GLOBAL
PC: Mapping Big Tech’s Global Deregulatory Demands for the Trump Trade Agenda
We previously outlined the Big Tech demands behind President Trump’s tariff negotiations, showing that over 100 digital policies in more than 45 jurisdictions around the world are in the crosshairs of big technology companies and their lobby groups.
Now, Big Tech, emboldened by the Trump administration carrying water on their behalf, is upping the ante. We have scrutinized comments submitted by tech industry lobby groups to the US Trade Representative’s public comment process leading up to the 2026 release of the National Trade Estimate (NTE) Report.
Our findings show that Big Tech is doubling down on its attacks on global digital regulations, lobbying against hundreds of digital sector regulations in over 60 jurisdictions – from Argentina to Zimbabwe! Among the regulations under attack are AI laws, including those that regulate the use of AI systems in sensitive areas such as real-time biometric surveillance, data protection laws that seek to limit the commercial exploitation of personal data, and anti-monopoly regulations that seek to promote innovation in the digital ecosystem.
TheAmericanProspect: Where Big Tech and Trump Are Demanding Tax Cuts and Deregulation – David Dayen
Last month, former European Union Commissioner Thierry Breton and four other officials with European nongovernmental organizations were barred from entering the U.S., in what was described as retaliation for “censorship” of U.S. tech platforms in Europe. In reality, it was the latest in a campaign to force the EU to withdraw two regulatory laws, the Digital Markets Act and the Digital Services Act, that U.S. tech firms don’t like. The laws require tech companies to take down illegal content on their platforms, restrict the transfer of user data to multiple platforms run by the same companies, refrain from “steering” users toward their own products, and allow for fair competition in app stores and interoperable social media sites.
The travel ban was only the latest in the Trump administration’s special pleading for Big Tech, using threatened tariffs and leverage in trade deals to try to force changes to the EU’s sovereign laws. European leaders cried foul, claiming that the travel ban was an act of intimidation attempting to damage the EU’s regulatory autonomy.
In an analysis shared exclusively with the Prospect, Public Citizen has mapped Big Tech lobbyist demands in public comments for the National Trade Estimate, an annual report that lists alleged “non-tariff trade barriers” from other countries. This report is an annual lobbyist free-for-all, a way for them to get on the government radar laws in other countries that they would like to see eliminated. The trade groups are now objecting to hundreds of laws in close to 65 different jurisdictions around the world, a significant escalation in demands over the previous year.
LeMonde: Takeover by Big Tech – Francesca Bria
The critical infrastructures of the state are being replaced and reinstalled across five strategic domains: personal information, money supply, defence, orbital communication and energy – the very foundations of democratic control.
To understand why this capture is happening so rapidly, follow the personnel. The revolving door no longer spins between government and industry – it locks them together in a new architecture of power.
What emerges is not traditional corporate capture but a fundamental transformation of sovereignty, from political authority exercised through relatively democratic institutions to technical capacity controlled through private ownership. While Brussels debates ‘digital sovereignty’, European ministries sign contracts that compromise future policy autonomy while embedding anti-democratic logic in governance infrastructure.
Silicon Valley’s political transformation in the Trump 2.0 era marks the maturation of what Evgeny Morozov calls ‘oligarch-intellectuals’, ‘new legislators’ using technological infrastructure to spread their gospel and engineer post-democratic governance. What began as a libertarian exit has evolved into authoritarian capture. The same network that once championed seasteading (the creation of autonomous nations in international waters) to escape state authority now places its members at the highest levels of government. Having failed to build parallel institutions, they have found it more effective to become the infrastructure of the state itself.
TheGuardian: Trump may be the beginning of the end for ‘enshittification’ – this is our chance to make tech good again – Cory Doctrow
It’s been 25 years since I started working for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, an American nonprofit dedicated to preserving and promoting human rights on the internet. I’ve found myself in dozens of countries working with activists, politicians and civil servants to untangle the complex technical questions raised by the internet, andevery one of our discussions ended in the same place. “OK,” they’d say, “you’ve definitely laid out the best way to regulate tech, but we can’t do it.”
Why not? Because – inevitably – the US trade rep had beaten me to every one of those countries and made it eye-wateringly clear that if they regulated tech in a way that favoured their own people, industries and national interests, the US would bury them in tariffs.
Donald Trump’s tariffs have opened up a new possibility for the technology we have become increasingly dependent on. Today, nearly all of our tech comes from US companies, and it arrives as a prix fixe meal. If you want to talk with your friends on a Meta platform, you have to let Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg eavesdrop on your conversations. If you want to have a phone that works, you have to let Apple’s Tim Cook suck 30p out of every pound you spend and give him a veto over which software you can run. If you want to search the web, you have to let Google’s Sundar Pichai know what colour underwear you’ve got on.
ASIA
Reuters: Exclusive: India proposes forcing smartphone makers to give source code in security overhaul – Aditya Kalra and Munsif Vengattil
India proposes requiring smartphone makers to share source code with the government and make several software changes as part of a raft of security measures, prompting behind-the-scenes opposition from giants like Apple and Samsung.
The tech companies have countered that the package of 83 security standards, which would also include a requirement to alert the government to major software updates, lacks any global precedent and risks revealing proprietary details, according to four people familiar with the discussions and a Reuters review of confidential government and industry documents.
FT: How south-east Asia is riding out Trump’s tariff storm – Peter Foster, Amy Borrett and A. Anantha Lakshmi
South-east Asia has weathered Donald Trump’s tariff blitz thanks to US demand for tech, cheap manufacturing costs and the rerouting of goods from China, analysis of trade data shows.
Goods exports from south-east Asia to the US rose 25 per cent between July and September relative to the same period in 2024 despite the US president’s trade war, according to data from the US Census Bureau.
The increases defy fears following Trump’s “liberation day” in April that tariffs would hammer the region.
KoreaJoongAngDaily: Sensible or suppressive? How Korea’s ‘fake news’ law puts U.S. diplomacy, tech cooperation on the line
Korea’s newly passed amendment to the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection — dubbed the Network Act — has triggered an unusually blunt response from the United States, fueling speculation that it could emerge as another source of trade friction between the allies in the new year.
Korea has framed the law as a good-faith effort to address the growing social harms caused by online disinformation, denying that it amounts to censorship or protectionism. The revision allows courts to impose punitive damages for the intentional spread of false or manipulated content and places new expectations on large online platforms, including content removal or account restrictions — a scenario U.S. officials warn could chill lawful speech and push U.S. platforms into pre-emptive moderation.
This interpretation has led Washington to escalate criticism, with a social media post by the U.S. under secretary of state and an official State Department statement warning that the law could infringe on the freedom of expression and hinder bilateral technology cooperation.
SCMP: Fair or fowl? Malaysia struggles to stomach its US trade pact – Joseph Sipalan
Malaysia is bracing itself for a surge in American poultry shipments under an “agreement on reciprocal trade” signed with Washington in October. The deal opens the Southeast Asian nation to more US exports of food, cars and machinery, in exchange for a reduced 19 per cent tariff on Malaysian goods entering the world’s largest economy.
Critics have accused Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s administration of hastily signing a deal that is lopsided in Washington’s favour to appease Trump.
But the agreement has triggered discord in Malaysia.
Anwar’s administration sold the deal, which grants tariff exemptions for some Malaysian goods such as semiconductors, palm oil and rubber products, as crucial to reducing the overall tariff rate following months of threats from Washington over bilateral trade.
Still, the new trade minister, Johari Abdul Ghani, has said the government may seek to renegotiate elements of the pact “where terms are not fair”.
JakartaGlobe: Indonesia – US Tariff Talks Stay on Track Despite Venezuela Tensions: State Secretary – Celvin Moniaga Sipahutar
The government has assured that rising tensions in Venezuela will not affect ongoing tariff negotiations between Indonesia and the United States, insisting talks will proceed as scheduled.
State Secretary Prasetyo Hadi said follow-up negotiations will move into the legal drafting stage next week, with delegations from both countries set to finalize technical details between Jan. 12 and Jan. 19.
The trade document is expected to be signed by President Prabowo Subianto and US President Donald Trump by the end of January 2026.
NYT: Malaysia and Indonesia Block Access to Grok Because of Sexually Explicit Content – Ali Watkins
Indonesia and Malaysia said they were blocking access to Grok, the artificial intelligence chatbot created by Elon Musk, this weekend amid mounting outrage over the bot producing sexualized images of real people.
Indonesia announced that it was temporarily blocking the chatbot from xAI, Mr. Musk’s A.I. company, on Saturday, and the Malaysian government made a similar announcement on Sunday. While officials elsewhere have expressed concern and called for bans over the images, Indonesia and Malaysia are the first countries to formally ban the application.
TechCrunch: India orders Musk’s X to fix Grok over ‘obscene’ AI content – Jagmeet Singh
India has ordered Elon Musk’s X to make immediate technical and procedural changes to its AI chatbot Grok after users and lawmakers flagged the generation of “obscene” content, including AI-altered images of women created using the tool.
On Friday, India’s IT ministry issued the order directing Musk’s X to take corrective action on Grok, including restricting the generation of content involving “nudity, sexualization, sexually explicit, or otherwise unlawful” material. The ministry also gave the social media platform 72 hours to submit an action-taken report detailing the steps it has taken to prevent the hosting or dissemination of content deemed “obscene, pornographic, vulgar, indecent, sexually explicit, pedophilic, or otherwise prohibited under law.”
EUROPE
BEUC: EU-Korea Digital Trade Agreement: Bridging digital markets for the benefit of consumers
In March 2025, the EU and Korea concluded negotiations on a Digital Trade Agreement that complements the existing Digital Partnership framework. The agreement includes binding rules to facilitate digital trade in goods and services covering issues such as data flows, personal data protection, source code, online consumer protection, and spam. Several of these provisions can contribute positively to building consumer trust in the digital marketplace, both in the EU and in Korea. However, some elements raise concern as they could limit governments’ ability to enforce digital policies in the public interest.
This paper summarises BEUC’s and Consumers Korea’s common position on the negotiated deal.
Reuters: EU assembly weighs freezing US trade deal over Trump’s Greenland threats – Philip Blenkinsop
The European Parliament is considering putting on hold the European Union’s implementation of the trade deal struck with the United States in protest over threats by U.S. President Donald Trump to seize Greenland.
The European Parliament has been debating legislative proposals to remove many of the EU’s import duties on U.S. goods – the bulk of the trade deal with the U.S. – and to continue zero duties for U.S. lobsters, initially agreed with Trump in 2020. It was due to set its position in votes on January 26-27, which the MEPs said should now be postponed.
Politico: UK watchdog in ‘urgent contact’ with Musk’s X over AI-generated sexualized images of children – Mizy Clifton
U.K. communications watchdog Ofcom is looking into whether X may be in breach of the Online Safety Act following a series of reports that its AI chatbot Grok generated sexually explicit images of children.
Ofcom is also in touch with X about instances where Grok was used to generate non-consensual images of women naked.
An Ofcom spokesperson said the regulator had made “urgent contact” with X and xAI, Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence company which owns X, “to understand what steps they have taken to comply with their legal duties to protect users in the U.K.”
Govt.ofUK: Technology Secretary statement on xAI’s Grok image generation and editing tool
The Technology Secretary comments on the changes xAI has implemented to its chatbot overnight, and government action to stamp out this form of abuse.
Technology Secretary Liz Kendall said: “Sexually manipulating images of women and children is despicable and abhorrent. It is an insult and totally unacceptable for Grok to still allow this if you’re willing to pay for it. I expect Ofcom to use the full legal powers Parliament has given them.
I, and more importantly the public – would expect to see Ofcom update on next steps in days not weeks.
I would remind xAI that the Online Safety Act Includes the power to block services from being accessed in the UK, if they refuse to comply with UK law. If Ofcom decide to use those powers they will have our full support.”
AtlanticCouncil: Digital sovereignty: Europe’s declaration of independence? – Frances Burwell and Kenneth Propp
In 2025, the Trump administration’s open hostility to the EU and close connections with tech CEOs brought long-simmering transatlantic tensions over how to regulate Big Tech to a boil.
The effect so far has been to accelerate the EU’s quest to break its dependence on Silicon Valley and China.
Washington’s combative posture toward EU tech regulation sets the stage for more conflict that could imperil the $1.5-trillion trading relationship.
OpenRightsGroup: Techno-Permacrisis – Jim Killock
Musk’s latest venture, image generation in Grok that until Wednesday lacked sufficient guardrails to prevent the easy production of non-consensual sexual images and even child abuse images, provoked an Ofcom investigation and further EU Commission action as well as the promise of UK emergency legislation against apps that provide such images in less than a week.
There is a wider, uncomfortable question which is not yet central to the political debate. Musk, X and Grok are not some accidental rogue element. They are the extreme edge of an alignment between far right politics, billionaire controlled platform infrastructure, and the US government.
Labour needs to develop a strategy that tackles the effects of that relationship in the UK; but beneath the immediate reaction to Grok, the truth is that the Government is building the power of the tech giants, rather than tackling it.
The missing middle path is structural: creating real protection for customers through regulation and competition measures that let people escape from malign social media, rather than solely attempting to police behaviour within monopolised systems.
NORTH AMERICA
CCPA: The trade war goes digital – Notes on how trade agreements prevent Canada from exercising digital sovereignty – Kaylie Tiessen
Digital services represent one of Canada’s fastest growing trade related opportunities. According to the World Trade Organization, Canada’s trade in digital services—both imports and exports—grew by more than 200 per cent between 2005 and 2024. Across industries, removing frictions from trade relationships has been a centrepiece of increasing total trade volumes with real potential to help grow Canada’s economy.
However, this pursuit of seamless digital trade has often come at the cost of digital sovereignty. In our quest to facilitate international trade, Canada agreed to rules that compromise our ability to fully control and regulate our digital landscape. These agreements, while beneficial for trade, limit Canada’s ability to protect our data, enforce privacy standards, and consider local economic interests.
The path to regaining governance capacity over our digital world is long. We need to impose current and new rules on large digital platforms. We also need to gain the right to hold platforms accountable in the first place.
NYT: From A.I. to Chips, Big Tech Is Getting What It Wants From Trump – Cecilia Kang
Before President Trump returned to the White House in January, the titans of the tech industry went all out to win him over with inauguration donations and pilgrimages to Mar-a-Lago.
Yet upon taking office, Mr. Trump vowed to continue a fight to break up Meta, imposed tariffs that would raise the costs of Apple’s supply chains and restricted the exports of artificial intelligence chips from Nvidia and other chip makers. It seemed that the tech industry’s efforts to woo the president would not pay off.
Now, however, the biggest tech companies have gotten almost everything they wanted from Mr. Trump.
Since the summer, he has eliminated many limits on A.I. chip exports, fast-tracked the building of data centers that power A.I. development and pushed legislation that gave government approval to a type of cryptocurrency. This month, Mr. Trump signed an executive order to kill A.I. restrictions set by states and greenlighted sales of a more powerful Nvidia chip to America’s top rival, China.
USTR: Op-Ed by Ambassador Jamieson Greer: The Year of the Tariff
United States Trade Representative Jamieson Greer published an op-ed in The Financial Times explaining how President Trump’s trade program is accelerating America’s re-industrialization, incentivizing domestic production with improved market access for U.S. exports.
NYT: Why Haven’t Trump’s Tariffs Had a Bigger Impact? – Ana Swanson
President Trump raised the taxes that the United States charges on imports last year to levels not seen in a century.
Prices of goods have increased as a result, and businesses that depend on imported products and supplies have struggled, with some closing their doors. Still, the effects have not been felt as strongly as some experts predicted after early April when Mr. Trump announced double-digit tariffs on imports from countries worldwide.
A new working paper from economists at Harvard and the University of Chicago helps explain why. It shows that the tariff rate importers have paid is significantly lower than the tariff figures that Mr. Trump announced. The reasons include exemptions for certain countries and industries, rates that were lowered for some goods by the time they arrived in the U.S. and evasion of the rules by some companies.
IELP: Is Foreign Antitrust Enforcement “Discriminatory” and “Anti-American”? – Simon Lester
The House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Administrative State, Regulatory Reform, and Antitrust held a hearing in December on “Anti-American Antitrust: How Foreign Governments Target U.S. Businesses.” There was a lot of talk at the hearing about how foreign regulations and regulators “discriminate” against American companies.
In reaction to this, I want to start with an issue I have raised before: What exactly do people mean by “discriminate” when they use it in the context of tech market regulation? Are they talking about the intent – objective or subjective – of the regulation (or its enforcement)? Or just the effect of the regulation/enforcement at its most basic, e.g., looking for a disparate impact on American companies? An intent test and an effects test have very different implications.
CCPA: The backup plan: A framework for protecting the Canadian digital public square, inspired by the European Union – Gabriel Rojas Hruka
At present, the Canadian government’s ability to regulate Canadian digital space is hampered by international agreements. Specifically, sections 17.19.2 and 17.19.3 of the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) form a liability shield protecting online media companies. This threatens our digital sovereignty and increases our susceptibility to online harms. Canadian negotiators should aim to remove—or at least modify—these sections during the upcoming 2026 CUSMA review. However, a backup plan is necessary.
The European Union Digital Services Act (EU DSA) could inspire a framework to address disinformation and online harms in Canada that would be permissible, even given an unchanged legal context—including the World Trade Organization General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). The framework should emphasize reasonable transparency and regular reviews for accountability and assurance of good faith acting on the part of private corporations that now moderate the digital public squares of the 21st century.
HarvardPoliticalReview: Building Trade Policy That Lasts: An Interview with Katherine Tai – Emma Pham-Tran
Ambassador Katherine Tai served as the 19th United States Trade Representative (USTR) from 2021 to 2025. As a member of the Biden administration, Tai was the principal trade advisor, negotiator, and spokesperson on U.S. trade policy. The Harvard Political Review sat down with Tai about the legacy of trade policy and identity in America.
LATIN AMERICA
NYT: E.U. and South America to Form Free-Trade Zone With 700 Million People – Patricia Cohen
The European Union, overcoming deep dissension among its members, gave the green light to a sweeping trade pact with four South American countries on Friday that would create one of the largest free-trade zones in the world, connecting markets with more than 700 million people.
The agreement offers a stark contrast to the amped-up aggression on display this week from the Trump administration. As Europe worked to extend an era of economic collaboration, the United States, its once-close ally, demonstrated that it preferred coercion over cooperation.
The European Union’s agreement with Brazil, the largest economy in Latin America, as well as Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay was long opposed by agricultural interests and environmentalists in Europe.
Critics argued that South American producers did not meet European standards on pesticides, deforestation, animal treatment and worker rights. Farmers, particularly chicken and beef producers, have been worried that cheap imports would undercut their livelihoods.
Earth.org: The EU-Mercosur Deal Comes With Serious Environmental and Social Implications – Silvia Meloni
After more than 20 years of negotiations, the European Union and the Mercosur countries have signed a historic trade agreement meant to promote unprecedented industry relations between Europe and South America. Although accompanied by grandiose promises of sustainability and mutual benefit, the EU-Mercosur deal’s increased trade in beef, soy, and other commodities will accelerate deforestation, fuel climate emission, and expose the loopholes in the EU’s already shaky green legislation.
