Still Too Early for Quantum Tech Restrictions, Experts Say
It’s still too early to regulate quantum technologies through export controls and other means, two tech industry officials said during an event this week hosted by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Although the Commerce Department is studying new export controls on certain slices of quantum technologies, strict regulations risk hurting American competitiveness, the officials said.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
“If you regulate now, you're going to stifle innovation,” said Robert Liscouski, CEO of Quantum Computing, a quantum software and hardware company. Liscouski said the quantum technology sector is in its infant stage. “It's a very early stage in terms of a market. In fact, I would argue that there really is not a market, per se, yet,” Liscouski said. “We've got some really brilliant physicists that are out there doing things that ultimately bring some innovation to it, and you don't want to regulate that. I think that will kill an industry.”
Jay Gambetta, IBM vice president of quantum computing, called regulation a “complicated topic” and said we shouldn’t “get ahead of where the technology is.” He also said companies shouldn't be pursuing only innovation in quantum technology, but they can also innovate how they protect the technology. “What I really like seeing is, how do we continue ... driving what it means to compute and continue to drive what it means to keep security,” he said.
Industry groups and companies have urged Commerce to avoid broad, unilateral controls on quantum technologies and other emerging technologies, which they say could stifle U.S. competitiveness and innovation (see 2204140033, 2205100022 and 2202180013). Some groups have urged the U.S. and the EU to work closely on any new controls to make sure they are aligned ​(see 2205110032).
The White House last month announced several initiatives aimed at advancing and protecting U.S. innovation in quantum technologies, including from “theft and abuse by criminals. The initiative specifically directs government agencies to impose “well-targeted export controls” (see 2205040005).
Liscouski said he realizes quantum is a “real national security issue” that the government should be taking seriously, but choosing how far to regulate is a difficult decision. “You’ve got the encryption/decryption issues. You've got all sorts of things going on that nation states are working really hard to try to achieve, that once they achieve those things, it could potentially give them a very big competitive advantage,” he said.
Regulation eventually will be necessary, he said. “You could be doing things that have a national security implication that, if they're not governed well, they're not necessarily controlled appropriately, we could be accelerating the pace of some other smaller nation states, their acceleration of the quantum space without even thinking about it,” Liscouski said. “And that’s worrisome.”
Gambetta said industry and government can work together to both promote innovation and ensure the technology is safely regulated and secure. “I think if we approach it in a smart way, pushing on both, and continue discussing with all the right stakeholders, we can manage this without getting ahead of ourselves and putting restrictions that are going to slow us down,” he said.