The prospective Trump administration is poised to bring significant shifts in the government's interaction with technology corporations, potentially impacting users in various aspects, from the online content they access to the possibility of encountering biased AI systems.

President-elect Donald Trump and his supporters have often clashed with major tech firms, accusing them of wielding excessive influence and sometimes using it adversely against him. It was during Trump's previous term that initial discussions about a TikTok ban emerged, and a lawsuit was initiated that could potentially lead to the dismantling of Google. He attempted to erode legal safeguards for tech platforms and even threatened to imprison Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg. However, since his previous term, Trump appears to have made a dramatic reversal on numerous tech-related matters.

He now suggests that he no longer seeks to ban TikTok or dismantle Google, although it remains uncertain whether he can halt the momentum on these issues. With his own social media platform, Truth Social, he would likely be subject to any new regulations he imposes on his competitors. Additionally, he has Elon Musk as an advisor, who advocates for deregulation and uninhibited technological advancement. As tech executives, many of whom have sought to ingratiate themselves by congratulating Trump promptly upon the election outcome, await the inauguration, here are the top five questions concerning the president-elect's potential influence on the tech sector:

Trump once attempted to prohibit TikTok in the U.S. via executive order due to national security concerns, but he has since changed his stance. In June, Trump stated in a video posted on the platform that he would "never ban TikTok." However, it is unclear whether he can fulfill this promise.

A law passed by Congress this year, initiated under his leadership, will ban TikTok in the U.S. if it is not separated from its Chinese parent company, which has indicated it will not comply. TikTok has filed a lawsuit to block the law, and the case is pending a federal judicial panel's decision. The ban is set to take effect a day before the inauguration, suggesting that Trump may have missed his opportunity to influence the outcome.

Trump could request Congress to repeal the law, but experts believe such an effort would likely fail. He then has two probable options: he could instruct the attorney general to refrain from enforcing the law or declare that TikTok is no longer bound by the law, according to University of Minnesota Associate Law Professor Alan Rozenshtein. The first approach would involve communicating to TikTok's tech partners, such as Apple, which could face penalties under the law if they continue to host TikTok on their app store, that they "should feel free to continue business with TikTok," Rozenshtein explained.

"But again, if you’re the general counsel of Apple, does that really give you a lot of confidence? You’re still violating the law. Trump is very mercurial." The latter would rely on a provision of the law that grants the president some authority to determine if a "qualified divestiture" of TikTok has occurred. In theory, Trump could claim that it has, regardless of the truth, and then hope it isn't challenged in court. "It’s not clear who could sue to enforce the law. Congress isn’t allowed to sue to enforce its own laws," Rozenshtein said, adding that few parties could claim "concrete injury" to sue if Trump falsely asserts qualified divestiture has taken place.

As Trump enters the White House, many within the AI industry, including some of its leaders, are advocating for regulations to mitigate AI's most harmful potential consequences. Trump acknowledged in a Fox News interview over the summer that AI has "tremendous potential but it’s also got potential to destroy … we’ve got to be very careful with artificial intelligence."

Musk, who is now advising Trump, also once called for a pause in the technology's development before launching his own AI company. However, Trump seems likely to rescind the few guidelines that exist for AI companies. The Republican Party's election platform included a commitment to repeal an executive order signed by President Joe Biden that outlined comprehensive actions to manage some of the worst risks from AI, including discrimination and threats to national security.

The Republican document claimed the executive order contained "radical leftwing ideas" that impeded innovation. "I think whatever replaces (the Biden order), if anything does, will probably be less regulation heavy," said John Villasenor, faculty co-director of the UCLA Institute for Technology, Law and Policy. However, he suggested that Trump could advocate for federal laws that preempt state AI regulations on issues like the use of AI in hiring to prevent a patchwork of different rules that could complicate tech companies' operations. Many Republicans are eager for the Trump administration to address what they perceive as "censorship" of conservative voices by many mainstream social media platforms. Trump himself once threatened to veto an annual defense bill unless Congress repealed the legal protections for social media companies under a law known as Section 230. Trump's nominee to lead the Federal Communications Commission, Brendan Carr, recently cautioned tech giants that the new administration would "take broad ranging actions to restore" Americans' First Amendment rights.

This could entail reforming or reinterpreting Section 230, which shields tech platforms from liability for their users' posts and allows the platforms to moderate content as they see fit. "(Carr) wants to, essentially, interpret Section 230 in a way that says that if they take down certain speech, then they lose their protection under the first part of" the law, said Gigi Sohn, a lawyer who worked for the FCC under Democratic chairman Tom Wheeler. In essence, Carr could attempt to pass a rule that would enable suing tech platforms under this new interpretation. Ultimately, this could hinder tech companies' efforts to reduce hateful or false content on their platforms. However, it is unclear whether the FCC has the authority to implement such a change.

While Democrats have also called for Section 230 reform, their concerns differ: they worry it allows tech companies to avoid accountability for not adequately moderating harmful content. Evan Greer, director of the digital rights advocacy group Fight for the Future, expressed concern that Carr's discussion of contentious social media issues might be a "very convenient way of distracting" from his other plans, including rolling back net neutrality. Any changes to increase platform liability could also directly affect Trump's Truth Social and Musk's X, complicating decisions on how to proceed with the issue.

With Lina Khan at the helm of the Federal Trade Commission, the Biden administration has overseen a series of antitrust actions against tech giants. While Vice President-elect JD Vance has praised Khan's approach, she is widely expected to be dismissed when Trump introduces a more business-friendly agenda at the White House. Days before the election, Musk posted on X that Khan "will be fired soon."

This could signal a return to greater corporate consolidation – Khan opposed mergers like Microsoft and Activision Blizzard, and Kroger and Albertsons – and could facilitate companies raising prices. "For example, if a large established company wants to acquire an up-and-coming, highly successful AI startup, whereas under the Biden administration, you might have had the FTC essentially put the brakes on that, you may be less likely to see that happening under the new Trump administration," Villasenor said. This approach also raises questions about whether Trump would encourage his Justice Department to ease up on the fight to dismantle Google and how the DOJ would handle ongoing antitrust cases against tech giants, including Apple. If there is one tech policy issue where Democrats and Republicans might find common ground under a Trump presidency, it may be the already bipartisan issue of children's safety or privacy online.

However, experts are skeptical after years of discussion, disagreement over the appropriate approach, and little action. "We see a lot of tech policy that’s really just sort of ‘made for TV’ versus made for, like, actually passing through Congress or legislating in any meaningful way that will stand up in court," Greer said. Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee and Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut have urged Congress to pass the Kids Online Safety Act soon, after it passed the Senate over the summer. Although it’s the closest lawmakers have come to passing youth online safety legislation in years, the bill still faces opposition. House Speaker Mike Johnson said last month that while he likes the idea behind the bill, he finds the details “very problematic.”