US gov't preps sweeping export controls for Nvidia, AMD AI hardware — worldwide licensing system would give Trump admin broad authority to block global sales

Nvidia hardware in a data center.
(Image credit: Nvidia)

The U.S. government is drafting sweeping new export regulations that would give it authority to approve nearly all global shipments of advanced AI accelerators made by American companies, including AMD and Nvidia, reports Bloomberg. The rules would expand existing country-based restrictions into a worldwide licensing system and will give Trump's administration power to allow or decline large-scale AI infrastructure buildouts. The rule turns out to be considerably stricter than the highly-criticized AI Diffusion Rule from the Biden era.

  • Shipments involving up to 1,000 Nvidia GB300 GPUs would pass through a simplified review and may qualify for limited exemptions.
  • Larger installations would require pre-authorization before export licenses could be issued. These will introduce compliance obligations that may include operational transparency, disclosure of business activities, and potential on-site inspections by U.S. authorities.
  • Clusters powered by 200,000 GB300 GPUs operated by a single company within one country — such as those currently deployed by AWS, Microsoft, Oracle, Open AI, or xAI — would trigger direct intergovernmental arrangements. In these cases, approvals would depend on national-security assurances as well as commitments to invest in American AI infrastructure.

For now, companies like AMD, Cerebras, and Nvidia cannot ship high-performance AI processors to select countries, such as China, Iran, North Korea, and Russia, just to name a few. Yet, shipping large-scale batches of AI accelerators to Middle Eastern countries requires direct intergovernmental arrangements and investments in the American AI infrastructure. If the newly proposed regulation becomes a law, then such arrangements would become much more common particularly with allied nations in Europe.

The proposed policy is by no means a total export ban, but an extremely powerful tool that lets the U.S. government influence how global AI infrastructure develops. If the Trump administration does not like the fact that a UK or France-based company deploys a cluster of over 200,000 GB300 GPUs or equivalent, it can deny appropriate export licenses if appropriate governments and companies do not meet their requirements.

If the proposed policy is enacted, for companies like AMD or Nvidia, which ship their products globally, everything will depend on how quickly licenses are granted and what conditions are attached. Fast approvals with light restrictions would let most small projects move forward, though with more paperwork. However, for larger installations, tougher requirements would delay construction and make operating large data centers outside the U.S. considerably more complicated. Meanwhile, building clusters comparable to those currently operated by AWS, Google, Oracle, Microsoft, or xAI outside of the U.S. would face extreme complications, which would lower their economic feasibility.

Google Preferred Source

Follow Tom's Hardware on Google News, or add us as a preferred source, to get our latest news, analysis, & reviews in your feeds.

Anton Shilov
Contributing Writer

Anton Shilov is a contributing writer at Tom’s Hardware. Over the past couple of decades, he has covered everything from CPUs and GPUs to supercomputers and from modern process technologies and latest fab tools to high-tech industry trends.

  • hotaru251
    so basically becoming middle man and using specific peoples needs to leverage better deal i assume is point of it.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    The article said:
    ... If the newly proposed regulation becomes a law ...
    I'm confused. Is this an internal policy of the Executive Branch or a Bill being drafted for Congress to vote on? The only way it can become a law is by Congress passing it and the President signing it. Yet, I got the impression this is a policy being finalized internally. Which is it?

    P.S. I checked Bloomberg, but the article is paywalled.
    Reply
  • SkyBill40
    Art of the Deal? Or something like it?

    I'm sure that neither Jensen Huang nor Lisa Su are going to like this one as it could directly impact their business. It may make sense, but it's hard to imagine how this is going to be beneficial. If those countries want those AI products... they're still going to find a way.
    Reply
  • thestryker
    bit_user said:
    I'm confused. Is this an internal policy of the Executive Branch or a Bill being drafted for Congress to vote on?
    The source article doesn't really specify on this point, but it sounds like it's commerce department regulation.
    US officials have written draft regulations that would restrict AI chip shipments to anywhere in the world without American approval, giving Washington broad control over whether other countries can build facilities for training and running artificial-intelligence models — and under what conditions.

    ...

    President Donald Trump’s team has said repeatedly that they want the world to use American AI, and the draft rules aren’t meant to function as an Nvidia export ban. Rather, the regulation would set up the US government as gatekeeper for the AI industry: Companies — and in some cases, their governments — would have to seek the blessing of the US Commerce Department to buy the precious accelerators.
    Reply
  • Notton
    Sounds like a Cartel.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    SkyBill40 said:
    Art of the Deal? Or something like it?
    Depends on whether access to AI hardware is used in a horse-trading fashion.

    Notton said:
    Sounds like a Cartel.
    That's when you conspire to raise prices. This has to do with restricting availability, not prices.
    Reply
  • rm12
    Time that ASML put a clause in their maintenance contracts that they have the exclusive right for sales decisions concerning chips created with their machines. The clause should be mandated by the Dutch government.
    Reply
  • Shiznizzle
    Stay under the 1000 chip limit and everything is gucci,

    If the large players have 200.000 chips systems it would only take an operation of 400 or more transactions, world wide, in markets that allow the purchase of those chips, for nefarious entities to stay afloat using american chips.

    If they bells go off at the 1000 mark of course people will stay below that. Somehow i don think these restrictions will work.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    rm12 said:
    Time that ASML put a clause in their maintenance contracts that they have the exclusive right for sales decisions concerning chips created with their machines. The clause should be mandated by the Dutch government.
    I think that wouldn't be recognized in most countries - and probably none of the leading chip-making ones. For instance, Microsoft cannot claim ownership or control over of software which is compiled using Microsoft Visual Studio.

    About the only things they can control is whether or not to sell to a country and with what amount of export duties.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    Shiznizzle said:
    If they bells go off at the 1000 mark of course people will stay below that. Somehow i don think these restrictions will work.
    For something like this, sanctions doesn't have to be water-tight to have a marked effect. The way you can tell is how much fuss both China and Nvidia have made about them. Furthermore, when restrictions have been eased, how many orders have surged in for what they're allowed to buy.
    Reply