I Like My AI—But I Can’t Use It: Potential Issues with Baking AI into Workflows

Over the last few weeks, many articles have explored a fascinating question about AI investment: how will these companies recoup the monumental costs? While early players may find quick acquisitions or other exits, larger companies are in it for the long haul. Still, with global AI investments expected to exceed a trillion dollars, the challenge of capital expenditures is unavoidable.

This cost-recovery problem is central to efforts worldwide, as countries try to develop AI tools that can compete with dominant U.S.-based platforms. Switzerland’s Swiss AI Initiative is an open-source effort led by academic institutions, while France’s Mistral AI represents a high-profile commercial attempt to secure European digital sovereignty.

If the capital required to develop future AIs continues to spiral, we may witness the rise of AI nationalism. Rather than relying on tariffs, countries could implement policies that deliberately limit the use of foreign AIs to ensure market share for domestic industries.

U.S. Bill: Decoupling AI from China

This trend is visible in the U.S. Senate. The Decoupling America’s Artificial Intelligence Capabilities from China Act of 2025 (S. 321) is currently pending and seeks to prohibit investment, research, and technology transfer between the U.S. and China in the AI sector. While framed as protecting national security, the bill signals a potent policy direction: explicit limits on foreign technologies and an aggressive prioritization of domestic AI industries.

The Looming AI Trade War

Should such sweeping legislation pass, reciprocal measures are highly likely. Foreign countries would be incentivized to restrict U.S.-origin AIs to champion their own local platforms. While open-source AI complicates enforcement, the economic incentive of high capital costs could still force countries to favor domestic development to ensure their enormous investments pay off.

Intellectual Property Laws as the Final Barrier

The most restrictive limits could arise from domestic Intellectual Property (IP) laws. A nation might choose to ban a foreign platform that fails to respect local copyright or moral rights, or that is seen as detrimental to local artistic or business communities. Some nations could even require media content to be generated exclusively using domestic tools, effectively blocking foreign generative AI output. 

This discussion is speculative but profoundly plausible. 

As AI becomes the central nervous system for business and creative workflows, countries are poised to adopt policies—be they legislative, regulatory, or based on IP—that limit access to foreign AIs to support domestic industries and protect national strategic interests. 

The era of truly global, unrestricted AI may be at risk in the future, which would be unfortunate.