US Industries Urging Commerce to Limit Export Controls on AI
As the Commerce Department prepares to issue export controls on emerging technologies, U.S. industries are urging the agency to limit controls on artificial intelligence and 3D printing, according to industry comments gathered by Jessica Blum Sanchez, the trade compliance manager at Accenture Federal Services.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
Blum Sanchez, speaking June 28 at the American Association for Exporters and Importers Annual Conference in Washington, also said U.S. companies want Commerce to fundamentally change how it approaches export controls on new technologies. Instead of increasing controls, Blum Sanchez said, companies want the government to offer incentives for them to try to out-innovate foreign competitors, giving the U.S. advantages in industry and security.
“We suggest Commerce incentivize U.S. companies to stay ahead -- as opposed to controlling it more -- through investing and education, tax incentives, etc.,” Blum Sanchez said.
Blum Sanchez said she had gathered the industry comments and feedback from Commerce’s November request for comments on emerging technologies controls. She said the main concern from U.S. companies was the fear that Commerce’s controls will be “overly broad,” which could slash U.S. global competitiveness in technology sectors. She also said companies thought A.I. and 3D printing were “already controlled sufficiently.” If Commerce introduces more controls, specifically on A.I., U.S. companies believe it will only hurt domestic industries, not limit foreign competitors' access, Blum Sanchez said.
“For A.I. and cybersecurity we see time and time again in enforcement cases that bad actors don’t necessarily care about export control laws,” she said. “So we didn't think controls around A.I. would deter attacks in that regard or help us in national security.”
U.S. companies have similar concerns about 3D printing, Blum Sanchez said. She named China, South Korea, Germany, Italy and the United Arab Emirates as nations that are “investing aggressively” in 3D printing and could surpass the U.S. if export controls are increased. “This is another area we thought probably was already controlled sufficiently under the dual-use and [International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR)] regulations,” she said. “So additional controls we didn’t think would offer as much value.”
But the main concern among U.S. industries has been A.I., Blum Sanchez said. “A.I. has scared a lot of people because it is so broad and there is so much foreign availability and foreign competition,” she said. Some companies are concerned controls on A.I. could lead Commerce to “retroactively try to enforce” technology that is already in use, like self-driving cars, Blum Sanchez said. “All of that technology that's already out there, if we try to restrict, we can’t pull all of that back,” she said.
Matt Borman, deputy assistant secretary for export administration at Commerce, who spoke on the same panel, stressed that Commerce is not looking to create controls on entire categories of technologies, such as A.I. The agency is instead trying to control a “slice” of categories that fall under military uses, he said (see 1906280057). “The input from the public industry is very helpful as we think through how we identify these things,” Borman said.