General

a16z’s Recommendations for the National AI Action Plan

Jai Ramaswamy, Collin McCune, and Matt Perault Posted March 14, 2025

This week, a16z shared our recommendations with the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) for how the United States can implement a competitiveness agenda that will enable it to continue to lead the world in AI development. Little Tech has an important role to play in strengthening America’s ability to compete in AI in the future, just as it has been a driving force of American technological innovation historically. We shared our comments as part of the OSTP’s request for information as it gathers policy ideas to inform and develop a new AI Action Plan.

AI has the promise to transform our world and lives for the better. AI-powered services could help doctors create new medicines and treatments to improve health outcomes, enhance how students learn in school and at home, improve transportation infrastructure, and the list goes on. As we’ve seen throughout history, from Edison and Ford to Hughes and Lockheed, startups are the vanguard of American technological leadership. This AI innovation cycle is no different. Consider, for instance, that more than 5,000 new AI startups in the United States were funded between 2013 and 2023 alone. And all of the recent, cutting edge products in AI have come from startups, not Big Tech incumbents.

a16z stands firmly on the side of Little Tech. It’s imperative that US policymakers create a regulatory framework that allows Little Tech to compete with larger companies with more resources and deeper pockets. If not, we run the risk of stagnation and surrendering America’s leadership position to other countries, particularly China. To that end, we proposed three policy pillars to guide the OSTP’s development of an AI policy agenda rooted in American competitiveness:

1. Adopt a policy framework that prioritizes American competitiveness, including establishing the federal government’s leadership role in regulating a national AI model market.

American startups have always been a principal driver of American competitiveness and we believe, will play a critical role in America’s future ability to compete in AI. The US AI Action Plan should support the ability of Little Tech to compete on a level playing field with better-resourced incumbent platforms.

AI models are crucial to America’s national security and economic competitiveness, its geopolitical objectives, and the overall welfare of our country. Because the AI development market is inherently a national one with potential significant impacts in commerce, national security, and foreign relations, the federal government–not individual states–must lead in promoting and regulating a national AI market. This approach will provide certainty for innovators looking to build products that serve people throughout the country. Of course, states also have an important role to play in AI governance by policing harmful conduct within their borders.

As the recent emergence of DeepSeek R1 showed, failing to prioritize competitiveness may slow American AI development and allow other nations to catch up. Policy decisions we make now will determine whether the most important AI technologies of the future are built in the United States, or by a foreign adversary like China. To outcompete other countries and win the AI race, the United States must recognize that entrepreneurship is the cornerstone of AI leadership and ensure Little Tech has a fair shot to build, compete, and thrive.

2. Regulate harms, not AI model development.

For decades, the United States’ approach to regulating technology has been based on how that technology is used–not how it’s made. For instance, there’s no law dictating how to build a computer. But the law does prohibit people from using that computer to hurt someone else.

This is the same approach lawmakers should use in AI: enforce existing laws to prohibit harms–while identifying any gaps that may exist–and punish bad actors who violate the law, rather than forcing developers to navigate onerous regulatory requirements based on speculative fear. There are no exceptions in the law for AI. And if someone is accused of violating the law, using AI is not a defense.

Regulating model development by imposing burdensome compliance requirements will make it harder for Little Tech to compete with larger platforms. Some startups might have small legal teams, but some have no lawyer on staff at all. For Little Tech, navigating complex legal frameworks or reporting requirements isn’t just hard; it’s a competitive threat.

Importantly, regulating model development does not directly protect consumers, the primary objective many lawmakers cite in weighing how best to regulate AI. To protect consumers from AI misuse, policymakers instead should focus on enforcing a host of laws already on the books related to consumer protection, civil rights, antitrust, fraud, and deceptive trade practices, and filling in gaps as necessary. In addition, we urge the administration to clarify that existing copyright law protects the ability of developers to train models. Getting this right is critical to ensuring American competitiveness in AI.

3. Invest in AI infrastructure and talent

To make it easier for startups and researchers to build and study AI models, the United States should establish a National AI Competitiveness Institute to provide them with access to the infrastructure resources they need, including compute, data, and evaluation tools. This is analogous to the approach taken in earlier eras of computing, for example, when the federal government established a National Center for Supercomputing Applications at University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, which resulted in the development of the first web browser. At the same time, the United States should make investments to strengthen talent pipelines through workforce development initiatives. This could include AI literacy and training programs or public-private initiatives to support new jobs created for the AI economy such as AI labelers, something the Chinese government has done which provides Chinese AI companies a competitive advantage today. It’s also vital that the United States continue to support open-source models which promote innovation and competition by reducing barriers to entry and providing transparency.

It’s encouraging to see US policymakers take seriously the enormous potential of AI to drive advancements across society, industry, and government. We have no doubt that they, like us, want to advance our national security and economic interests by enabling Little Tech to compete. We believe these recommendations are the best path forward for a National AI Action Plan to ensure the United States retains its place as the world’s AI leader for generations.

For more, read our full submission to the OSTP.

About the Contributors
Recommended For You
General

The Lighthouse Playbook

David Booth
General

The Case for Scaling Venture

Erik Torenberg
General

Death of Software. Nah.

Steven Sinofsky

Expert News by a16z

We have built a network of experts who are deeply rooted in technology and how it’s shaping our future. Subscribe to our newsletters to receive their perspectives.

Views expressed in “posts” (including podcasts, videos, and social media) are those of the individual a16z personnel quoted therein and are not the views of a16z Capital Management, L.L.C. (“a16z”) or its respective affiliates. a16z Capital Management is an investment adviser registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Registration as an investment adviser does not imply any special skill or training. The posts are not directed to any investors or potential investors, and do not constitute an offer to sell — or a solicitation of an offer to buy — any securities, and may not be used or relied upon in evaluating the merits of any investment.

The contents in here — and available on any associated distribution platforms and any public a16z online social media accounts, platforms, and sites (collectively, “content distribution outlets”) — should not be construed as or relied upon in any manner as investment, legal, tax, or other advice. You should consult your own advisers as to legal, business, tax, and other related matters concerning any investment. Any projections, estimates, forecasts, targets, prospects and/or opinions expressed in these materials are subject to change without notice and may differ or be contrary to opinions expressed by others. Any charts provided here or on a16z content distribution outlets are for informational purposes only, and should not be relied upon when making any investment decision. Certain information contained in here has been obtained from third-party sources, including from portfolio companies of funds managed by a16z. While taken from sources believed to be reliable, a16z has not independently verified such information and makes no representations about the enduring accuracy of the information or its appropriateness for a given situation. In addition, posts may include third-party advertisements; a16z has not reviewed such advertisements and does not endorse any advertising content contained therein. All content speaks only as of the date indicated.

Under no circumstances should any posts or other information provided on this website — or on associated content distribution outlets — be construed as an offer soliciting the purchase or sale of any security or interest in any pooled investment vehicle sponsored, discussed, or mentioned by a16z personnel. Nor should it be construed as an offer to provide investment advisory services; an offer to invest in an a16z-managed pooled investment vehicle will be made separately and only by means of the confidential offering documents of the specific pooled investment vehicles — which should be read in their entirety, and only to those who, among other requirements, meet certain qualifications under federal securities laws. Such investors, defined as accredited investors and qualified purchasers, are generally deemed capable of evaluating the merits and risks of prospective investments and financial matters.

There can be no assurances that a16z’s investment objectives will be achieved or investment strategies will be successful. Any investment in a vehicle managed by a16z involves a high degree of risk including the risk that the entire amount invested is lost. Any investments or portfolio companies mentioned, referred to, or described are not representative of all investments in vehicles managed by a16z and there can be no assurance that the investments will be profitable or that other investments made in the future will have similar characteristics or results. A list of investments made by funds managed by a16z is available here: https://a16z.com/investments/. Past results of a16z’s investments, pooled investment vehicles, or investment strategies are not necessarily indicative of future results. Excluded from this list are investments (and certain publicly traded cryptocurrencies/ digital assets) for which the issuer has not provided permission for a16z to disclose publicly. As for its investments in any cryptocurrency or token project, a16z is acting in its own financial interest, not necessarily in the interests of other token holders. a16z has no special role in any of these projects or power over their management. a16z does not undertake to continue to have any involvement in these projects other than as an investor and token holder, and other token holders should not expect that it will or rely on it to have any particular involvement.

With respect to funds managed by a16z that are registered in Japan, a16z will provide to any member of the Japanese public a copy of such documents as are required to be made publicly available pursuant to Article 63 of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act of Japan. Please contact compliance@a16z.com to request such documents.

For other site terms of use, please go here. Additional important information about a16z, including our Form ADV Part 2A Brochure, is available at the SEC’s website: http://www.adviserinfo.sec.gov.