> smaller US/EU firms will take place of larger firms.

Why do you think smaller EU/US firms are more likely to take their place than Big Chinese firms. The Big Chinese firms will have economies of scale and more capital.

> This will result in decreasing inequality and help the general society as well.

I don't know how is that going to decrease inequality. Even if big tech is replaced by 5 small tech, there is no way on earth it will decrease inequality. Do you have any basis for such an extraordinary claim?

> There is a good reason why anti-trust laws exist people. Billionaires are already a policy failure, we don’t need trillionaires in future as well.

Sure. In the totally globalised world, you can decide you don't want big companies. This will just ensure a Chinese company dominates the market.

I’ve been using software products past 25 years, and been developing them for quite a while, in my opinion scale of a company has a minor relevancy to software quality after a certain size.

I never worked at google but I’m willing to bet giant firms like Google have bunch of problems with their organization size which limits their code quality, product delivery times, and their agileness. A smaller, more agile company can definitely produce better products than Google (case in point: protonmail).

It will decrease income inequality because profits will go to different shareholders / employees.

> , in my opinion scale of a company has a minor relevancy to software quality after a certain size.

Possible, but I didn't talk about software quality, I talked about number of users.

> (case in point: protonmail).

I think your case undermines your argument. Protonmail is not a very successful product. It is behind even many paid mail services. If that is your idea of success then sure, many small companies will become like protonmail, while tencent mail might become the new gmail.