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.
The NTE, which Trump waved around when he announced his sweeping “reciprocal” tariffs, is an annual report that purports to list non-tariff trade barriers implemented by countries around the world that the U.S. seeks to water down or eliminate. In reality, as we noted in Public Citizen’s NTE submission, “non-tariff barriers” could be any domestic law or regulation that big businesses would rather not follow, from consumer labels to bans on carcinogens to emissions requirements.
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.
The map below visualizes an indicative list of digital economy-related regulations and policies that Big Tech companies and their lobbyists are eager for the U.S. government to target. There are certainly additional policies in a number of countries that may be targeted by the tech industry and U.S. trade negotiators.
This map is based only on selected policies referenced in comments submitted to the USTR by: the Internet Infrastructure Coalition (IIC), the Computer and Communication Industry Association (CCIA), the Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA), the Coalition of Service Industries (CSI), ACT, The App Association (ACT), the Consumer Technology Association (CTA), the Open Digital Business Consortium (ODBC), the Business Software Alliance (BSA), the Global Data Alliance (GDA), the American Chamber of Commerce in Japan (ACCJ), the Information Technology Industry Council (ITIC), and the Digital Media Association (DIMA). These trade associations and lobby groups represent tech giants including Google, Microsoft, Amazon, and Facebook, amongst others.
Big Tech's Targets
Anti-monopoly laws: Several jurisdictions are attempting to create more competitive digital ecosystems by implementing specific digital sector related competition regulation. This could take the form of ex ante regulation aimed at preventing dominant digital entities from engaging in particularly harmful behaviour. However, tech companies (wrongly) insist that such regulations are discriminatory, despite being neutral in their application.
Source code disclosure: One of the ways in which transparency of AI and other digital systems can be enhanced and harm prevented is by enabling regulators and independent researchers to access source code. This is opposed by Big Tech companies, thereby reducing accountability of complex AI and other systems.
Privacy and data protection: The importance of the data economy has led a number of jurisdictions to implement privacy and data protection laws that regulate how companies can process, store, and export personal data. A number of countries are also attempting to regulate the processing of data to ensure fairness in the digital economy and development of local tech ecosystems.
AI regulations: With AI quickly becoming embedded into nearly every aspect of our lives, some jurisdictions are seeking to regulate the development and deployment of AI systems to mitigate potential harms. Big Tech companies are seeking to limit the ways in which governments can regulate AI to reduce their compliance costs and limit oversight.
Regulation of electronic payments: Several countries have sought to implement rules on electronic payments, including in the context of security, data transfer, and other areas.
Restrictions on cross-border data flows: Many countries implement restrictions on cross-border data flows for reasons of national sovereignty, to protect personal data from being transferred to jurisdictions with low privacy standards, to enable regulators to access data, and to aid in local economic development.
Revenue sharing: Several jurisdictions are seeking to prevent the cannibalization of domestic industries (such as publishing and content production) by large streaming or other digital services. A number of countries have also sought to introduce regulations that would require large technology companies and platforms to contribute towards network development, including by compensating telecom service providers.
DSTs and other taxes: Many countries are unable to appropriately levy income tax on Big Tech companies as these companies do not have a physical presence within their borders. Instead, they use Digital Services Taxes (DSTs) to ensure that these companies pay tax within their jurisdictions. Others implement some form of VAT, customs duties, etc., to increase their tax base.
Domestic production and import substitution: Several countries have sought to support the growth and development of domestic industries (and address balance of payments problems) by implementing regulations that support the use of domestically manufactured tech equipment.
Local testing and certification: Many countries require imported tech equipment to be tested for safety and adherence to local regulations prior to deployment.
Cloud service regulations: A number of countries have implemented regulations that seek to establish licensing or other regulations on cloud service providers. A number of countries have also sought to ensure that cloud services used by public or government authorities are appropriately certified for security reasons, while also limiting their ability to take data offshore.
* The map reproduces complaints made against various regulations and policies by American industry. It does not represent Public Citizen’s view on the quality of the regulations and policies.
Policies in China, Russia, Ukraine and Hong Kong have also been excluded from the map. European Union (EU) policies have been included amongst the policies of its constituent members.
The map shows hundreds of policies under attack, which is a significant undercount. For example, the multiple policies and proposed legislations implicated in South Korea that fall under the category of “anti-monopoly laws” are only counted as one policy.
A list of the specific policies included in the map above can be viewed here.