markets & economy  |  september 1, 2023

Regulating the AI Revolution: What Investors Need to Know

Competition with China and consumer safety are key themes.

3:27

Gil Fortgang

Washington Associate Analyst, U.S. Equity Division

Hi, I'm Gil Fortgang, Washington policy analyst at T. Rowe Price. The disruptive potential of generative AI, or artificial intelligence that can create new content, has captivated the public, markets, and corporate executives. It’s also on policymakers’ minds in Washington.

I’m monitoring two policy developments:

  • Strategic competition with China, and
  • Security and consumer safety in the U.S.

Let’s start with U.S.-China competition.

Congress increasingly views AI leadership as critical to security and U.S. economic competitiveness.

The proof has been in the policy.

The U.S. went its own way in restricting exports of advanced semiconductors and chipmaking equipment. Then persuaded Japan and the Netherlands to join the effort.

Chips developed to skirt these rules may prompt the U.S. to update its existing limits on semiconductor exports. Similar restrictions could be extended to other AI-enabling technologies.

More recently, President Biden issued an executive order that would prohibit certain investments by U.S. companies in China’s AI and chipmaking industry.

Responses to these restrictions could cause further disruption and uncertainty.

The gradual decoupling of U.S. and China technologies appears likely to continue. That could create headline risk for companies involved in chipmaking and other next-generation technologies.

Next up: The domestic front.

What we’ve seen from Washington so far involves little that would hamper AI adoption and innovation significantly—at least anytime soon.

The Biden administration secured agreements from seven prominent AI developers to follow a broad set of principles.

These voluntary commitments include:

  • Model testing and security,
  • Markers that identify AI content, and
  • Publicly disclosing a model’s capabilities and limitations.

None of these measures appear overly burdensome. However, the agreement establishes safety, security, and transparency as key themes.

What’s next?

The Senate will host a series of expert panels on these themes and other thorny issues related to AI, including copyright, privacy, and potential job losses.

Complexity and congressional gridlock likely make meaningful legislation of AI an uphill battle in the near to medium term. However, these discussions may set the agenda for regulators.

Some agencies are already starting to respond. The Federal Trade Commission, for example, is exploring rules to limit data tracking and prevent discriminatory practices from being embedded into algorithms.

Bottom Line: The AI revolution is in its early stages. So is the regulatory response.

The principles guiding the U.S. approach to China’s AI efforts are better understood at this juncture, even if the tensions between the two powers create uncertainty.

Domestic policy, on the other hand, is still taking shape. Market forces should win the day, but regulators will have their say.

I’ll be paying close attention to how the situation evolves and its implications for Big Tech and other companies developing and deploying generative AI.

 

Key Insights

  • National security and consumer protections are focus areas as U.S. policymakers seek to develop guardrails for artificial intelligence (AI).

  • Congress regards AI leadership as critical to competitiveness. Policies based on this view could drive further decoupling of U.S. and Chinese technologies.

  • Domestic policies governing AI are still taking shape. Market forces should win the day, but federal regulators will have their say.

The disruptive potential of generative artificial intelligence, or AI that can create new content, has captivated the public, markets, and corporate executives. It also figures prominently among the technology issues on the minds of Washington policymakers.

So far, much of the emphasis has been on strategic competition with China. Domestic AI policies, on the other hand, are still taking shape, with an initial focus on security and consumer safety.

Here is what investors need to know about the U.S. policy response on these two fronts.

Strategic Competition With China

Congress increasingly views technology leadership, including advanced AI, as critical to national security and U.S. economic competitiveness with China.

The proof has been in the policy.

The U.S. first went its own way in restricting exports of advanced semiconductors and chipmaking equipment to China. These technologies are critical to deep learning models and next-generation AI. The U.S. then persuaded Japan and the Netherlands to join the effort.

Chips developed to skirt these rules may prompt the U.S. to update its existing limits on semiconductor exports. Similar restrictions could be extended to other AI-enabling technologies. Developments on this front bear watching.

More recently, the Treasury Department, in conjunction with an executive order from President Joe Biden, proposed prohibiting certain U.S. investments in China’s AI, chipmaking, and quantum computing industries.

The goal appears not so much to stem access to capital but, rather, to prevent the transfer of “intangible benefits,” especially the technical and managerial expertise that may accompany these investments.

Responses to U.S. efforts to maintain its edge in key technologies could cause further disruption and uncertainty. China’s recently announced restrictions on exports of gallium and germanium—metals used in semiconductors and telecommunications equipment—underscore this point.

Bottom Line: The gradual decoupling of U.S. and China technology sectors appears likely to continue, in our view. That could create uncertainty and headline risk for companies involved in chipmaking and other next-generation technologies related to AI.

Domestic Regulation of AI

So far, regulatory developments in the U.S. have involved little that would hamper AI adoption and innovation significantly, in our view—at least anytime soon.

The Biden administration in July secured agreements from seven prominent AI developers to follow a broad set of principles. These voluntary commitments include:

  • Model testing and security,

  • Creating markers that identify AI-generated content, and

  • Publicly disclosing a model’s capabilities and limitations.

None of these measures appears overly burdensome. However, the agreement suggests that safety, security, and transparency are emerging as key themes for AI regulation in the U.S.

What could be coming down the pike?

This fall, the Senate will host a series of expert panels on these themes and other thorny issues related to AI, including copyright, privacy, and potential job losses.

The complexity of these issues and congressional gridlock should make meaningful legislation of AI an uphill battle in the near to medium term. However, these policy discussions may set the agenda for the federal agencies that are likely to devise and implement rules governing the use of advanced AI in the areas that they oversee.

Some agencies are already starting to respond. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC), for example, is exploring rules to limit data tracking and prevent discriminatory practices from being embedded into algorithms. The agency has also launched an investigation into whether a popular generative AI platform has harmed individuals by producing false or misleading information about them.

The Department of Defense, while not a technology regulator, is also an important stakeholder in the AI policy debate, given the focus on national security.

We’ll keep an eye out for comments from agency leaders and rulemaking proposals to get a sense of what might be coming and to gauge how the territorial battle among regulators may shake out.

What We’re Watching Next

The AI revolution is in its early stages. So is the regulatory response.

The principles guiding the U.S. approach to China’s efforts in AI and enabling technologies are better understood at this juncture, even if the tensions between these two powers create uncertainty.

Domestic policy, on the other hand, is still taking shape. We will be paying close attention to how the situation evolves as well as its implications for Big Tech and other companies developing and deploying generative AI.

Important Information

This material is provided for informational purposes only and is not intended to be investment advice or a recommendation to take any particular investment action.

The views contained herein are those of the authors as of September 2023 and are subject to change without notice; these views may differ from those of other T. Rowe Price group companies and/or associates.

This information is not intended to reflect a current or past recommendation concerning investments, investment strategies, or account types, advice of any kind, or a solicitation of an offer to buy or sell any securities or investment services. The opinions and commentary provided do not take into account the investment objectives or financial situation of any particular investor or class of investor. Please consider your own circumstances before making an investment decision.

Information contained herein is based upon sources we consider to be reliable; we do not, however, guarantee its accuracy. Actual outcomes may differ materially from any forward-looking statements made.

Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future performance. All investments are subject to market risk, including the possible loss of principal. International investments can be riskier than U.S. investments due to the adverse effects of currency exchange rates, differences in market structure and liquidity, as well as specific country, regional, and economic developments. These risks are generally greater for investments in emerging markets. Investing in technology stocks entails specific risks, including the potential for wide variations in performance and usually wide price swings, up and down. All charts and tables are shown for illustrative purposes only.

T. Rowe Price Investment Services, Inc., distributor. T. Rowe Price Investment Management, Inc., investment adviser.

202308-3085951

 

Next Steps

  • Get our latest thinking on the markets.

  • Contact a Financial Consultant at 1-800-401-1819.