I believe in individual choice, economic freedom, and the right to exchange personal data for value. Just as free trade maximizes opportunity in traditional markets, the free exchange of data is essential for a thriving digital economy. But instead of letting us decide how to use our own data, the government has imposed a hidden tariff on information—restricting access to global social media and AI platforms under the guise of national security.
To me, this is no different from a tariff on goods. Just as trade barriers drive up prices and limit competition, these data restrictions artificially inflate the cost of digital engagement, reduce innovation, and take away my ability to optimize my own economic value.
About the Author: Jeff Hulett leads Personal Finance Reimagined, a decision-making and financial education platform. He teaches personal finance at James Madison University and provides personal finance seminars. Check out his book -- Making Choices, Making Money: Your Guide to Making Confident Financial Decisions.
Jeff is a career banker, data scientist, behavioral economist, and choice architect. Jeff has held banking and consulting leadership roles at Wells Fargo, Citibank, KPMG, and IBM.
My Data, My Choice—But the Government Says Otherwise
I recognize that my data has value—to me, to businesses, and to the platforms that monetize it. I should be able to decide how I trade my data for value. If I want highly curated, tailored entertainment, and I am willing to provide my data in exchange, that is my choice. It is a fair trade for me.
But the government does not think I should have that choice. Instead, it restricts my access to certain social media and AI platforms, deciding for me what I can and cannot use. They say it is about national security, but I have seen this excuse before.
The National Security Excuse Rings Hollow
Throughout history, the U.S. government has framed heavy-handed interventions as necessary for national defense, only for them to be later revealed as harmful and discriminatory. We all remember:
The McCarthy Era, when fear-driven policies led to baseless blacklists, costing innocent people their jobs and reputations.
Japanese-American Internment Camps, where American citizens were rounded up and imprisoned under the guise of protecting the country—an action now widely recognized as a dark stain on U.S. history.
I cannot help but see today’s data restrictions as another misguided intervention. Is this really about security, or is it about economic protectionism, race-baiting, and tax revenue? It feels less like a defense strategy and more like a way to shield politically connected tech companies from competition while keeping tighter government control over digital commerce. Let's face it, the only difference between the American-based Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube - on the one hand - and the Chinese-based TikTok on the other hand - is WHERE THEY PAY TAXES. They all use similar algorithms to use data and maximize engagement from that data. By the way - if the Chinese Government wants to learn my silly entertainment habits - have at it! For me, it is part of the trade and it is a trade I am willing to make.
How the Data Tariff Hurts All of Us
These restrictions do not just inconvenience me—they have serious economic consequences for all Americans:
Higher Costs, Less Consumer Value – Just as tariffs make goods more expensive, data restrictions limit access to the best digital services. Instead of engaging with the most innovative platforms, I am forced into less personalized, less efficient alternatives that the government deems acceptable.
A modern example: Content creation is the modern-day equivalent of entrepreneurship, allowing individuals to leverage their unique skills and passions to build businesses, connect with global audiences, and drive economic growth. These entrepreneurs—whether they are YouTubers, Instagram influencers, or TikTok creators—make money not just from ads but also through partnerships, merchandise, and direct support from their followers. The democratization of content creation has opened up new doors of opportunity, empowering individuals to turn their creativity into revenue.
But just as tariffs block market access and limit potential growth in traditional sectors, data restrictions are preventing a growing class of digital entrepreneurs from fully capitalizing on their opportunities. These restrictions hinder creators from accessing global audiences, limiting their ability to build, expand, and innovate. Government restrictions hurt entrepreneurs and favor the big tech platforms. Why - because the big tech platforms spend over $50 million annually on U.S. Federal Government lobbying. And that number will likely ONLY increase.
Complacent Tech Companies, Less Innovation – In trade, tariffs protect industries from competition—allowing them to stagnate. For some companies, they feel it is easier to lobby for protection than to compete. The same thing is happening in tech. By shielding domestic social media and AI companies from global competition, these restrictions make U.S. firms complacent, reducing their incentive to innovate. The end result? We all get worse products, slower innovations, and fewer technological breakthroughs.
Lost Economic Opportunities – Just as tariffs misallocate jobs, data restrictions block opportunities for content creators, entrepreneurs, and businesses that rely on global platforms to monetize their skills. If my business model depends on access to certain AI tools or global social media markets, why should the government have the right to take that from me?
Lower Economic Mobility for Future Generations – Just as tariffs raise consumer costs and reduce wages over time, data restrictions are creating a fragmented digital economy where AI progress slows, tech job growth weakens, and future generations inherit fewer opportunities. The digital world should be expanding economic possibilities, not restricting them.
Free Markets Must Extend to the Data Economy
I have spent much time thinking about why tariffs fail, and the same economic logic applies to government-imposed restrictions on data exchange. These policies do not protect us; they limit our choices, stifle innovation, and hold back economic progress.
If the government truly wants to ensure a secure and prosperous future, it should stop trying to control how I use my data and start trusting individuals to make their own decisions. The more a consumer is free to exercise their data choice, the more likely entrepreneurs will create digital solutions to fulfill their preferences. Competition for those consumers will sharpen the products and services. Economic growth and prosperity will be the reward for fulfilling those choices. I know the value of my data, and I should have the right to exchange it for services that benefit me.
Just as protectionist trade policies weaken the economy, these protectionist data policies are weakening the digital economy. If we do not push back, we will find ourselves in a future where government-controlled digital access robs us of the very freedoms and opportunities that the internet was meant to create.
The future of the data economy should be driven by personal choice—not government intervention.
Comments