French IT services giant Capgemini has announced the immediate sale of its US subsidiary, Capgemini Government Solutions (CGS), following intense political backlash in France over the unit’s controversial work with US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The decision marks a dramatic reversal for the CAC 40-listed firm, which now faces growing scrutiny over ethical accountability in international government contracts.
ICE Contract Triggers Outrage
The controversy erupted after reports revealed that CGS signed a $4.8 million contract with ICE in December 2025 to provide so-called “skip tracing” technology, a data-driven service designed to locate individuals for deportation. Critics labeled the practice as “digital manhunting,” accusing the company of enabling aggressive immigration enforcement operations.
Public anger intensified following the fatal shootings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti by federal agents in Minneapolis, events that reignited global condemnation of ICE tactics during the Trump administration. In France, lawmakers and activists demanded accountability from Capgemini, questioning how a European technology leader could be linked to such practices.
Political and Union Pressure Mounts
French Economy Minister Roland Lescure publicly demanded “extreme transparency,” arguing that a French-listed company must uphold European ethical standards regardless of where its subsidiaries operate. Meanwhile, major labor unions CFDT and CGT condemned the contract, calling it a “huge shock” and a betrayal of Capgemini’s corporate values.
Under mounting pressure, CEO Aiman Ezzat defended the company by citing US national security regulations, which allegedly created a legal firewall between the French parent company and its US government-focused subsidiary. According to Capgemini, CGS is governed by an independent board of US security-cleared directors, limiting the group’s ability to oversee sensitive federal contracts.
Why Capgemini Chose to Divest
Despite these legal constraints, the reputational fallout proved too severe to ignore. CGS accounts for just 0.4% of Capgemini’s global revenue and less than 2% of its US business, making the sale a strategic move to protect the company’s brand, investor confidence, and regulatory relationships in Europe.
Analysts see the divestiture as a form of corporate damage control, allowing Capgemini to distance itself from controversial immigration enforcement activities while reaffirming its commitment to ethical governance.
Broader Implications
The episode highlights the growing tension between global technology firms and government surveillance contracts, particularly in politically sensitive sectors such as immigration and law enforcement. It also signals that European regulators and shareholders are increasingly unwilling to tolerate ethical gray zones in international operations.
For Capgemini, the sale closes a turbulent chapter but it also raises broader questions about accountability, transparency, and the limits of corporate oversight in the age of digital governance.
