have reportedly agreed to back the Chrome proposal, the startup says—an indication the bid is at least plausibly financeable.
Since its 2008 debut, Chrome has become the dominant consumer gateway to the web on both desktop and mobile, and it funnels enormous volumes of usage and behavioral data to Google’s search and advertising systems. Control of Chrome would give any owner extremely valuable distribution advantages: the ability to influence default search settings, integrate novel search experiences, and surface services at the moment millions of users open a browser.
That is exactly what makes the bid consequential. For Perplexity, acquiring Chrome would rapidly remove the single largest obstacle to scaling its search product: distribution. Rather than trying to win users by incremental product improvements or partnerships, Perplexity would inherit the platform that shapes how people begin their online journeys.
Regulatory backdrop and the DOJ case
Perplexity’s acquisition offer comes against the backdrop of the U.S. Department of Justice’s antitrust litigation, which concluded that Google holds an illegal monopoly in general internet search. As part of proposed relief, the DOJ asked a court to require Google to divest Chrome, arguing that the browser is the “critical search access point” that entrenches Google’s dominance.
“To remedy these harms, the [Initial Proposed Final Judgment] requires Google to divest Chrome, which will permanently stop Google’s control of this critical search access point and allow rival search engines the ability to access the browser that for many users is a gateway to the internet,” the DOJ wrote.
The company has decried the remedy as overbroad, and the litigation is far from settled.
This backdrop explains why Chrome is suddenly available as an acquisition target in the headlines at all: divestiture is one of the DOJ’s suggested fixes. But any sale will be examined not only by Google’s corporate leadership but by regulators in multiple jurisdictions, who will assess whether a transfer of Chrome would cure or worsen the competitive harms the DOJ identified.
Chrome’s acquisition will drastically change Perplexity’s fortune. The upside includes immediate scale, near-unrivaled distribution, and the chance to bake its AI answers into the user flow that currently feeds Google search results and ad inventory. Owning Chrome would give Perplexity leverage to set a default search engine and to design novel interactions that prioritize AI-driven answers over link lists — a business model that would threaten the ad-driven economics of incumbent search providers.
Chrome is a linchpin in Google’s data, services, and advertising ecosystem. Selling Chrome would mean parting with a major user touchpoint that feeds Google Search and ad targeting.
What the deal would require — and the risks
However, in the unlikely circumstance Perplexity musters financing and Google is willing to negotiate, the transaction would be technically and politically fraught. Chrome is built on an open-source engine (Chromium) and deeply integrated with Google’s services and Android distribution agreements. Splitting Chrome from Google’s broader ecosystem while preserving a smooth user experience is a substantial engineering task.
Regulators will also scrutinize buyers. A sale that merely hands Chrome to a single, fast-growing search provider could be viewed as trading one concentrated control point for another. The DOJ and international competition authorities would evaluate not only whether a divestiture curbs Google’s dominance but also whether it creates a new gatekeeper with similar power.
