AI Exports Program Success Depends on US Fixing License Delays, Commerce Told

The companies and groups said delays -- which have been especially pronounced this year due to multiple license review pauses and slowdowns at BIS caused by Trump administration officials (see 2506110008, 2504020051 and 2504140055) -- could cause foreign buyers to look elsewhere for AI-related technologies that require BIS export approvals.

The Computer and Communications Industry Association said BIS needs a “streamlined, transparent, and timely licensing process to prevent administrative delays that could disadvantage U.S. firms competing internationally against less restricted foreign competitors.” CCIA, which was responding to Commerce’s request for feedback on how it should shape the AI exports program (see 2510220008 and 2507240019), also said BIS needs to be “adequately” resourced to “ensure enforcement keeps pace with the technological complexity of global trade.”

CCIA was one of a host of groups and companies that submitted feedback to Commerce after the department extended its public comment deadline on the AI exports program from Nov. 28 to Dec. 13. Commerce heard in November from a range of advanced technology and AI companies that largely supported the new effort, with some saying companies should commit to "rigorous" export compliance conditions before being allowed to participate (see 2512010010).

Companies that submitted comments this month made similar points but also stressed that BIS licensing needs to be faster if the U.S. hopes to better promote American AI exports.

Cisco said Commerce should use the program to “provide greater certainty and support in securing export licenses.” The company added that the delays “may hinder the competitiveness of U.S. businesses as companies from other countries may not have to meet export control requirements and thus can deliver solutions in an expedited manner.” Any industry export proposals approved under the program should benefit from an “accelerated review of their export license application.”

The Coalition of Services Industries, which represents Amazon, Mastercard and other major technology, telecommunications and financial services firms, said the U.S. needs to find the “right balance” between protecting national security and promoting AI-related exports to allies. “In order to maintain US AI leadership, delays and uncertainty in licensing must be addressed, as they can drive partners to non-US options.”

Carmaker Tesla said BIS needs more “streamlined” export licensing, which currently risks undermining American technological leadership through “potential overregulation.” Not only should BIS make sure its controls are narrowly tailored to capture only AI-related items with a “clear nexus” to U.S. national security concerns, but Tesla also said it should make sure its “licensing processes are sufficiently resourced to facilitate timely adjudication of license applications.” It also called for better, “transparent” guidance “that is written in a language that is understood by industry engineers.”

The Information Technology Industry Council called for “predictability, consistency, speed, and transparency” surrounding U.S. export license decisions.

“If foreign customers doubt the reliability of U.S. suppliers due to unpredictable policymaking or license approvals, then it will be much harder for U.S. companies to compete for market opportunities and may undermine the Program’s likelihood of success,” ITI said. It said more support from Commerce will be “critical to meeting the 30-day goal to process export license reviews.”

Tenstorrent, an AI chip startup, said more “predictable” export licensing will “greatly help facilitate the global proliferation of an American AI platform.” That includes maintaining “fair, transparent, and predictable” export licensing policies with “prompt licensing decisions,” including those that adhere to the “60 to 90 day timeline” outlined in the Export Administration Regulations, Tenstorrent said.

“We recommend ongoing engagement with industry to ensure controls do not unintentionally restrict U.S. competitiveness, which could push the rest of the world toward non-U.S. solutions,” it said. “Without a reasonable and predictable policy regime, any government program to boost American AI exports will be fundamentally hamstrung.”

The Center for a New American Security said companies and projects that are approved for the AI exports program -- as long as they are in full compliance with U.S. national security restrictions -- could receive "expedited review of any necessary export licenses or other U.S. government regulatory approvals for that specific project." Those exports would still be subject to the same review procedures as other non-program applications, but they would benefit from a "procedural fast track" lane, the think tank said.

Faster reviews could "be a meaningful benefit to incentivize U.S. companies to participate in the program," it said.

Companies also made other export control-related recommendations, with some warning BIS against new restrictions that they say would disadvantage American exporters compared with their foreign competitors. The Computer and Communications Industry Association said "overly heavy-handed controls," including on-chip hardware -- such as security features built into a chip that could trigger a "kill switch" if the chip is used to violate export controls (see 2508060020 and 2507170040) -- would "undermine the global competitiveness of U.S. firms."

Those measures would "erode customer trust, raise compliance costs, and incentivize foreign buyers to turn to alternative suppliers whose products are not subject to comparable restrictions," the association said. "Controls that distort commercial markets in this way risk accelerating the very supply chain fragmentation that U.S. policy seeks to prevent."

Intel urged Commerce to continue to rely on its "industry consultation mechanisms," including its technical advisory committees, which help to provide informal feedback to BIS about new or existing regulations. Intel said members of those committees, which must sign non-disclosure agreements, can help through "advance notifications of regulatory changes."

BIS earlier this year started restricting the public sessions of its TAC meetings, a move that current government officials, former officials and industry representatives said has jeopardized a crucial outlet for industry feedback about new rules (see 2509120021 and 2512030044).

Intel also stressed that export licensing should be "transparent and equitable."

"A scalable licensing framework is also important, with clear timelines and predictable review processes, automated approvals for lower-risk transactions, and regular updating of thresholds," the company said.

The National Association of Manufacturers said Commerce should keep in mind that not every aspect of the AI technology stack is sensitive enough to warrant strict export controls. It said much of the "manufactured content" in an AI data center, such as cooling systems and construction materials, aren't "unique" to AI.

"As the administration considers how to scope potential export controls related to AI, it should tailor those controls to only what it considers sensitive, balanced with the value of allowing export of non-sensitive, generic hardware as part of the AI technology stack in promoting U.S. competitiveness," it said.