The following is part of our annual publication Selected Issues for Boards of Directors in 2026. Explore all topics or download the PDF.
AI adoption is now mainstream: 88% of businesses use AI in at least one function, with global spending expected to exceed $1.5 trillion in 2025 and approach $2 trillion in 2026. As
2026 promises to be a year that will demand both agility and strategic foresight from boards of directors and management as they navigate unprecedented challenges.
The following is part of our annual publication Selected Issues for Boards of Directors in 2026. Explore all topics or download the PDF.
In 2026, boards of directors will continue to navigate a shifting U.S. regulatory environment shaped by an assertive and transactional approach to trade and national security. Uncertainty surrounding the most significant U.S.
Introduction[1]
In this three-part series, we discuss the outlook for whistleblower programs in the United States under the new administration. Second, we review initiatives relating to whistleblower reports in other jurisdictions over the past year. Third, we address emerging issues and considerations for companies in relation to whistleblower reports.
On December 18, 2025, President Trump signed the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (“NDAA”), a sweeping defense spending bill that brings a number of changes to the U.S. outbound investment security program, U.S. economic sanctions, and biotechnology restrictions relating to federal procurement. First, the NDAA includes the Comprehensive Outbound Investment National Security (“COINS”) Act, which provides
As states continue to grapple with establishing regulatory frameworks for the most powerful artificial intelligence (“AI”) systems, New York has joined California in targeting frontier AI models with the Responsible AI Safety and Education Act (the “RAISE Act” or the “Act”).[1] Signed into law on December 19, 2025 by Governor Hochul, the Act creates
On December 12, 2025, the Digital Markets Act (“DMA”) High-Level Group (“HLG”)[1] endorsed a joint paper on the regulatory interplay on AI-related issues.[2] This paper assesses how to best implement the different legal frameworks that govern AI systems. It underlines the importance of achieving a coherent and consistent implementation of these frameworks and
For more insights and analysis from Cleary lawyers on policy and regulatory developments from a legal perspective, visit What to Expect From a Second Trump Administration.
On December 11, 2025, President Donald Trump signed an executive order titled Establishing A National Policy Framework For Artificial Intelligence (the “Order”)[1]. The Order’s policy objective
Form 20-F is the form used for an annual report of a foreign private issuer (“FPI”) filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC” or the “Commission”). This alert memorandum summarizes considerations that will affect the preparation of the annual report on Form 20-F for the year ending on December 31, 2025 (the
This article was authored by Daniel Ilan, Rahul Mukhi, Prudence Buckland, and Melissa Faragasso from Cleary Gottlieb, and Brian Lichter and Elijah Seymour from Stroz Friedberg, a LevelBlue company.
Recent disclosures by Anthropic and OpenAI highlight a pivotal shift in the cyber threat landscape: AI is no longer merely a tool that aids attackers, in some cases, it