The restrictions in the executive orders are set to take effect in just 45 days, meaning there is a very tight time frame for government officials, consumers, and companies to adjust. Pushback to the TikTok and WeChat bans will likely spur renewed interest in this question. Over the past several decades, presidents have increasingly turned to IEEPA to carry out foreign economic policy, almost entirely beyond the scope of any congressional review. Yet this decision is likely to further accelerate debates over reforming IEEPA and the need to rein in this presidential power and prevent its abuse. The White House likely chose to act through IEEPA precisely because it grants the administration such wide latitude to intervene however it deems necessary. Acting through IEEPA rather than CFIUS allows the White House to target WeChat in addition to TikTok, and to require not only divestment but to block any future transactions with Americans. (In this case, both the TikTok and WeChat orders reference a prior announcement from last May on “Securing the Information and Communications Technology and Services Supply Chain” as the basis for action.) IEEPA has broader jurisdiction and a more extensive list of remedies than CFIUS. Designed to allow presidents to respond to emergency national security concerns, IEEPA grants the White House sweepingly broad authority to intervene in economic markets, so long as actions are tied to a formally declared emergency.
The Trump administration, however, did not issue a CFIUS declaration, and instead acted through the second channel available to it: the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). In recent weeks there was growing speculation that CFIUS would soon issue an order requiring ByteDance to sell TikTok U.S., with Microsoft emerging as the most likely buyer. market when its Chinese owner ByteDance purchased the musical.ly app and rebranded it, had reportedly been under CFIUS review since late last year. The first is through the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), which is an interagency committee with authority to review, block, and where necessary compel divestment of foreign acquisitions of U.S. There are two main avenues the administration could in principle use to limit the actions of foreign companies in the U.S. Does Trump have the authority to do this? technology companies cannot operate freely in China. It also reflects some officials’ desire for greater reciprocity in the U.S.-China relationship, given that many U.S. action against hardware companies such as Huawei and ZTE. The move is a significant escalation in ongoing technology tensions between the U.S. officials also worry the apps censor political speech and could be used to spread misinformation.īehind the scenes there are several broader motivations likely also contributing to American action against TikTok and WeChat. Like other social networking apps, both TikTok and WeChat collect extensive data on their users, and the core American concern appears to be that the Chinese government will be able to access this data and potentially leverage it for espionage or blackmail. as TikTok, it is extensively used by the Chinese diaspora to connect with family and friends in China. WeChat is a “super app” which includes messaging, social media, and payment platforms while it is not as popular in the U.S. TikTok is a social networking app for sharing short user-produced video clips, popular particularly among teenagers, with an estimated 100 million users in the U.S. Instead, the concern is primarily around data security and data privacy.
Yet on the surface neither appear to touch on traditional issues of national security, such as access to classified information on weapons or intelligence systems. market due to national security concerns.
The executive orders argue TikTok and WeChat should be banned from the U.S. Twitter geoffreygertz Why is the US government banning TikTok and WeChat?
0 kommentar(er)
