Apple CEO Tim Cook frequently interrupted Margrethe Vestager during a meeting earlier this year, according to sources | Josh Edelson/AFP via Getty Images iFailure: Apple crashes in Brussels The €13 billion price tag for neglecting to engage Europe.

Its founder was a genius. Its customers offer cultish loyalty. Shareholders love it. It not only dominates its market; it created it. In nearly every arena in which it engages, Apple stands for excellence.

And yet, on the day the Silicon Valley tech giant was handed a tax bill for up to €13 billion plus interest by the European Commission, the company did not have a single spokesperson in Brussels (either on staff or in a PR agency) to explain its position to the more than 1,000 journalists accredited to cover the decision.

The absence was symbolic of the dismissive approach the company has taken throughout the Commission’s investigation.

More so than any American company which has tangled with the EU’s hardline competition enforcers, Apple has failed to get to grips with how to lobby Brussels. The consequences can now be counted in cold hard cash.

In fact, Apple failed some of the most basic tests of what it takes to maintain good relationships in Brussels: like showing up.

The Apple staff member legally responsible for Apple’s lobbying presence in Brussels is Bruce Sewell. He didn’t show up in Brussels Tuesday.

If you circulate in Brussels policy circles, you will not be invited to Apple-hosted drinks, debates or conferences, because they do not exist.

The next most senior staff member, Per Hellstrom, formally joined Apple’s staff less than a year ago, and is prevented from lobbying the EU because of conflicts of interest.

Hellstrom is a former EU competition official who from 2007 to 2012 managed competition cases against Apple’s competitors Google and Microsoft, which directly affected the company’s interests. Hellstrom initially joined the Apple team on loan from the European Commission.

That leaves the biggest company in the world with just three staff members who can lobby the EU on a regular basis from its unmarked office on Rue de la Science in Brussels’ EU quarter.

Those staff members work with the consultancy FleishmanHillard on public affairs, but not media relations. Apple is not among the agency’s top 10 public affairs clients in Brussels. It paid FleishmanHillard less than €199,000 for its services in 2015.

Search the Apple website, and you won’t find any mention of the Commission’s tax ruling or what Apple has to say about it.

The problems for Apple, however, started at the top.

When Tim Cook, the company’s CEO, made a surprise visit to Brussels in early 2016 to lobby European Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager, things couldn’t have gone worse.

People briefed on the meeting recall Cook as insistent that he was right, and as a poor listener who frequently interrupted Vestager.

That meeting set the tone for Apple’s future engagement with the EU.

Apple doesn’t do soft power, unless you count its flagship Brussels store on Toison D’Or, opened in 2015. If you circulate in Brussels policy circles, you will not be invited to Apple-hosted drinks, debates or conferences, because they do not exist.

Apple’s small Brussels office devotes only half its time to lobbying the EU, according to the company’s entry in the EU Transparency Register.

That means the company employs the equivalent of just 2.5 full-time lobbyists, according to its entry in the transparency register, at a cost of €800,000-€900,000 last year. In contrast, Google has eight people working full time and has spent more than five times as much money, around €4.5 million.

The world’s biggest company has a massive footprint in the marketplace, but is nearly invisible in the world’s biggest diplomatic and policy community: the EU.

When Apple does surface, the policy results and the impression it leaves behind are mixed.

One MEP staffer noted that Apple rarely sends press releases and other news to MEPs, in contrast to competitors such as Google.

A Commission official who worked with both Apple and Google to solve a concern over how the companies labeled "in-app purchases" sold by application vendors in smartphone application stores had praise for the company. “My experience was positive,” the official said. “They solved the problem” by agreeing to remove the word “free” from apps that did in fact require payments in order to enable full functionality.

Members of the European Parliament who spoke to POLITICO, however, reported being unimpressed by the company’s outreach.

Aside from occasional engagements on specific policies, Apple has no ongoing involvement in the hundreds of consultative bodies, expert groups and industry forums that both the Commission and Parliament have established to work with stakeholders like Apple.

One senior MEP said Apple did a good job at reaching out to the most senior MEPs, but other elected and appointed officials in the Parliament found the company to be largely absent from key debates, and dismissive when present.

“It’s obvious that they don’t have a strong presence in the EU,” said Marietje Schaake, a digitally savvy MEP and tech policy expert. “I don’t think they’ve ever lobbied me here. I once made a visit to their headquarters. It struck me that they mostly presented me products rather than talked policy, presenting their latest releases. Companies generally send their policy people to talk. And with Apple that didn’t happen.”

One MEP staffer noted that Apple rarely sends press releases and other news to MEPs, in contrast to competitors such as Google.

“With the other tech companies at least I knew who to call,” complained another. “With Apple, I have no idea who works here.”

Saim Saeed contributed to this article.