From AI to quantum computing, the tech landscape is shifting—and so are we. 🚀
We are returning to our official name: Association for Competitive Technology (ACT). Our new look reflects the full breadth of our members’ innovation.
#TechPolicy#ACT#Innovation#SmallTech
Read about our next chapter: https://t.co/BoIpcsbCPU
Imposing a European DMA-style framework in the U.S. would be a mistake for American competition policy.
Blanket prohibitions eliminate pro-competitive benefits, spike cyber risks for small devs, and disproportionately impact startups. For innovators and policy wonks alike, case-by-case harm analysis is still the superior approach.
Read the full insights from our recent Capitol Hill briefing: https://t.co/azKUkCFlJR
Save Our Standards joined @actonline, @EngineOrg, and @HiTechInventors in urging the DOJ and FTC to maintain clear, predictable guidance for procompetitive business collaborations without conflating those principles with standards-setting and SEP licensing issues.
Technical standards and FRAND commitments help drive innovation, interoperability, and investment across the American economy. Policymakers should preserve balanced, transparent frameworks that give innovators and manufacturers the confidence to collaborate, compete, and grow.
Read the letter here:
https://t.co/tBKGVVvxan
New name, same mission.
We are officially returned to our original name: The Association for Competitive Technology, as our members were on the ground in D.C. to ensure small tech companies have a seat at the table.
🔒 Punchbowl News had the scoop: https://t.co/Q6eNJCaYUS
What does it mean to drive innovation in practice? The R&D Tax Deduction
Jad Meouchy, founder of ACT member company @BadVR_Inc — a firm building VR data visualization tools — sees the R&D tax deduction as more than a line item. In a recent @cfo piece, he described it as a meaningful signal: when innovation is valued and there's an incentive tied to it, "all of a sudden, everybody wants to do innovation."
Unfortunately, many companies still aren't taking advantage of the deduction — not because they don't qualify, but because of outdated risk perceptions and information gaps.
The cost of that caution? Real dollars left unclaimed: https://t.co/gCTKHwhDLT
Extending pre-market review, à la the Federal Drug Administration’s (@US_FDA) process is concerning.
The FDA already reviews AI systems at the app layer marketed as bona fide medical devices, which is the appropriate point in the tech stack to address immediate safety risks.
The creation of any mandated pre-market review for foundation AI models or secondary tools needs considerable public consultation, especially with the small businesses that will be most drastically impacted.
The White House’s top economic advisor said Wednesday the Trump administration is considering an executive order to give the U.S. government oversight of releasing AI models just like it does with new drugs.
@Dareasmunhoz and @BenBrodyDC have more:
https://t.co/fjDPWv0WiT
“These risks should be addressed at the appropriate levels of the technology stack. The creation of any mandated pre-market review for foundation AI models or secondary tools needs considerable public consultation, especially with the small businesses that will be most drastically impacted.”
Appropriate oversight of AI is reasonable, but pre-market review is concerning.
Risks should be addressed at the appropriate level of the technology stack, and we should be relying on existing law, like the @FTC's Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices (UDAP) authority.
https://t.co/YJDoXC6ndx
“But extending pre-market review, à la the Federal Drug Administration’s (FDA) process for critical lifesaving medical devices, is concerning. The FDA already reviews AI systems at the app layer marketed as bona fide medical devices. This review is an appropriate method of addressing immediate safety risks, but it is unworkable as a framework for the lowest layers of the stack like general AI foundation models. This risks adding unnecessary, duplicative, and massive new costs and delays for everyone building on base models without adding any safety benefits.”
💫 GAEC 2026 kicks off this week, and we couldn't be more excited to see it come together.
This week, 45+ of our U.S. member companies will be in the room with the policymakers who need to hear from them. We're grateful for every founder showing up to advocate for small tech businesses, and honored to work alongside them.
👀Follow along all week for member perspectives and the conversations shaping the future of tech.
#MemberMonday #GAECUS #GAEC2026 #USTech #TechPolicy
"SMEs need digital markets that are not only fair and contestable, but also safe, predictable, and easy to operate in’, said Sax. ‘We therefore call on the Commission to complement this report with a more detailed assessment of the DMA’s full impact on the SME community, including the indirect costs of enforcement uncertainty, the security risks introduced by restructuring the ecosystem, and a stronger framework for ensuring that enforcement reflects the full range of values that SMEs depend on."
In it first review of the Digital Markets Act, the @EU_Commission focused more on cosmetics than substance, missing an opportunity to take stock of the broader impact on the digital economy.
https://t.co/5JKT34bbgR
"We disagree with the EU Commission's conclusion that the '#DMA remains fit for the purpose and does not need to be revised.' The Commission has restructured digital ecosystems in the name of competition but has not stopped to ask what those changes cost in terms of security, stability, and legal predictability." - Mike Sax, founder & chairperson of ACT
California’s latest merger proposals could set back the startup economy by a generation.
By adding new hurdles to the acquisition process, CA is making it harder for small tech to scale and for investors to see a return.
Let’s keep the exit door open for growth and innovation.
Read more: https://t.co/BHCUNLjTCC
Bad AI policy doesn't just slow down tech companies—it hurts the users who need it most.
New York’s SB S7263 is a prime example of why we should regulate harmful conduct, not the technology itself.
Broad liability always lead to fewer tools for small businesses and consumers: https://t.co/y82B9MqMX3
Does the weather channel app really need your government ID? 🤨
Protecting kids online is an absolute priority, but blanket age verification mandates aren’t the answer.
At a recent @FTC workshop, our General Counsel @GDufault sat with industry experts to discuss why forcing every app to collect sensitive ID data creates more privacy risks—not less.
Let’s focus on risk-based safety, because one-size-fits-all still doesn't fit.
Learn more: https://t.co/VeDXPpiBZt
New: The SECURE Data and GUARD Acts have been introduced, aiming to establish a comprehensive federal data privacy framework.
As @emrwilkins reports for @CNBC, these bills would preempt existing state laws to create a single national standard, something our members have been calling for for a long time.
https://t.co/xAi8Z0qvq8
@LEHogg@actonline If that's the process you want, you can do that now via OS age APIs, you don't have to take the option not to do so away from everyone else thru ASAA.
DoorDash opposes ASAA b/c it forces all users to send them age data. DD shouldn't be liable for this even if Instagram should.