The United States won't allow Europe to become "the arbiter" of regulating American tech companies, U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer declared at Axios House D.C. this week. His comments underscore growing tension over who controls the regulatory framework for the technologies that'll define the next generation of economic competition.
The event, held in Washington and sponsored by Accenture and Ford, brought together policymakers and business leaders who agreed on one point: America's economic future hinges on outcompeting rivals in AI, energy and advanced manufacturing. That's not a small challenge. It's the defining industrial contest of this decade.
The AI Race and Regulatory Battles
Greer's warning about European regulatory overreach came as part of broader discussions about maintaining American competitiveness. The message was clear—the U.S. won't accept foreign bureaucracies setting the rules for American innovation.
Commodity Futures Trading Commission chair Michael Selig reinforced that determination in a different context, saying the CFTC will defend its authority over prediction markets "all the way up to the Supreme Court" if necessary. The battle over who regulates emerging financial technologies is intensifying, and federal agencies aren't backing down.
Kalshi co-founder and CEO Tarek Mansour argued prediction markets are "here to stay" because many people feel traditional financial systems are "rigged against them." That sentiment reflects deeper frustrations with established institutions that government intervention often fails to address.
Energy Infrastructure as Economic Foundation
NYSE Group president Lynn Martin identified AI's biggest economic opportunities in energy and infrastructure, predicting both sectors are positioned for "outsized returns for a longer period of time." That assessment aligns with market realities—AI's computational demands require massive energy investments.
Southern Company chair, president and CEO Chris Womack put a number on what's needed: the U.S. must commit to building 10 new nuclear plants to meet growing energy demand. It's a concrete target that acknowledges the scale of infrastructure required for technological leadership.
In a sponsored conversation, Ford Motor Company executive chair Bill Ford highlighted a critical vulnerability: most of America's critical minerals come from China. The U.S. has these resources, he said, but doesn't have proper regulation to develop them. Ford called for a bipartisan industrial policy to compete with China, noting that "having a planning horizon that we can count on makes a huge difference, because our lead times are longer than political lead times."
Deployment Over Prototyping
Accenture Federal Services CEO Ron Ash warned the U.S. is in a prototyping bubble. "My biggest concern is that we win this race for developing the best AI technology and we lose the race to deploy it," he said. That's the difference between laboratory success and market dominance.
Zillow Group CEO Jeremy Wacksman offered a telling statistic about regulatory complexity's human cost: the homebuying process has become so complicated that half of Americans cry at some point during the process, according to Zillow's 2022 study from the fourth year.
Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.) expressed concern the Iran war will become this generation's "forever war," criticizing President Trump for using "basically real estate negotiators" in diplomatic talks. "I don't think that you're going to be able to bomb yourself out of this," Meeks said.
Ford also said flying cars are "very possible," suggesting the technological frontier remains wide open for those willing to invest and innovate.
Why This Matters:
The regulatory fight over AI and emerging technologies isn't academic—it'll determine whether American companies operate under rules written in Washington or Brussels. European regulators have consistently favored precautionary principles that slow innovation, while U.S. markets have historically rewarded speed and risk-taking. If Europe sets the regulatory baseline for global tech, American companies face compliance costs that favor established players over startups. The energy infrastructure gap presents an even more immediate challenge: without massive investment in nuclear and mineral development, the U.S. can't power the AI systems that drive economic growth. China's control over critical minerals gives it leverage over American supply chains that no amount of software innovation can overcome. The deployment gap Ash identified reveals the real danger—developing technology that sits unused while competitors turn theirs into market advantage.