AI lobbying spending rises as companies press Washington on rules

AI lobbying spending has climbed to record levels for several major developers as the industry seeks to influence Washington’s approach to model releases, data centers and public disclosure rules. The Financial Times reported Monday, citing federal disclosures, that OpenAI and Anthropic sharply increased their lobbying outlays in the first half of the year, while Google and Microsoft reached quarterly levels not matched since 2020.

OpenAI spent $2.22 million on lobbying in the first six months of the year, nearly twice its spending in the same period of 2022, according to the FT. Anthropic’s lobbying expenses nearly tripled to $3.53 million over the same comparison period, the newspaper reported.

The rise in spending comes as federal agencies and international bodies move from broad statements on artificial intelligence toward more detailed processes. PYMNTS reported last week that AI oversight is increasingly being shaped through committees, consultations and comment periods rather than one broad federal rule.

Why are AI companies spending more on lobbying?

Lobbyists and policy specialists told the FT that AI companies are trying to build a stronger presence in Washington as policymakers consider tougher oversight. The issues include rules for releasing advanced models, policy governing data center expansion and whether developers should disclose model parameters to the public.

Federal lobbying disclosures give a periodic account of what companies spend to influence policy debates. In this case, the FT used those filings to track how fast the largest AI companies are increasing their engagement with lawmakers and regulators.

Amba Kak, co-executive director of the AI Now Institute and a former senior adviser on AI at the Federal Trade Commission during Joe Biden’s presidency, told the FT that the push has two aims. “The lobbying offensive has been as much about deterring regulation as making the case for an affirmative government industrial policy that supports the industry,” Kak said.

The regulatory agenda has become more urgent for AI companies after the government halted the launch of Anthropic’s Fable model last month on cybersecurity grounds, according to the FT. That decision put the release of new models at the center of the policy debate.

Joseph Hoefer, chief AI officer at Monument Advocacy, described the policy challenge to the FT as unusually broad. “It’s an export-controlled technology like semiconductors, an infrastructure build-out like telecoms or power, a procurement relationship like defence, and a liability question like the [social media] platforms, all at the same time,” Hoefer said. “No single playbook covers that.”

Recent oversight activity includes the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s search for candidates for the National Artificial Intelligence Advisory Committee and its Subcommittee on Artificial Intelligence and Law Enforcement, according to PYMNTS. The FTC and the Financial Stability Board are also seeking feedback on AI-related work.

PYMNTS reported that these developments point to a more procedural phase of AI oversight, with agencies and international bodies focusing on documentation, board accountability, vendor controls and corporate claims about AI products. For AI developers, that shift means policy influence is likely to depend less on a single legislative fight and more on sustained engagement across multiple regulators and advisory processes.

This story draws on original reporting from PYMNTS.