Ctrl+AI+Reg - 20 May 2026

May 19, 2026

∙ Paid

In this issue:

Updates from G7, US x China, EU, France, US (x2), Japan (x2), South Korea, Singapore, Australia, United Arab Emirates.

See all real time updates in the Global AI Regulation Tracker (English version | Chinese version)

A new AI-enabled search feature on the Global AI Regulation Tracker.

🇺🇸🇨🇳 [19 May 2026] China and US agree to AI dialogue: China’s Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Guo Jiakun has confirmed during a regular press conference that President Xi and President Trump have discussed AI regulation and agreed to have dialogue and cooperation: “As two leading AI powers, China and the US need to work together to promote the development and improve the governance of AI to make sure it will better contribute to social progress and the common welfare of the international community. During President Trump’s visit to China, the two heads of state had constructive exchanges on AI and agreed to launch government-to-government dialogue on AI.”
🌐 [12 May 2026] G7 and EU Commission publish guideline on SBOM for AI minimum elements: The European Commission and covernment agencies from Group of Seven (G7) countries have released joint guidance titled “Software Bill of Materials for AI - Minimum Elements” to enhance transparency in AI systems and supply chains for public and private sector stakeholders. This guidance outlines the importance of a software bill of materials (SBOM) as an “ingredients list” that aids organizations in understanding their supply chains and making informed risk management decisions regarding critical systems.

🇪🇺 [19 May 2026] EU Commission releases draft guidelines on the classification of high-risk AI systems: The European Commission has published draft guidelines on the classification of high-risk AI systems to assist providers, deployers, and market surveillance authorities in determining whether an AI system qualifies as high-risk, thereby ensuring consistent application and enforcement of Article 6 of the AI Act. These guidelines interpret key concepts relevant to classification and provide practical examples of AI systems that should or should not be deemed high-risk, although the examples are not exhaustive and may be updated. The guidelines are structured according to Article 6, which identifies two scenarios for high-risk classification: systems intended as safety components of products requiring third-party conformity assessments, and systems falling under specific use cases listed in Annex III of the AI Act. Sections III and IV of the guidelines address these categories, and stakeholders can access individual sections for targeted feedback.

Ctrl+AI+Reg