How Trump's Win Affects the Tech Landscape
Will an "America First" Approach Make Tech Great Again?
Hi everyone,
Yesterday was all about the election results, and now that Trump has won, it’s time to think about what his leadership could mean for tech. We’ve heard plenty on how this could impact the economy and global relations, so let’s take a closer look at his actual tech policies and what they could bring to the industry.
Trump’s all about putting “America First,” which means we’ll likely see some changes. His approach to tech zeroes in on AI, crypto, and Big Tech, with fewer rules and big moves to shake up trade, especially around supply chains. It could lead to fewer hurdles for tech companies and more room to grow, though it might complicate things for global players.
Though tech issues aren’t central to their platforms, let’s not forget—the speed at which technology is evolving will undoubtedly shape how Americans connect, work, and navigate their world over the next four years. Advancements in AI, digital currencies, and data privacy make this election a key moment for tech policy.
Understanding these potential changes will be crucial as the industry enters this new chapter.
1. AI Policy Shifts Under Trump: From Deregulation to Economic Strategy
AI has undeniably become a cornerstone in the global tech race. With Trump back in office, we’re looking at a potentially significant pivot in AI policy from the more cautious, regulated approach Biden initiated. Trump’s team views AI as a big opportunity, and his plan? Get rid of the red tape and make sure America is ahead of the curve. He’s already said he’ll cancel Biden’s AI order on day one. To Trump, this order is a “left-wing overreach,” and he’s vowed to remove any “barriers” that he believes could stifle U.S. innovation.
Biden’s executive order, which was expansive and multifaceted, required each federal agency to study and manage AI's societal impacts within their sectors. It pushed for responsible AI governance, aiming to ensure AI doesn’t just advance but does so safely, securely, and ethically. Repealing this directive could signal a complete shift, taking a laissez-faire approach that prioritizes rapid AI growth over regulatory oversight.
Focus on Economic Gains Over Regulation
Trump’s AI policy is anchored in economic independence and self-sufficiency. He’s not only looking at AI as a tool for economic growth but also brings us back to Trump’s “America First” economic strategy. With fewer rules, Trump’s betting the U.S. can speed up its AI game. This might mean a faster path for tech companies—both the big players and startups—to develop AI without the extra red tape slowing things down.
However, fewer restrictions also raise questions. It’s an approach designed to help the U.S. dominate AI development, but it not may but will conclude with broader risks—particularly regarding issues like data privacy, responsibleðical ai, security, and algorithmic fairness. Biases might go unchecked, AI safety could become a secondary concern, and consumers might bear the brunt of any data mishandling or privacy breaches.
Federal AI Initiatives: Prioritizing Defense and Economic Competitiveness
While Trump’s AI policies seem less focused on oversight, they zero in on federal AI applications with clear economic and defense goals. In his previous term, Trump was the first president to issue an executive order on AI back in 2019, emphasizing AI’s role in maintaining America’s competitive edge, especially against nations like China. With his return, we can anticipate an even stronger emphasis on AI for defense, cybersecurity, and federal efficiency. This is less about AI for public well-being and more about AI as a tool for national security and economic fortification.
Global Positioning and the U.S.-China AI Race
Trump’s plan includes pushing federal agencies to adopt AI that strengthens U.S. military and cyber capabilities. From AI-enhanced surveillance systems to predictive defense analytics, his focus is on practical applications that protect U.S. interests. The final months of his last term saw an order promoting “trustworthy AI” in the government, a move he could build on by prioritizing “U.S.-first” AI systems that avoid dependencies on foreign tech infrastructure.
Trump’s team has floated the idea of AI development that minimizes reliance on foreign tech supply chains—a significant factor as he plans to phase out certain Chinese tech imports. By bolstering AI within federal programs, he’s betting on strengthening the U.S. workforce in AI-driven industries and, in turn, creating a self-sustaining tech ecosystem.
Biden’s administration had been cautious, establishing security measures that limited China’s access to advanced U.S. AI technology and hardware. Trump’s approach is likely to intensify this rivalry with more direct actions, such as stricter AI-related trade sanctions, to counter China’s rapid AI growth.
Trump’s not looking to beat China by piling on rules. Quite the opposite—he’s all about cutting down what he sees as barriers holding back American tech growth. His stance is that AI innovation, unhindered by strict rules, will outpace China’s progress. Trump’s policies will likely favor private-sector flexibility, allowing American companies to work on high-stakes AI projects that other countries may have hesitated to tackle under stricter regulation.
This approach could boost U.S. productivity in areas like autonomous tech, advanced computing, and defense AI applications but might open doors to ethical concerns that other nations—like those in the EU with their AI Act—are working to mitigate.
Implications: -my takes-
For Businesses:
With Trump’s deregulatory stance, businesses in sectors like defense, healthcare, and consumer tech may find it easier to integrate AI rapidly without navigating strict compliance barriers. This approach could indeed accelerate AI adoption, allowing companies to gain a competitive edge by innovating faster and pushing boundaries in areas like automation, predictive analytics, and personalized services.
Trump’s proposed tariffs on tech imports, especially those targeting Chinese-made goods, could have knock-on effects on the AI sector. Increased tariffs may raise the costs of essential AI components, such as high-powered chips, which could affect both development and scalability for AI companies. This protectionist stance might limit international AI partnerships, potentially slowing the rate of innovation due to constrained access to global resources.
Since it expected to focus more on physical security threats—such as preventing AI’s use in developing bioweapons—than on issues like algorithmic bias or ethical standards in AI applications. This could lead to significant developments in defense-related AI but may deprioritize civilian protections against potential biases, thus affecting sectors like healthcare and employment where AI’s ethical considerations are crucial.
By deprioritizing federal AI regulation, the U.S. could lag behind global AI ethics standards, especially as the EU and other regions advance their regulatory frameworks. This shift could diminish the U.S.'s influence in setting global standards, which could affect American companies looking to operate internationally, where stricter regulations on AI ethics and safety are increasingly being enforced.
Given Trump's anticipated rollback on federal oversight, Democratic-led states like California and Colorado are likely to intensify their AI regulations independently. This decentralized approach might mean that businesses will need to navigate differing compliance requirements across states, potentially complicating operations for companies with a national footprint.
For companies, this means a proactive approach is essential. Those that prioritize responsible AI now, even without federal pressure, can establish credibility and avoid disruption when regulatory tides eventually turn. Building a long-term strategy that considers both innovation and ethical AI use will be crucial for maintaining consumer trust and staying resilient amid regulatory shifts.
For Investors:
Trump’s push to strengthen U.S. economic competitiveness in AI is likely to create a favorable investment environment for American AI firms, with potentially lucrative returns in sectors poised for AI integration. However, his hands-off approach to regulation may lead to overlooked risks, especially in areas like cybersecurity and ethical governance.
In the short term, reduced oversight might boost growth, but in the long term, companies that sideline responsible AI practices could face significant setbacks—both reputational and financial. Investors should assess how companies manage ethical risks, data privacy, and AI’s potential societal impacts. Those able to identify firms with a balanced strategy that integrates ethical AI practices stand to benefit as the demand for responsible AI solutions grows globally.
Ultimately, investors may want to look beyond immediate financial gains and consider companies that are preparing for the regulatory demands of the future. With the European Union advancing its own AI Act and the potential for other nations to follow, the U.S. approach may be short-lived. Savvy investors will benefit from being ahead of the curve, encouraging and supporting companies that prioritize ethical AI practices, as this will likely yield long-term stability and alignment with evolving global standard
For Consumers:
The deregulated approach means AI-driven products and services might reach the market faster, with continuous advancements in areas like healthcare, finance, and digital platforms. However, the trade-off could be a reduction in privacy protections and increased exposure to biased or inaccurate AI tools—particularly in sensitive applications like medical diagnostics, financial assessments, and hiring processes.
In this landscape, the responsibility shifts significantly to consumers. With fewer federal protections, individuals will need to become more vigilant about their rights and more discerning about the products and services they use. Transparent AI practices and privacy standards may not be universally upheld, so consumers may need to actively seek information about how their data is used and what protections are in place.
In the long run, awareness and advocacy among consumers could influence companies to adopt more responsible practices. A well-informed public can drive demand for ethical AI products, ensuring that the consumer voice remains a powerful force even in a less regulated environment.
2. Cryptocurrency and Digital Asset Regulation: Trump’s Hands-Off Approach vs. Harris’s Balanced Oversight
For a candidate who once called cryptocurrency a “scam,” Trump’s evolution into a crypto proponent has been striking, framing his new stance as a cornerstone of his broader vision for American tech leadership. Trump envisions the U.S. as the “crypto capital of the planet,” and his approach is hands-off, aiming to energize innovation rather than imposing strict oversight. Trump’s campaign has openly declared its commitment to end what it calls the “unAmerican crackdown on crypto,” targeting the restrictive policies introduced by current regulatory heads. His platform rejects the creation of a Central Bank Digital Currency, which he deems a “dangerous threat to freedom,” and champions the right for Americans to mine and self-custody digital assets, free from government surveillance.
As we mentioned for all other points, he emphasizes deregulation. He believes that crypto, much like other technologies, should be allowed time to “work itself out,” advocating for a free-market environment that nurtures innovation without government interference. For Trump, it’s about positioning America ahead of what he calls China’s “crypto ambition,” with U.S. dominance in the space seen as a strategic advantage. The recent launch of World Liberty Financial, a new crypto platform by Trump and his family, adds to this narrative, underlining his commitment to creating a robust domestic crypto ecosystem.
In contrast, Harris had brought a more cautious approach. While supportive (?) of digital assets, she advocates for balanced oversight that protects consumers while still fostering innovation. Her stance distanced itself from Biden’s regulatory-heavy approach but aligns with the need for some structure in the sector. Harris acknowledged the transformative potential of digital assets but emphasized protecting investors from volatility and ensuring transparency in the marketplace. Industry figures, like Uniswap CEO Hayden Adams, responded positively, seeing it as a sign that Harris understood crypto’s growing economic value. However, I think this may have been more a strategic appeal than a fully committed stance.
Reflecting back on my piece for CoinDesk Türkiye two years ago, I pointed out how crypto users represent a new type of major electoral group—one that we can no longer overlook.
Look what we have here:
The Broader Landscape of U.S. Crypto Regulation
Trump’s light regulatory touch contrasts sharply with the Biden administration’s recent clampdowns, including high-profile lawsuits against major players like Coinbase. Over the last few years, the SEC, under Chair Gary Gensler, has been accused by many in the crypto industry of overreach. For instance, in 2023, Gensler’s team filed two major lawsuits against Coinbase within days, signaling a stance many see as overly aggressive. Trump has promised to remove Gensler if re-elected, further highlighting his commitment to a more permissive regulatory landscape for crypto.
The future of U.S. crypto policy now leans more toward an open-market ideology, with fewer restrictions and a more “wait and see” approach. As Trump’s administration unfolds, the crypto world will be watching closely, navigating the balance between innovation and stability in an evolving global landscape.
Implications: -my takes-
For Businesses: With Trump’s hands-off approach, the crypto industry may see a boom in innovation, with more freedom to explore and develop blockchain-based applications. But this freedom comes at a cost—without consumer protections, companies will likely face the pressure to self-regulate to avoid potential fallout from crypto’s infamous volatility. And this isn’t just an experimental playground; businesses are in a high-stakes game where they must innovate responsibly if they want to survive long-term. Blockchain’s decentralized, political nature isn’t just a trend; it’s challenging traditional financial structures and questioning centralized power.
For Investors: Investors may find a favorable environment for growth with fewer restrictions on crypto markets. However, the absence of regulations could heighten exposure to scams, price volatility, and market instability, requiring investors to exercise greater caution. Importance of proof of trust, i mean… Savvy investors will need to put in the work, doing their homework on projects before diving in. In this new frontier, diligence isn’t just recommended; it’s a necessity for anyone looking to avoid getting burned in an unpredictable market.
For Consumers: With fewer regulations, consumers will need to exercise unprecedented caution in navigating the crypto space. Blockchain’s decentralization places much of the responsibility on the user, and while this can be empowering, it also opens the door to increased risks of fraud and market manipulation. Recent surges in scams and “rug pulls” across crypto assets are reminders of these dangers.
As the phrase goes, “Not your keys, not your coins.” Consumers should be fully aware that without control over their private keys, their digital assets can be as vulnerable as funds held by any third-party institution.
In this deregulated landscape, consumer awareness and self-education aren’t just beneficial—they’re essential. For consumers stepping into crypto, understanding this principle could be the key to safeguarding their assets in a sector where government oversight is unlikely to intervene on their behalf.
3. China Relations: A Hard Line on Tech Independence
Navigating U.S.-China Tech Relations Under Trump
As mentioned 100 times, Trump has promised to reduce American reliance on Chinese tech products, placing clear restrictions on Chinese ownership in U.S. critical infrastructure, particularly in sectors tied to national security.
Trump’s latest pledge to phase out Chinese imports of goods such as electronics, steel, and pharmaceuticals reflects his vision of an America-led tech ecosystem. In Trump’s view, reducing imports isn’t merely economic; it’s a direct response to the perceived risks of Chinese influence and competition.
While Trump’s focus is unequivocally on separating U.S. tech from China, Harris’s hypothetical approach would likely have been more collaborative yet still pragmatic. Her administration, though less vocally combative, has already shown its willingness to impose tangible limits on China through extensive tariffs and technology export bans. Drawing on her California connections and relationships within Silicon Valley, Harris might have had pursued a balanced strategy that preserved American innovation while remaining open to specific, carefully defined partnerships on neutral grounds.
TikTok and the Threat of a Ban: What’s Next Under Trump?
TikTok, owned by the Chinese company ByteDance, has been in the crosshairs of U.S. policymakers for years, and its future remains uncertain. Earlier this year, bipartisan momentum built toward forcing ByteDance to divest from TikTok or face a U.S. ban. The Biden-Harris administration backed this push, with Harris acknowledging TikTok’s role as a vital platform for expression and income generation but raising concerns about national security implications due to Chinese ownership.
In April, Biden signed legislation giving ByteDance a nine-month deadline to find a U.S.-based buyer or risk TikTok’s removal from American app stores. The company has filed lawsuits challenging the legislation, arguing it violates free speech, and both parties have urged the Supreme Court to rule before the potential January 2025 ban. Harris, aligned with Biden, voiced support for addressing security concerns without necessarily banning the app, a nuanced approach that underscored her balanced perspective on maintaining tech innovation and open platforms.
And… it’s ironic! Trump may have tried to ban TikTok, but here he is, effectively using it to rally his base and fuel his campaign, with 13.6 M followers. POLITICS…
Interestingly, Trump opposed this recent legislation, despite previously calling for a TikTok ban in 2020. He contends that banning TikTok would only benefit Meta, suggesting the action could grant undue power to Facebook’s parent company—a company he’s repeatedly accused of bias. Instead, Trump has actively campaigned to “save TikTok,” urging voters to support him if they wish to keep the app operational, framing the ban as an overreach by “the other side.” — promised “never to ban”
Trump’s renewed focus on TikTok isn’t a straightforward decision. Banning it might play well with his anti-China narrative, but it could also alienate a big slice of his audience. With around 170 million American users, TikTok is no longer just a platform for lip-syncing teens. The hashtag #donaldtrump2024, for example, has clocked up over 445 million views on the app, showing that the platform is as much a political space as a social one. Its user base has aged up, with the average user now over 30 and many engaging with the platform for news, political views, and beyond—including a good share who align with Trump’s views.
TikTok’s Defense Move: Project Texas
Meanwhile, TikTok hasn’t been sitting idle. With Project Texas, they’re doubling down on efforts to show they’re keeping U.S. data away from ByteDance. They’ve set up a separate entity staffed by Americans and are using Oracle’s Texas-based cloud to store U.S. user data. But skepticism remains. Some insiders have pointed out lingering connections to ByteDance, despite TikTok’s insistence otherwise. For now, without any formal oversight board, TikTok’s measures lack a robust third-party check—raising questions just as the U.S.-China tension could ramp up further in the 2024 election run-up.
Semiconductors, Quantum, and Emerging Tech: The China Factor
In the race for technological supremacy, Trump has honed in on semiconductor manufacturing and quantum computing as strategic battlegrounds against China. During a recent debate, Trump and Harris discussed quantum technology and the U.S. chip industry’s position relative to China’s growing semiconductor influence. Trump sees the tech industry as inseparable from national security, emphasizing the need for domestic production of semiconductors to reduce reliance on Chinese supply chains. Trump has long been a proponent of reshoring essential tech industries, which he views as a necessary move to insulate the U.S. against economic and geopolitical leverage wielded by foreign nations, particularly China.
Harris, on the other hand, would likely have continued Biden’s policies, which have also been stringent toward China but with more collaboration-focused nuances. Under Biden and Harris, U.S. policies mirrored Trump’s hard stance, with bans on technology exports to China and increased tariffs on goods like Chinese electric vehicles.
Implications:
For Businesses: Companies reliant on Chinese supply chains may have to rethink their sourcing strategies or prepare for supply constraints and higher costs if Trump’s restrictions take hold. For tech manufacturers, this might mean reshoring production to the U.S. or finding alternate international partners.
For Investors: An intensified U.S.-China trade policy could make sectors like semiconductors and quantum computing more volatile, as restrictions create production delays or pricing shifts. Investors might see high growth potential in American suppliers as the U.S. pushes to domestically source key tech components.
For Consumers: Prices for electronics and tech products, which are often reliant on Chinese parts, may rise as U.S.-China restrictions tighten. Consumers might see more “Made in America” products, but at a potentially higher cost as manufacturers adjust to the shift in trade policies.
4. Antitrust and Big Tech: Trump’s Watchful Eye but Open Market Stance
So, what does this mean for Big Tech? Trump’s stance on tech giants is more complex than it first appears. Toward the end of his first term, the DOJ and FTC under Trump’s administration began cracking down on Big Tech, with lawsuits against Google and Meta to address their dominance. This sent a message that he was willing to take a hard look at the power these companies hold. Since then, under Biden, the antitrust momentum has only grown—further lawsuits have been filed against Google, Amazon, and Apple, with a federal court recently ruling that Google holds an unlawful monopoly in online search.
This past record could indicate Trump may continue the tough stance on Big Tech regulation to some degree. During a Bloomberg event in October, Trump voiced reservations about breaking up Google, hinting that while he acknowledges their market power, he’s not eager to weaken an American company in a way that could benefit foreign competitors, particularly China. “We want great companies,” he stated, “but we also don’t want to hand over the advantage to other countries.”
On the other hand, Harris’s approach would likely lean toward robust antitrust enforcement, a path initiated by Biden’s administration. She has pledged to “crack down on anti-competitive practices that let big corporations jack up prices,” emphasizing consumer welfare and fair competition. This might mean continuing strong regulatory oversight, which has the backing of FTC Chair Lina Khan—an advocate for limiting Big Tech power—though her position has faced pushback from Harris’s supporters in the business world, like Reid Hoffman and Barry Diller.
One thing seems clear: While the general public seems in favor of tighter Big Tech regulation, they’re less focused on the complex details that keep these bills in Congress limbo. Had Harris won, we’d likely be gearing up for continued challenges to Big Tech’s dominance, with potentially tougher regulations aimed at breaking up monopolistic power. Trump’s approach, with his pro-business background, may mean fewer barriers to tech mergers and acquisitions, in contrast to Biden and Harris’s trend toward enforcing competitive markets.
Implications: -my takes-
For Businesses: Trump’s less aggressive stance on breaking up Big Tech could mean more opportunities for tech companies to expand and merge without as much antitrust scrutiny. However, the ambiguity around enforcement could create uncertainty, making it harder for startups to compete against larger corporations.
For Investors:
With Trump not likely to push for Big Tech breakups, investors in tech giants like Google, Meta, and others in the “Big 5” may breathe a little easier. The potential threat of forced restructuring—which could have drastically shaken up their valuations—seems to be off the table, at least for now.
But the tech landscape is shifting, and the dominance of the Big 5 may not stay static. With AI leaders like OpenAI and NVIDIA gaining ground, the top players in tech could look different over the coming years. Companies that want to secure a spot in the world’s top 5 will likely need to continue pushing forward. Investors keeping a close eye on this space might see opportunities in emerging AI giants who are positioning themselves to claim a seat at the top.
For Consumers: While a more hands-off approach to regulation might speed up tech innovations, it also opens the door for monopolistic behaviors that could affect prices, data privacy, and consumer choice in the long run. With fewer checks on Big Tech’s power, companies may be less inclined to prioritize consumer rights.
In short, be aware of your rights! As technology continues to evolve, understanding how these policies impact you will be key to navigating the digital landscape. :)
In Trump’s vision, American tech would lead the charge, free from what he sees as restrictive, innovation-stifling regulations. He plans to empower industries like AI and cryptocurrency with as few hurdles as possible, pushing U.S. competitiveness globally while doubling down on the country’s economic independence.
As we move forward, the direction of U.S. tech policy will continue to shape everything from the devices in our homes to the software that powers our workplaces. Let’s explore together!