US technology corporation Palantir Technologies, whose solutions are used in military intelligence, national security, policing, migration control and public services, is becoming increasingly embedded in the infrastructure of European states. Lithuania is no exception: Palantir technology is used in the country’s state data governance system, which brings together hundreds of state information resources.
At the same time, new information about the company’s activities raises questions about its tax transparency, while trade unions are warning about the growing risks of technological dependency and control over people’s data.
For this reason, the Lithuanian Industry Trade Union Federation (LPPSF) is joining the initiative of the European Federation of Public Service Unions (EPSU) and civil society organisations, “No Place for Palantir in a Democratic Europe!”. The initiative calls on European governments to reassess their relations with the company, strengthen public services and seek technological alternatives that safeguard democratic principles, data security and the technological autonomy of states.
A new report raises questions about tax transparency
A new report by the Centre for International Corporate Tax Accountability and Research (CICTAR) examines Palantir’s tax practices in Europe. According to CICTAR researchers, profit shifting to the United States creates an estimated €12 million tax gap between the taxes paid in Europe and the amount that, according to their calculations, would have been paid if the profits had remained in Europe.
The report also examines stock-based employee compensation and its impact on the company’s tax burden. Employees may receive shares or stock options as part of their compensation. Under certain circumstances, these costs can be accounted for as compensation expenses, reducing the company’s taxable profit, even though the company does not necessarily pay employees an equivalent amount in cash.
It is important to stress that this is a study conducted by CICTAR and an assessment by its authors, rather than a finding that Palantir has violated the law. However, it raises an important question: should a company that receives public-sector contracts and generates revenue from public money not also be assessed on how transparently and fairly it contributes to public finances?
Public interest must come before technological dependency
The Palantir case raises questions not only about taxation, but also about data security, technological sovereignty and the protection of democratic processes. The more state data and functions are integrated into a single private platform, the greater the risk of vendor lock-in – a situation in which replacing the provider in the future may become technically, financially or organisationally difficult.
From the perspective of trade unions, when purchasing technological solutions, governments should therefore assess not only their cost and efficiency, but also data control, long-term dependence on the provider, the availability of alternatives, and the company’s operational and tax transparency. EPSU is calling for stronger tax transparency requirements to be incorporated into EU public procurement rules and for existing contracts with Palantir to be reviewed.
It is also important to note that the company operates in the fields of defence, national security, policing, migration control and intelligence. In 2025, the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) included Palantir in its list of “Corporate Underminers of Democracy”, drawing attention to the political influence of its co-founder Peter Thiel, his links to the US far-right political movement, and financial support for Donald Trump’s and J. D. Vance’s political campaigns.
This, in itself, is not grounds for claiming that Palantir’s system is unsafe or inappropriate. However, when a private foreign company becomes part of a state’s data infrastructure, it is essential to transparently assess what level of control the state retains, what safeguards are in place to protect data, and whether the public interest remains more important than technological dependency.
Europe is facing a lack of investment in public services, while governments are simultaneously purchasing an increasing number of functions and technological solutions from private corporations. Public procurement rules should therefore pay greater attention not only to the price and technical characteristics of a service, but also to tax transparency, data security and long-term dependence on the provider.
Why is this relevant to Lithuania?
This is not a theoretical issue for Lithuania. The State Data Agency’s state data governance platform operates on the basis of Palantir Foundry. According to the Agency’s 2025 annual report, by the end of the year the state data lake ecosystem included 517 information resources, 13,537 primary integrated tables, 1,814 projects and 5,186 users. In 2025, 463 new connections to state information resources were also established.
This means that Palantir technology is becoming part of an important element of Lithuania’s digital state infrastructure. The question, therefore, is not simply whether the particular system is efficient. The question is what long-term dependence on a single private US technology provider is being created, who controls the technological infrastructure, and how safe are the state and its citizens’ data.
Can technological sovereignty be ensured?
Palantir’s activities extend beyond state data analysis. The company’s solutions are used in national security, military, policing and migration control. As a result, its role in Europe is also being assessed in the broader context of technological sovereignty.
The more strategic state functions and data are concentrated within a single private technology platform, the more important questions become about data control, system transparency, resilience to political or economic changes, and the ability to choose a different technological solution in the future.
From this perspective, the ownership, leadership and investor influence surrounding a company can also legitimately be considered as part of transparency and risk assessment when dealing with strategic state infrastructure.
European public services therefore need technological solutions that ensure not only efficient use of data, but also high standards of data security, privacy, transparency and technological autonomy. Priority should be given to solutions whose control and infrastructure remain in Europe, rather than leaving states dependent on a single private provider.
“No Place for Palantir in a Democratic Europe!” initiative is calling on European governments to review existing public-sector contracts with Palantir and refrain from entering into new ones; develop alternative data solutions adapted to public-service needs and ensure protection against mass surveillance; strengthen and democratise public institutions, invest in quality public services and good jobs; and strengthen international cooperation in developing alternative technological solutions.
The trade union position
Trade unions have a direct interest in the pathway of the public services. Digitalisation can make public services more efficient, but it should not come at the cost of the state losing technological expertise, control or the ability to choose alternatives.
This is not a question of whether technologies are good or bad. It is a question of what limits and safeguards should apply to private technology companies when their solutions become part of state infrastructure.
In LPPSF’s view, the more important the state function, the more sensitive the data and the greater the share of public money allocated to technological solutions, the higher the standards of transparency, data security, tax responsibility and democratic accountability should be.
It is important not only to assess existing risks, but also to invest in European technological alternatives that ensure data security, privacy, transparency and greater technological autonomy for states.
Palantir in numbers
- US$4.48 billion – Palantir’s revenue in 2025.
- US$1.63 billion – the company’s net income in 2025.
- US$684 million – stock-based employee compensation expenses in 2025.
- Around €12 million – the tax gap in Europe estimated by CICTAR, resulting from profit shifting to the United States.
- US$417 billion – Palantir’s current market value.
- 517 state information resources – the number integrated into Lithuania’s state data governance system in 2025, which operates on the basis of Palantir Foundry, a data management platform.
These figures prove that we are dealing with a huge and rapidly growing corporation whose solutions are becoming increasingly embedded in the public sector. Alongside the benefits offered by technology, it is therefore essential to assess how much public money goes to such a company, how much it contributes to public finances, how state data control is ensured, and whether governments have real technological alternatives.