The Trump administration's decision to examine emerging technologies as candidates for export controls could cost U.S. businesses tens of billions of dollars and threaten thousands of jobs, the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation reported, in an email Monday. If substantial export controls are enacted, ITIF said firms “could lose $14.1 billion to $56.3 billion in export sales over five years." The Commerce Department Bureau of Industry and Security seeks to expand export controls to technologies that are or may soon be essential to national security but aren't export-regulated. A Nov. 19 Federal Register notice sought feedback from companies on “identifying emerging technologies,” including products such as artificial intelligence and machine learning technology." ITIF warned of the harm that it said could result if Commerce defines “an overly restrictive set” of technologies, saying that could “significantly impede competitiveness of certain U.S. industries and stifle their “output, exports and employment growth.”

The Trump administration's decision to examine emerging technologies as candidates for export controls could cost U.S. businesses tens of billions of dollars and threaten thousands of jobs, the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation reported, in an email Monday. If substantial export controls are enacted, ITIF said firms “could lose $14.1 billion to $56.3 billion in export sales over five years." The Commerce Department Bureau of Industry and Security seeks to expand export controls to technologies that are or may soon be essential to national security but aren't export-regulated. A Nov. 19 Federal Register notice sought feedback from companies on “identifying emerging technologies,” including products such as artificial intelligence and machine learning technology." ITIF warned of the harm that it said could result if Commerce defines “an overly restrictive set” of technologies, saying that could “significantly impede competitiveness of certain U.S. industries and stifle their “output, exports and employment growth.”

The Trump administration's decision to examine emerging technologies as candidates for export controls could cost U.S. businesses tens of billions of dollars and threaten thousands of jobs, the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation reported, in an email Monday. If substantial export controls are enacted, ITIF said firms “could lose $14.1 billion to $56.3 billion in export sales over five years." The Commerce Department Bureau of Industry and Security seeks to expand export controls to technologies that are or may soon be essential to national security but aren't export-regulated. A Nov. 19 Federal Register notice sought feedback from companies on “identifying emerging technologies,” including products such as artificial intelligence and machine learning technology." ITIF warned of the harm that it said could result if Commerce defines “an overly restrictive set” of technologies, saying that could “significantly impede competitiveness of certain U.S. industries and stifle their “output, exports and employment growth.”

The Trump administration's decision to examine emerging technologies as candidates for export controls could cost U.S. businesses tens of billions of dollars and threaten thousands of jobs, the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation said in a new report. If substantial export controls are enacted, the report warns, firms “could lose $14.1 [billion] to $56.3 billion in export sales over five years, with missed export opportunities threatening from 18,000 to 74,000 jobs.”

Internet companies urged flexible reading of California’s privacy law. The California Consumer Protection Act (CCPA) will be enforced from Jan. 1, though Attorney General Xavier Becerra (D) has until July 1, 2021, to adopt rules and guidance interpreting CCPA. “It would be unfortunate if the lack of clarity or conflicts in the statute were amplified in the implementing regulations,” the Internet Association commented. Privacy advocates urged the AG to make it easy for consumers to take advantage of CCPA rights, while some specialized industries sought exemptions.

Internet companies urged flexible reading of California’s privacy law. The California Consumer Protection Act (CCPA) will be enforced from Jan. 1, though Attorney General Xavier Becerra (D) has until July 1, 2021, to adopt rules and guidance interpreting CCPA. “It would be unfortunate if the lack of clarity or conflicts in the statute were amplified in the implementing regulations,” the Internet Association commented. Privacy advocates urged the AG to make it easy for consumers to take advantage of CCPA rights, while some specialized industries sought exemptions.

The U.S. needs to do more work “to get our arms around the opportunities and challenges with federal spectrum,” Doug Brake, Information Technology and Innovation Foundation director-broadband and spectrum policy, told us (see 1903070061). “The fragmentation and inefficient use of federal spectrum represents a tremendous opportunity to unlock value through better governance structures.” Because of recent changes, the spectrum relocation fund (SRF) can be tapped earlier than in the past, Brake said. “But there are limits on how this money can be used for the very upfront planning,” he said. “Also the SRF is not an unlimited source of money. On top of there being no great source of funding for this work, you also have real principal-agent problems.”

China’s 2018 “digital protectionism and mercantilist” policies ranked among the worst for the sixth straight year, “undermining trade and competition in key tech sectors,” warned an Information Technology and Innovation Foundation annual report Monday. “While these forms of protectionism typically rely on behind-the-border regulations rather than tariffs to protect local firms, the objective and impact remain the same -- either to replace foreign goods and services with local ones, or to unfairly promote exports, or both.” Among China’s worst 2018 infractions was a new “standardization law” that shuns international principles and best practices and “could be used to favor local tech firms,” ITIF said. New rules could “potentially force firms to store data only in China if it is related to privately funded, commercially focused research,” it said. China’s refusal to reference its World Trade Organization commitments in the standardization law “raised further concerns about potential discriminatory intentions,” said ITIF. “Unique levels of standards,” combined with lack of transparency about implementation and enforcement “adds further uncertainty for foreign firms” there, it said. “Such nontransparent and discriminatory standards can act as a significant barrier to trade, especially for high-tech.”

China’s 2018 “digital protectionism and mercantilist” policies ranked among the worst for the sixth straight year, “undermining trade and competition in key tech sectors,” warned an Information Technology and Innovation Foundation annual report Monday. “While these forms of protectionism typically rely on behind-the-border regulations rather than tariffs to protect local firms, the objective and impact remain the same -- either to replace foreign goods and services with local ones, or to unfairly promote exports, or both.” Among China’s worst 2018 infractions was a new “standardization law” that shuns international principles and best practices and “could be used to favor local tech firms,” ITIF said. New rules could “potentially force firms to store data only in China if it is related to privately funded, commercially focused research,” it said. China’s refusal to reference its World Trade Organization commitments in the standardization law “raised further concerns about potential discriminatory intentions,” said ITIF. “Unique levels of standards,” combined with lack of transparency about implementation and enforcement “adds further uncertainty for foreign firms” there, it said. “Such nontransparent and discriminatory standards can act as a significant barrier to trade, especially for high-tech.”

China’s 2018 “digital protectionism and mercantilist” policies ranked among the worst for the sixth straight year, “undermining trade and competition in key tech sectors,” warned an Information Technology and Innovation Foundation annual report Monday. “While these forms of protectionism typically rely on behind-the-border regulations rather than tariffs to protect local firms, the objective and impact remain the same -- either to replace foreign goods and services with local ones, or to unfairly promote exports, or both.” Among China’s worst 2018 infractions was a new “standardization law” that shuns international principles and best practices and “could be used to favor local tech firms,” ITIF said. New rules could “potentially force firms to store data only in China if it is related to privately funded, commercially focused research,” it said. China’s refusal to reference its World Trade Organization commitments in the standardization law “raised further concerns about potential discriminatory intentions,” said ITIF. “Unique levels of standards,” combined with lack of transparency about implementation and enforcement “adds further uncertainty for foreign firms” there, it said. “Such nontransparent and discriminatory standards can act as a significant barrier to trade, especially for high-tech.”