President Trump has appointed 13 tech executives to his President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST), creating an advisory body that will help shape American AI policy for the next several years. The council reads like a who’s who of Silicon Valley power - but two notable absences are making headlines.
The Full Roster
The council will be co-chaired by David Sacks, who is stepping down from his role as White House AI and crypto czar, and Michael Kratsios, director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy.
The 13 appointed members include:
Tech Platform CEOs:
- Mark Zuckerberg (Meta, CEO)
- Sergey Brin (Google, co-founder)
- Safra Catz (Oracle, CEO)
- Michael Dell (Dell Technologies, CEO)
- Larry Ellison (Oracle, Executive Chairman)
Chip and Hardware:
- Jensen Huang (NVIDIA, CEO)
- Lisa Su (AMD, CEO)
Venture Capital:
- Marc Andreessen (a16z, co-founder)
Energy and Infrastructure:
- Jacob DeWitte (Oklo, CEO - nuclear energy)
- Bob Mumgaard (Commonwealth Fusion Systems, CEO)
Other Tech:
- Fred Ehrsam (Coinbase, co-founder)
- David Friedberg (Ohalo Genetics, CEO)
- John Martinis (UC Santa Barbara, professor emeritus - quantum computing)
Who’s Not on the List
The most talked-about exclusions are Elon Musk and Sam Altman. Both lead companies at the frontier of AI development - xAI and OpenAI respectively - yet neither made the cut.
A White House advisor told reporters the President “wants to ensure technological advancement benefits all Americans, and that requires a measured approach guided by seasoned leaders with a clear understanding of established regulations and risks.” The comment appears aimed at Musk, whose companies (Tesla, SpaceX, xAI) have repeatedly clashed with regulators.
Altman’s absence may relate to OpenAI’s recent controversies, including its Pentagon partnership that prompted senior researcher resignations and the ongoing tensions around the company’s transition to for-profit status.
The Conflict Question
Here’s the uncomfortable part: many council members lead companies facing active regulatory proceedings from the same government they’ll now advise.
According to The Register’s analysis, what distinguishes this PCAST from previous versions is the concentration of active tech CEOs whose companies collectively face regulatory action:
- Google (Brin) is defending multiple antitrust cases
- Meta (Zuckerberg) faces ongoing regulatory proceedings
- NVIDIA (Huang) is under scrutiny for market dominance in AI chips
- Oracle (Ellison, Catz) has substantial government contracts that could expand under AI initiatives
Three of these companies - Google, Meta, and NVIDIA - each donated $1 million to Trump’s inauguration while facing regulatory action the panel is positioned to influence.
Only one academic researcher (John Martinis) sits among the 13 appointees. Previous PCAST formations typically included more university scientists and independent researchers.
What They’ll Actually Do
The council will focus on:
- Pushing Trump’s national AI framework, which aims to replace state-level AI regulations with federal standards
- Advising on semiconductor policy, including export rules to China
- Workforce strategy as AI automation accelerates
- Nuclear energy expansion for AI infrastructure power needs
- Quantum computing national strategy
The first policy recommendations are expected within 90 days - right as Congress weighs major AI legislation and the Commerce Department finalizes semiconductor export rules.
The Sacks Shift
David Sacks’ move from AI czar to PCAST co-chair is significant. As AI czar, he had direct policy-making authority. As PCAST co-chair, he leads an advisory body that can only make recommendations.
This could mean Sacks wanted a broader portfolio (PCAST covers all science and technology, not just AI), or it could signal a strategic repositioning as the administration’s AI policy crystallizes.
What This Means for Privacy
The council’s composition suggests where AI policy is heading:
Likely directions:
- Federal preemption of state AI laws, eliminating the patchwork of regulations that California, Colorado, and other states have enacted
- Industry-friendly frameworks that prioritize innovation over precaution
- Reduced emphasis on algorithmic transparency requirements
- Continued expansion of AI in government and military applications
Less likely:
- Strong data protection requirements for AI training
- Mandatory algorithmic audits
- Restrictions on surveillance applications
- Consumer consent requirements for AI data collection
With tech executives dominating the advisory structure, expect policy recommendations that align with industry preferences. The one safeguard: PCAST only advises. Congress and executive agencies still make the actual rules.
But as anyone watching Washington knows, advisory recommendations have a way of becoming policy - especially when the advisors have direct lines to the Oval Office and control the infrastructure everyone else depends on.
The Timeline
The council can include up to 24 members, so more appointments may follow. Watch for:
- April 2026: First policy recommendations expected
- June 2026: Commerce Department semiconductor rule finalization
- Fall 2026: Congressional AI legislation likely to advance
The people shaping America’s AI future are now officially on the record. Whether that’s good news depends entirely on whether you think the companies that built these systems should write the rules governing them.