How will the US tech sector be affected under Donald Trump?

The incoming Trump administration is expected to reshape the relationship between government and tech companies, bringing profound changes that could directly impact users.

From policing online content to the risk of facing discriminatory AI systems, the future of technology faces some big challenges.

President-elect Donald Trump and many of his allies have maintained a tense relationship with major tech corporations, repeatedly criticizing them for wielding too much power and sometimes using that power to his disadvantage.

During Donald Trump's first term, there was talk of banning TikTok, along with a major lawsuit that could potentially lead to a breakup of Google.

He has also worked to dismantle the legal protections that underpin tech platforms, culminating a few months ago when Trump publicly threatened to jail Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, sparking a firestorm of controversy.

Since his last term, Trump has seemingly completely changed his stance on many tech issues. He has stopped short of banning TikTok or pushing for a breakup of Google. But the question of whether he can stop these moves remains open, raising questions about his strategy going forward.

Trump now owns his own social media platform, Truth Social, which will be subject to any new regulations he imposes on his rivals, and he has received advice from Elon Musk, who has been vocal about his desire to promote free technological innovation and remove regulatory barriers.

Will TikTok be banned in the US?

Trump signed an executive order to ban TikTok in the US, citing national security concerns, but later reversed his decision. Notably, in June, he declared in a video posted on the platform that he would "never ban TikTok." However, whether he can keep that promise remains a big question mark.

Under Trump’s leadership, Congress passed a law requiring TikTok to separate from its Chinese parent company to avoid being banned in the U.S. However, TikTok has said it has no intention of complying with the request and is now suing to block the law, with the case awaiting a decision from a federal judge.

It's worth noting that the ban will take effect just before the inauguration, meaning Trump may have lost his chance to speak out or intervene on the issue.

According to Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota (USA), Trump could call on Congress to repeal this law, although experts say the chances of success are very low. In that case, he would have two options: instruct the Attorney General to stop enforcing the law or issue a declaration that TikTok is no longer bound by the provisions of the law.

Trump’s first approach could be to send a signal to TikTok’s technology partners like Apple, which risk fines if they continue to host TikTok on their app stores. According to Alan Rozenshtein, Trump could be suggesting that these partners “can continue to do business with TikTok with confidence.”

However, Rozenshtein told CNN: "If you're Apple's legal adviser, does that really make you feel comfortable? You're still at risk of breaking the law, and Trump is notoriously unpredictable."

The second option relies on a provision in the law that gives the president the power to determine whether a “qualified divestment” of TikTok has been completed. In theory, Trump could unilaterally declare that this has occurred, regardless of the facts, and then hope that the declaration is not challenged in court.

“It’s unclear who would have the authority to sue to enforce the law, since Congress is not allowed to do that on its own,” Rozenshtein said, noting that few parties would be able to argue for “specific damages” if Trump were to declare that the qualified divestment process was complete.

Will Trump Loosen AI Regulations?

Trump will return to the White House at a challenging time, when even leading experts in the field of AI are calling for regulations to control and prevent potentially serious consequences from AI.

In an interview with Fox News this summer, Trump frankly admitted that AI has "tremendous potential but also the potential for destruction," and emphasized: "We need to be very careful with AI." Elon Musk, Trump's current advisor, also called for a pause in the development of this technology before suddenly founding his own AI company.

Trump, however, appears prepared to roll back what little regulation there is for AI companies. The Republican platform pledged to repeal an executive order issued by President Joe Biden that outlined a comprehensive set of measures to address the most serious risks posed by AI, including discrimination and threats to national security.

The Republican Party document describes the executive order as a collection of “radical left-wing ideas,” arguing that they are stifling innovation and technological progress.

"I think any policy that replaces Biden's executive order, if any, will probably lean toward reducing regulations," said John Villasenor, a leader of the Institute for Technology, Law and Policy at the University of California (USA).

But he also noted that Trump could push for federal legislation that would limit individual state regulation of AI, such as in the area of ​​hiring, which could help avoid the regulatory patchwork that has made it difficult for tech companies to operate across the country.

What is the future of Section 230 and social media liability?

Section 230 is an important part of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (CDA) in the United States. It is a legal provision that protects online service providers (such as social networks, forums, and other Internet platforms) from liability for user-generated content.

Many Republicans want the Trump administration to crack down on what they call “censorship” of conservative voices on mainstream social media platforms. Trump himself has threatened to veto an annual defense bill if Congress doesn’t repeal the legal protections for social media companies provided by Section 230.

Brendan Carr, Trump's pick to lead the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC), recently warned big tech companies that the incoming administration would "take strong measures to restore" Americans' First Amendment rights.

This could include reforming or reinterpreting Section 230, which protects tech platforms from liability for user-generated content and gives them freedom to moderate content as they see fit.

“Carr essentially wants to reinterpret Section 230 so that if platforms remove certain types of content, they lose the protections afforded by the first clause of the law,” said Gigi Sohn, a lawyer who worked at the FCC under Democratic Chairman Tom Wheeler. Carr could seek to push for a new rule that would allow tech platforms to be sued based on this interpretation.

Ultimately, this could mean thwarting tech companies' efforts to limit hateful content or misinformation on their platforms.

It remains unclear, however, whether the FCC has the authority to make such changes. While Democrats have also called for reform of Section 230, their concerns are different, with concerns that it could allow tech companies to avoid responsibility for failing to monitor and block harmful content.

Evan Greer, director of the digital rights group, expressed concern that Carr's focus on sensitive social media issues could be just "a ploy to distract" from his other plans, including repealing net neutrality regulations.

Any changes to increase platforms' legal liability could directly impact Trump's Truth Social and Musk's X, making deciding how to address the issue more complex and challenging.

Will Trump continue his fight to break up the tech giants?

Under Lina Khan's leadership at the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the Biden administration has launched a series of antitrust actions targeting tech giants.

Despite receiving praise from Vice President-elect JD Vance for this strong approach, Ms. Khan's future appears to be in jeopardy as Trump prepares to push a more pro-business agenda in the White House.

Just days before the election, Musk made waves on the X platform when he announced that Lina Khan "will be fired soon.

This could signal a revival of the wave of corporate consolidation that Lina Khan has been determined to block, with deals like Microsoft’s acquisition of the world’s leading entertainment and video game developer Activision Blizzard and the world’s leading retailer Kroger merging with supermarket chain Albertsons. The result could be easier for companies to raise prices, raising concerns about the impact on consumers.

Regarding this issue, Mr. John Villasenor commented: "For example, if a large corporation wants to acquire a growing and promising AI startup, which under the Biden administration might have been blocked by the FTC, then under the new Trump administration, the possibility of this deal happening may be significantly higher."

The approach also raises questions about whether Trump will push the Justice Department to abandon its efforts to break up Google, and how it will handle ongoing antitrust lawsuits targeting tech giants, including Apple.

Will Child Online Safety Law Pass in the US?

If there is one tech issue that Democrats and Republicans could find common ground on under President Trump, it is protecting children's online safety and privacy, a topic that has already garnered support from both sides.

However, after years of debate and disagreement over approach, with little substantive action, experts remain skeptical about the possibility of real progress.

"We're seeing a lot of tech policies that are designed just for show, rather than being seriously crafted for Congress to pass or become law in a way that's meaningful and likely to stand up in court," Evan Greer commented.

Republican Senator Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee and Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut have called on the US Congress to quickly pass the Child Online Safety Act, after the Senate approved it over the summer.

While it's the closest lawmakers have come in years to legislation protecting teens' online safety, the bill has faced plenty of opposition.

Last month, US House Speaker Mike Johnson expressed support for the bill's core idea, but he also bluntly said that the details in it "raise many concerns."