Trump enlists Big Tech chiefs for new AI advisory council

White House science and tech panels usually look like an academic conference, packed with university deans, lab researchers, and policy wonks. Trump’s latest lineup looks more like a Silicon Valley board meeting.

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Oracle CTO and executive chairman Larry Ellison, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang, and Google cofounder Sergey Brin will be the first four members of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST), according to the Wall Street Journal.

The high-powered quartet will advise Trump on artificial intelligence, the economy, education, and homeland security.

Big Tech takes the steering wheel

The panel, which will specifically weigh in on federal AI policy, will start with 13 members and could eventually expand to 24. It will be co-chaired by Trump's AI and crypto czar David Sacks alongside White House tech advisor Michael Kratsios.

According to the White House’s January charter, PCAST is tasked with providing scientific and technical information to guide policies related to the American economy, the workforce, and national security.

While Trump appointed a tech panel during his first term, it lacked this level of top-tier corporate firepower. These founders and CEOs also bring existing ties to the administration: Meta previously donated to Trump, Oracle served as the backbone of a deal to divest TikTok earlier this year, and both Zuckerberg and Brin attended Trump’s 2025 inauguration.

Why it matters

We think this move basically hands the pen on federal AI policy directly to the companies building the technology.

Trump spent the past year pushing to preempt state-level AI regulations. Bringing Huang, whose chips power the AI boom, alongside Zuckerberg and Brin right into the advisory room sends an unmistakable signal: federal tech policy will be designed around industry speed and competitiveness rather than restrictive safety guardrails.

For developers and startups, a unified federal framework might eliminate fragmented state rules, but having the industry's biggest incumbents advise on their own playing field carries obvious risks. When the executives holding the compute supply and platform monopolies write the recommendations, open competition rarely comes out ahead.