National

Tech Policy

The Trump administration has made exporting American AI a key part of its plans for global AI dominance, but ad hoc policy decisions around the most advanced AI are threatening that effort.

Why it matters: A flagship U.S. program designed to boost AI exports could be undermined by the very administration that created it.

"The government's willingness to arbitrarily and abruptly remove America's best models from all foreign use shows that the strategy behind the AI Export Program is no longer relevant to decision makers in the U.S. government," Dean Ball, a former AI adviser in the Trump administration, told Axios.

Driving the news: The Trump administration slapped export controls on Anthropic's newest model Fable 5 due to disagreements over whether it is safe for deployment, causing Anthropic to pull access to it entirely.

Administration officials and Anthropic staff continue to hash out their disagreements this week, with no solution yet.

The big picture: The American AI exports program is a relatively new initiative that President Trump created in a July 2025 executive order.

It's meant to bundle the infrastructure, tools and models into ready-to-deploy AI systems for allies and partners, and has been touted as a key part of the White House's AI policy goals, as Axios has previously reported.

Those who are selected for the program will get expedited export control license reviews, prioritized access to U.S. federal credit programs, government-to-government advocacy abroad and dedicated interagency coordination.

What they're saying: A tech industry source told Axios that there are "downstream consequences" to using export controls as a means of enforcing tech policy, setting new precedents for future oversight and licensing of tech releases.

"Fueling perceptions that the US government could disable overseas access to an AI model or system only makes it more difficult to promote American AI exports," the source said. "Global customers will have a harder time committing to purchasing US-made AI."

Other tech industry sources told Axios the Anthropic export control issue creates uncertainty by complicating relationships with allies at a time when there is a major focus on exporting U.S. technology abroad. 

"Given the interconnected nature of the AI tech stack, restrictions aimed at one layer or at one company in the stack can create unintended impacts for other parts of the stack," one of the sources said.

"It definitely has a flavor of picking winners and losers, and the hope is that the U.S. government, in its efforts to promote American companies abroad, is going to do that consistently across the board, rather than picking up individual companies to prioritize over others," said Paul Lekas, vice president of public policy at the Software and Information Industry Association.

Yes, but: Other AI companies looking to participate in the American AI exports program may avoid the problems that have befallen Anthropic. The upside of joining the program hasn't gone away, said Joseph Hoefer, AI principal at Monument Advocacy. 

But companies will have to build contingencies in case a layer of their "tech stack" suddenly becomes unavailable due to a decision by the administration.

"This could turn out to be a one-off: a specific action, in a specific situation, that the administration resolves and doesn't repeat," he said.

The other side: The White House defended the move as part of an effort to "balance" AI innovation and national security, per spokesperson Kush Desai.

The Commerce Department's International Trade Administration did not respond to requests for comment.

What's next: Applications for the American AI exports program are due June 30, and how the White House handles its dispute with Anthropic could shape whether companies feel confident participating.

Trump's AI export strategy runs into Trump's export controls

A flagship U.S. program designed to boost AI exports could be undermined by the very administration that created it.

Illustration of the American flag with red and white arrows pointing away from the stars.

AI & machine learning

Big Tech

Privacy & tech regulation

Tariffs & trade policy

Tech company news

Tech Regulation

From the Valley to D.C., Big Tech players like Facebook, Google and Amazon are under more scrutiny than ever as new technology develops and privacy and antitrust concerns grow in lockstep with companies’ ambitions.

Technology

Latest news on Wall Street, Corporate America and financial regulation.

Business

2024 will be an election year like no other, as President Biden seeks re-election amid economic uncertainty, two wars and questions about his age. His likely foe, former President Trump, faces felony charges and vows revenge on his political enemies. Meanwhile, Americans generally are dissatisfied with those choices and are divided over immigration, race, education and more.

Politics & Policy

Conflicts, policies and powers are intersecting and shaping the world. Breaking news and analysis of national security, foreign policy and global crises.

World

Top stories & latest news on the Federal Reserve, real-time data, plus the biggest shifts happening in the U.S. and global economy.

Economy

Markets

Axios Markets

A bar chart that ranks the largest U.S. companies by market capitalization as of June 16, 2026. Nvidia leads at about $5.07 trillion, followed by Alphabet at $4.50 trillion and Apple at $4.38 trillion. Micron is smallest among those shown at about $1.18 trillion.

Largest U.S. companies by market capitalization 

Data: FactSet ; Chart: Matt Phillips/Axios

SpaceX jumped another 4.8% Tuesday, enabling Elon Musk's space launch/satellite services/AI/social media conglomerate to leapfrog Amazon.com in market value.

In just its first two full days of trading, SpaceX has added roughly $537 billion to push its market value to $2.659 trillion, according to FactSet data.

That puts it ahead of Amazon.com, which was valued at $2.646 trillion at Tuesday's close. 

Why it matters: The gain underscores the extraordinary power Musk's mastery of the stock market gives him.

Essentially, the surge in market value provides SpaceX with hundreds of billions of dollars out of thin air, which it can then use to remarkable operational advantage.

Case in point: SpaceX announced a $60 billion all-stock deal Tuesday, essentially using its stock as currency to buy fast-growing vibe-coding startup Cursor, instantly bolstering its Grok AI division against Anthropic and OpenAI. 

SpaceX soars above Amazon in market cap

In just its first two full days of trading, SpaceX has added roughly $537 billion in market value.

Illustration of a businessperson hanging on to the edges of a fast-moving paper airplane made from money. 

Illustration: Aïda Amer/Axios. Stock: Getty Images

Dealmaking

Economy, finance & markets

Elon Musk

Stock market

Stock market news

The still-secret terms of President Trump's Iran deal have triggered a furious debate over how much Tehran stands to gain financially — and how soon.

The big picture: The deal is expected to allow Iran to sell oil freely during a 60-day negotiating window, while opening the door to broader sanctions relief, access to frozen funds and a potential $300 billion rebuilding investment fund if a final nuclear agreement is reached.

Friction point: Critics argue that after shredding the 2015 nuclear deal in his first term, Trump is now following the same playbook — unfreezing cash in exchange for nuclear concessions — while potentially going a step further with the rebuilding fund.

The White House says the discourse is being poisoned by Iranian "misinformation," and that its "pay for performance" structure is the best way to achieve the strongest-possible deal.

But U.S. officials acknowledge that at least some benefits will flow to Iran upfront.

State of play: The memorandum of understanding (MOU) set to be formally signed on Friday is designed to launch 60 days of negotiations on a more detailed nuclear agreement.

U.S. officials acknowledge it's uncertain whether a long-term nuclear deal will be reached, but argue the economic benefits for Iran depend on it.

In the meantime, the dearth of details about what's actually in the MOU has left space for a swirl of claims that billions of dollars are already flowing to Tehran.

In response to questions for this story, a U.S. official told Axios: "This is a performance-based agreement. Iran can only access any benefits of the MOU if they abide by all of the points they agreed to – including no nuclear weapon, neutralizing its enriched material, and not interfering with the free flow of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz."

Here's a breakdown of the financial incentives at play.

A U.S. official said the deal includes temporary sanctions waivers allowing Iran to sell oil as long as talks continue — a potentially massive revenue stream as the punishing U.S. naval blockade is lifted.

Iranian state media have claimed Tehran will also get immediate access to frozen funds simply for signing. U.S. officials adamantly deny that.

A senior U.S. official said Iran could receive "gestures" — sanctions relief or frozen fund access — in exchange for reciprocal gestures of compliance.

Reports of side deals in which Gulf states such as the UAE and Qatar could unfreeze Iranian funds they hold were dismissed by a senior U.S. official as "preposterous."

Still, the MOU leaves room for interpretation: The U.S. "undertakes to make [the frozen funds] fully available for use ... upon the implementation of this MOU," according to a source familiar with the text. 

If a final nuclear agreement is reached, the U.S. has committed under the MOU to lift all sanctions against Iran on an agreed-upon schedule, according to a source's description of the text.

The White House says any deal must include retrieval of Iran's highly enriched uranium, a moratorium on future enrichment and an accompanying inspections regime.

A senior administration official claimed the U.S. expects to know within two to three weeks whether Iran is serious — and that financial benefits would be limited if it isn't.

One of the most politically explosive provisions is a potential rebuilding fund for Iran.

The MOU says any final deal will include a "definitive and mutually agreed plan" for a fund supporting Iran's "reconstruction and economic development," according to a source familiar with the text.

Sources familiar with the discussions said the "prosperity fund" idea came from Qatar and has been discussed with the U.S. and Iran for several weeks. The initiative envisions private sector investment from Gulf states and east Asian countries.

Vice President Vance told Fox News the money would not come from U.S. taxpayers and would come into play only if Iran permanently ends its nuclear program, gives up its enriched uranium and allows nuclear inspections.

What to watch: Trump said once again on Tuesday that the text of the MOU will be released, though likely not until it is formally signed on Friday.

Breaking down the billions Iran could receive under Trump's deal

U.S. officials acknowledge that at least some benefits will flow to Iran upfront.

Photo: Ludovic Marin/Pool/AFP via Getty Images

Donald Trump

Geopolitics & international conflict

Iran

U.S. politics & policy

Codebook

Axios Codebook

AI researchers and cybersecurity leaders fear the U.S. government is setting a precedent that may discourage American AI companies from building tools that help defenders identify and fix vulnerabilities.

Why it matters: In trying to avert an AI hacking crisis, the Trump administration may end up making U.S. cyber defenses weaker, dozens of prominent security leaders warned.

Cybersecurity experts are worried about the long tail this ongoing feud will have on American cyber defenses.

"They've set a precedent that American models can't do defensive security research," former Facebook security chief Alex Stamos tells Axios.

Driving the news: Stamos organized an open letter, signed by nearly 150 security leaders, calling on the Trump administration to reverse its move to restrict access to Anthropic's Fable 5 and Mythos 5.

Concerns about Chinese access to Mythos and a call from Amazon CEO Andy Jassy reportedly sent the administration into a panic last week after Anthropic publicly released its first Mythos-class model.

During the spat, Anthropic brought in a leading zero-day bug hunter — who helped the Defense Department create its bug bounty program and sat on multiple government-led advisory boards — to help assess Amazon's concerns about the security of Fable and Mythos.

Now, the administration is casting the security researcher as a "radical Democrat," as my colleagues reported yesterday.

Between the lines: The dispute has quickly shifted from a fight over one model to a broader question of whether the government is creating unwritten rules for AI security research.

Stamos, who has spoken with the technical staffs involved in the fallout, said the findings Amazon flagged do not appear unique to Anthropic's models.

Multiple people familiar with Amazon's concerns said they centered on a jailbreak the company found that allows Fable to write "proofs of concept" — a capability security teams often use to understand and fix vulnerabilities.

Katie Moussouris, CEO of Luta Security, said in a detailed blog post yesterday that she saw a copy of Amazon's findings and the issue didn't involve mass exploitation of the model, but rather prompts designed to support defensive security work.

Flashback: Before releasing Fable 5, Anthropic said, it worked with both internal teams and outside security researchers to test the model for jailbreaks and other flaws.

The company has also argued that "perfect jailbreak resistance is not currently possible for any model provider," so it has focused on making "jailbreaks either narrow ... or very expensive to produce." 

Threat level: Cyber experts warn that if frontier AI companies fear punishment for models that can identify vulnerabilities, they may now be tempted to strip out capabilities on which defenders already rely.

Moussouris noted in an X post that there is no fix that wouldn't render the model less useful for cyber defenders. 

"No new frontier models can be developed or released if this is the administration's best take," she added. 

The big picture: Researchers argue the administration's response risks giving adversaries an advantage.

Researchers note that Chinese AI developers and government-backed hacking groups are unlikely to abandon similar tools, raising concerns that U.S. defenders could lose access to abilities their adversaries are using.

"This is closer to China than what I recognize as the United States, and personally I see this as a huge threat to American dynamism," Stamos said.

What to watch: The U.S. government is in the process of standing up a vulnerability clearinghouse via the recent AI security executive order that would likely triage reports about jailbreaks, prompt injections and other threats to AI models.

But questions linger about how much cybersecurity talent remains in the Trump administration after several White House departures in recent weeks and the sidelining of the nation's top cyber agency.

Go deeper: The hidden risk of Trump's Anthropic crackdown

The hidden risk of Trump's Anthropic crackdown

Trump's Anthropic crackdown rattles cyber defenders

The Trump administration may end up making U.S. cyber defenses weaker, dozens of prominent security leaders warned.

Illustration of a magnifying glass examining a glowing laptop. 

Cybersecurity

California Gov. Gavin Newsom's team is urging congressional Democrats to frame the Justice Department's investigation into him as part of a campaign of political retribution, according to talking points obtained by Axios.

Why it matters: The messaging memo, first reported by Semafor, echos Newsom's assertion that the probe was directly ordered by President Trump to kneecap the California governor's political aspirations.

"He ordered this investigation because the Governor is considering a run for President. Donald Trump is not investigating a crime. He is investigating a critic," the two-page document says.

The DOJ declined to comment, but a source familiar with the investigation said it originated from "whistleblowers and local sources in California" and was not ordered by Trump or DOJ officials in D.C.

Driving the news: Newsom said in a video posted to social media Monday that "in recent days, federal agents have knocked on the doors of family friends and former employees — not because they found a crime, because they're simply trying to find one."

"Donald Trump isn't just coming after me because of my mean tweets. He's coming after me because I'm considering running for president," Newsom said.

Newsom pointed to the DOJ's attempts to probe or prosecute former Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell, Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), former FBI Director James Comey and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz as other alleged examples of the Trump administration targeting the president's critics.

"Anyone who has challenged Donald Trump has ended up on his hit list, and today I proudly join that list," he added.

The other side: The source familiar with the investigation told Axios there are several probes into those in Newsom's orbit, including one regarding California first lady Jen Siebel Newsom's "tax activities."

Another pertains to Dana Williamson, a former Newsom chief of staff and political advisor to Xavier Becerra who pleaded guilty last month to lying to the FBI, filing a false tax return and conspiracy to commit fraud.

The U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of California has been investigating "for roughly a year" and they are "very legitimate, serious investigations," the source said.

Between the lines: The "key messages" section of the memo largely reflects what Newsom said in his video, but the "common Q&A" section offers additional insight into his arguments.

In response to "what exactly is the DOJ investigating," the document recommends the answer: "That's a question Trump's Department of Justice needs to answer. They are chasing conspiracy theories, and there isn't any credible evidence supporting the allegation of illegal conduct."

On whether Newsom has committed a crime, it pivots to Trump's felony convictions and quips that the governor "has jaywalked before — Trump may seek an indictment for that."

The document also says that Williamson's charges "had to do with conduct from before she worked for the Governor," claiming the DOJ offered her "a 'deal' in exchange for information on the Governor."

Justice Department's investigation into him

What Newsom's team is telling Hill allies about his DOJ probe

Trump "ordered this investigation because the Governor is considering a run for President," his office argues.

Man in a dark suit and blue tie speaks on a stage, gesturing with his hands. A purple backdrop with logos and an orange lava-like background frames him.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks at the U.S. Conference of Mayors in Long Beach, Calif., on June 4. Photo: Myraneli Fabian/Anadolu via Getty Images

Axios Today

Podcasts

Campaign ads featuring AI-generated clips and images once sounded like a laughable concept. Now they're everywhere, with attack ads that place candidates in a wide variety of compromising — and fictitious — situations.

Why it matters: This largely unregulated practice is warping the unspoken norms of political campaigns and blurring the line between truth and fiction.

Some campaigns voluntarily disclose this AI use, but it's not required. 

Democrats want to change that if they retake control of Congress in November.

Driving the news: The latest spot to push the envelope is an attack ad against Texas Democratic Senate nominee James Talarico from a President Trump-aligned group called Citizens for Sanity.

The ad depicts Talarico in a dress singing an abridged version of "Favorite Things" about transgender children.

Talarico has been a frequent target of this practice: The National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) used AI in March to depict Talarico reciting past social media posts. The posts were real. Talarico reading them was not.

Zoom out: While the Texas Senate race has been a hotbed of AI use — Republicans John Cornyn and Ken Paxton and Democrat Jasmine Crockett all utilized it to some extent in the primaries — it is far from the only one.

The GOP primary in Kentucky's 4th district saw widespread AI use by both sides. 

That included a "throuple" ad, which contained deepfakes of Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) dining, checking into a hotel and holding hands with Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.).

Pro-Massie spots used AI to depict an elephant with Trump-like hair and a MAGA cap, and Ed Gallrein, Massie's challenger, abandoning Trump in a foxhole.

In Georgia, gubernatorial candidate Brad Raffensperger used AI in multiple ads to depict his GOP primary opponents wildly shooting guns in the air and fighting each other with pugil sticks.

A new ad from another Georgia gubernatorial candidate, Burt Jones, is entirely AI-generated and features depictions of his GOP primary runoff opponent Rick Jackson shoveling money into a furnace and inflating a hot air balloon with his breath.

It's not just Republicans making use of AI:

In Texas, Crockett made use of AI to inflate the crowd size in one of her ads and posted an AI video to social media of herself, Trump and others as babies.

In New York City, Democrat-turned-independent Andrew Cuomo used AI in the mayoral election in an ad that portrayed him performing various jobs, including subway conductor, stockbroker, stagehand and window washer.

In Maryland, a new ad from Democrat Harry Dunn in the 5th congressional district includes a brief shot of AI-generated men in suits reading "Crypto" and "AIPAC" tossing golden basketballs into a carnival free-throw game.

elephant with Trump-like hair and a MAGA cap

An explosion of AI deepfakes is redefining American elections

This largely unregulated practice is warping the unspoken norms of political campaigns.

Illustration of a retro television set with a large protruding nose

Illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios. Stock: Getty Images

Media & journalism industry

Axios AM

Microsoft’s president says AI leaders overestimated the jobs apocalypse

Brad Smith, vice chair and president of Microsoft, slammed tech moguls for hypocritical, grandiose warnings that are alienating Americans at a time of huge workforce opportunity.

"Nobody knows for sure, but let's not panic," Smith, who has been with Microsoft for 33 years, said from the tech giant's headquarters in Redmond, Washington.

Why it matters: Smith is among the tech leaders who think dire predictions about AI's threat to entry-level white-collar jobs are souring young Americans on a miraculous technology.

Smith writes in a new paper about AI's effect on jobs that AI getting booed at this spring's commencements should be a "powerful wake-up call for the tech sector."

"Hopefully, leaders across our industry will listen and seek to learn from this reaction," Smith writes. "For the past half-century, the youngest generation of people and workers has led the way in adopting new digital technologies. ... When people who use a new technology complain about it, we had better take notice."

In our interview, Smith said tech leaders have botched the conversation about AI and jobs:

Hypocritical warnings: In an essay this month, Anthropic pointed to benefits of slowing AI development "to give ourselves more time to deal with its immense implications" — a so-called global pause. Smith told me: "If somebody says, 'This technology is so powerful that we need a global treaty to slow it down,' then I would say: Then take your foot off the accelerator yourself if you think it's moving too fast."

Scaring grads: Echoing points Jim VandeHei and I made in our recent "Rattled Generation" column, Smith notes that this year's graduates were in high school during COVID and have done much of their socializing through screens, against a backdrop of political turmoil. "Now, they finally get to enter the workforce and here comes AI?" he said. "Too often, this is being presented to them as something that is going to happen to them, not for them. And I think this is their way of saying: 'Wait a second. Not so fast. We have a voice. We want to be heard.'"

Short-term distortion: "This is going to unfold over 25 years, not two-and-a-half," Smith said. "But look, if you're trying to raise money as entrepreneurs need to do, it's easier to raise money if people think it's going to happen sooner rather than later. But we spend a lot of time studying the history of technology. Twenty-five years for complete transformation of an economy would be a record setter."

Unrealistic hype: "Tech leaders tend to repeat two mistakes," he said. "One is: They overestimate the impact of technology, especially the pace at which it will arrive. And second: The tech leaders often underestimate people. ... There was a time when humanity discovered that a horse could run faster than a person. So, people learned how to ride horses. Let's use AI to help people do more and not replace us."

Fake certainty: "You find that the same folks who made the wrong predictions a decade ago keep making them with extraordinary conviction," Smith said. "And it makes great fodder for people who generate stories for a living."

Hollow calls for regulation: He said we're seeing a flashback to the past decade's debates over social media legislation. "You had some companies that said, 'We want legislation,' and then they basically opposed every bill in Congress because they never liked it specifically." He said that on AI policy, beware "ideas that are so grandiose that the chance of them being adopted is zero."

The bottom line: The AI debate has been "too focused on grandiose predictions," Smith said, "and not centered enough in: Let's use technology, as we always have, to help people do better things."

Share this video ... Read Brad Smith's post, "AI, jobs, and the next generation."

Microsoft's Brad Smith on AI-era jobs: "Let's not panic"

Smith thinks dire predictions about AI's threat to jobs are souring young Americans on a miraculous technology.

Mike Allen interviews Microsoft's Brad Smith

Behind the Curtain

Latino

Axios Latino

Vice President JD Vance's memoir about his conversion to Catholicism, out Tuesday, puts a high-profile face on a small but distinctive slice of the U.S. Church.

Why it matters: Parish reports have fueled talk of a Catholic revival. But a new Pew Research Center analysis found the Church loses eight former Catholics for every adult it gains through conversion.

The converts it does attract tend to be whiter, more conservative, and more observant than "cradle Catholics," or those born into the faith.

"The story of how I regained my faith, of course, only happened because I had lost it to begin with," Vance said in an announcement about the book in March. "The interesting question that hangs over this book, and over my mind, is why I ever strayed from the path."

By the numbers: 1.5% of U.S. adults are converts to Catholicism, Pew found, making up about 8% of Catholics in the U.S. 

Most converts come from another Christian background, with 59% raised Protestant, 9% in another Christian tradition and 22% with no childhood religious affiliation.

The most common reason for conversion is family, not politics or ideology: 49% of converts cite a Catholic spouse or partner, or a desire to marry in the Church.

Smaller shares cite belief in church teachings or its historical foundation, spiritual fulfillment, or relatives and friends.

Zoom in: Catholic converts are more observant by some measures. 38% attend Mass weekly, compared with 28% of cradle Catholics.

58% say they receive Communion every time they go to Mass, compared with 34% of cradle Catholics. 

Pew found there is no statistically significant gap in prayer or confession.

State of play: Vance fits several big pieces of the convert profile. 

He is white, U.S.-born, Republican and was raised outside Catholicism in a loosely evangelical family — aligning with Pew's finding that converts are disproportionately white, native-born and often raised Protestant.

Axios

Tuesday's top stories