As some lawmakers consider reintroducing the American Innovation and Choice Online Act (AICOA), American businesses and consumers should understand what’s really at stake: the wholesale adoption of European regulatory philosophy that would kneecap U.S. technology leadership while handing advantages to foreign competitors, especially China.
The architects of AICOA aren’t shy about their inspirations. Senator Amy Klobuchar—widely regarded as harboring national political aspirations—has been particularly vocal in her admiration for Europe’s aggressive regulatory approach. She has consistently championed the EU’s Digital Markets Act as a model worth emulating, co-signed letters praising Brussels’ competition enforcement and criticized American courts for maintaining traditional antitrust principles.
The 2020 House Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee report that laid AICOA’s foundation reads like a love letter to European regulatory theory. With significant input from Lina Khan, the report dismissed the consumer-welfare standard that has guided successful U.S. antitrust policy for decades, instead framing technology markets as requiring permanent “rules of the road” rather than case-by-case enforcement. Its authors even boasted about reaching conclusions similar to European regulators, as if regulatory convergence with Brussels should be an American policy goal.
Undercutting America on the World Stage
Here’s the problem: The Trump administration has fought hard against EU overreach targeting American companies. Adopting DMA-style legislation here would pull the rug out from under those efforts. How can the U.S. credibly push back against discriminatory European regulations if we’re implementing the same playbook at home?
Passing AICOA would send an unmistakable signal globally: abandon proven antitrust principles in favor of sector-specific regulations targeting successful companies. Other countries would inevitably follow suit, creating a patchwork of conflicting rules that stifle innovation while dramatically increasing compliance costs for American firms.
Handing Another Advantage to China
Europe’s regulatory crusade primarily hits American companies while leaving Chinese competitors largely untouched. If we import that model, we’ll be handicapping our own tech sector in its competition with Beijing—just as technological and economic competition with China intensifies.
This concern is not theoretical: look at the tragic collapse of American robotics company iRobot, which was blocked by the EU (with the support of then-FTC Chair Khan) from entering a life-saving merger with Amazon, only to be sold for parts to a Chinese firm. This incident, which employed AICOA-style antitrust theory, cost American jobs, set back cutting-edge innovation in an emerging field and literally handed China a U.S. company. Congress must not follow this failed path.
American innovation thrives under principles of free enterprise and competition based on merit. AICOA abandons those principles for a regulatory approach that’s already proving costly and counterproductive in Europe. Our policymakers should be charting an American path forward, not following Europe’s lead off a cliff.
Image via Unsplash.