• The Trump administration released an "AI Action Plan" on Wednesday.
• It proposes withholding federal funding from states that have "burdensome" AI regulations.
• Republicans previously tried to ban states from regulating AI via the "Big Beautiful Bill."

The Trump administration really doesn't want states to go hard on AI regulation.

Tucked into the White House's new "AI Action Plan," released on Wednesday, is a proposal to limit AI-related federal funding to states that impose "burdensome" regulations. The plan argues that doing so would be wasteful.

At the same time, the 28-page document leaves room to allow states to continue regulating AI in some form via "prudent laws that are not unduly restrictive to innovation."

"AI is far too important to smother in bureaucracy at this early stage, whether at the state or Federal level," reads the document, which was authored by White House Crypto Czar David Sacks, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Office of Science and Technology Policy Director Michael Kratsios.

The plan says that federal agencies will "consider a state's AI regulatory climate when making funding decisions" and "limit funding if the state's AI regulatory regimes may hinder the effectiveness of that funding or award."

It also recommends that the Federal Communications Commission review states' AI laws to see whether they interfere with the agency's authority.

Republicans previously tried to do a version of this via the "Big Beautiful Bill." The House version of the bill would have outright banned states from enforcing AI laws for 10 years, while a proposal by Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas would've tried to accomplish the same thing by conditioning federal funding to states.

That provision was met with internal GOP resistance and was ultimately stripped out of the bill in a 99-1 vote before it passed.

In addition to pushing for lighter regulation on AI, the administration's action plan also called for quicker development of AI data centers and the promotion of American AI technology abroad to counter Chinese influence.

The plan is likely to be received well by the tech industry broadly, which has pushed for lighter regulations.

On Wednesday, IBM Chairman and CEO Arvind Krishna praised the plan, calling it a "critical step towards harnessing AI for sustained economic growth and national competitiveness."

"IBM applauds the White House for its bold and timely AI Action Plan, which prioritizes open innovation, strengthens US technological leadership, and proposes a supportive regulatory environment for AI development and deployment," Krishna said in a statement.

• A consulting firm found that tech companies are "strategically overpaying" recruits with AI experience.
• They found firms pay premiums of up to $200,000 for data scientists with machine learning skills.
• The report also tracked a rise in bonuses for lower-level software engineers and analysts.

The AI talent bidding war is heating up, and the data scientists and software engineers behind the tech are benefiting from being caught in the middle.

Many tech companies are "strategically overpaying" recruits with AI experience, shelling out premiums of up to $200,000 for some roles with machine learning skills, J. Thelander Consulting, a compensation data and consulting firm for the private capital market, found in a recent report.

The report, compiled from a compensation analysis of roles across 153 companies, showed that data scientists and analysts with machine learning skills tend to receive a higher premium than software engineers with the same skills. However, the consulting firm also tracked a rise in bonuses for lower-level software engineers and analysts.

The payouts are a big bet, especially among startups. About half of the surveyed companies paying premiums for employees with AI skills had no revenue in the past year, and a majority (71%) had no profit.

Smaller firms need to stand out and be competitive among Big Tech giants — a likely driver behind the pricey recruitment tactic, a spokesperson for the consulting firm told Business Insider.

But while the J. Thelander Consulting report focused on smaller firms, some Big Tech companies have also recently made headlines for their sky-high recruitment incentives.

Meta was in the spotlight last month after Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, said the social media giant had tried to poach his best employees with $100 million signing bonuses. 

While Business Insider previously reported that Altman later quipped that none of his "best people" had been enticed by the deal, Meta's chief technology officer, Andrew Bosworth, said in an interview with CNBC that Altman "neglected to mention that he's countering those offers."

• Logan Kilpatrick is Google's head of developer relations and runs the company's AI Studio.
• He's also become a one-man marketing machine, regularly hyping up Google's AI products on X.
• Google has sometimes struggled to get credit in the AI race, but Kilpatrick told BI he's keen to change that narrative.

He's not an executive, a company spokesperson, or a world-class researcher. But he might be Google's secret weapon in winning the AI race.

If you're an AI developer, you've likely heard of Logan Kilpatrick. As Google's head of developer relations, Kilpatrick, 27, runs AI Studio, the company's AI developer software program.

He has also become Google's delegate for speaking to the AI community and — intentionally or not — a one-man marketing machine for the company's AI products. He's a prolific poster on X, where he'll sometimes hype Google's latest Gemini releases or tease something new on the horizon.

Above all, he is one of the people tasked with translating Google's AI breakthroughs to the global developer community. It's a crucial job at a time when the search giant needs to not just convince developers to use its products, but capture a new generation of builders entering the fray as AI makes it easier for anyone to make software.

"If you want AI to have the level of impact on humanity that I think it could have, you need to be able to provide a platform for developers in order to go and do this stuff," he told Business Insider in an interview. "The reality is there's a thousand and one things that Google is never going to build, and doesn't make sense for us to build, that developers want to build."

Company insiders say Google has recognized Kilpatrick's strength and given him more responsibilities and visibility. He could be seen onstage at this year's Google I/O conference and even had a fireside chat with Google cofounder Sergey Brin.

"People really crave legitimacy, authenticity, and competency, and Logan combines all three," Asara Near, a startup founder who has occasionally contacted Kilpatrick with development questions, told BI.

LoganGPT

In 2022, OpenAI was preparing to launch ChatGPT and fire the starting gun on one of history's most profound technological shifts. Kilpatrick, who has a technical background and worked at Apple and NASA, saw an online job ad for OpenAI and was soon facing a tricky decision: to work at what was then Sam Altman's little-known startup, or take a gig at IBM.

He decided that OpenAI was worth a shot — and within a few months, found himself at the center of the biggest tech launch since the debut of the iPhone in 2007.

"The OpenAI experience was a startup experience for about six months and then it became basically a hyperscaler," he told BI. It was chaotic, but it helped Kilpatrick learn how to build an ecosystem and cut his teeth as the developers' go-to guy. There, developers nicknamed him "LoganGPT."

When he left OpenAI in 2024 for Google, developers and peers made clear it was a huge loss for the ChatGPT maker, and a big win for Google in the AI talent transfer window. AI Studio was then still a project inside Google's Labs division, and Kilpatrick and his team were tasked with migrating it into a fully-fledged product inside Google's Cloud unit. It was again like going from zero to one: AI Studio was pre-revenue with no customers, but with a long tail of developers ready to jump on board.

"It has felt oddly almost like the same exact experience I've lived through at two different companies and two different cultures," he told BI.

In May this year, Kilpatrick was promoted, and his team running AI Studio was moved from the Cloud unit to Google DeepMind, bringing them closer to the researchers working on the underlying models and the employees working on its Gemini chatbot.

"He's kind of all over the place, and that's his superpower," said one senior employee who requested anonymity because they were not permitted to speak to the media. They said that Google has put Kilpatrick in charge of more products as leaders have recognized his ability to engage so effectively with the developer community. "Logan is 90% of Google's marketing," they said.

Helping Google win

On paper, Google is an AI winner. The reality is more complicated.

Its latest Gemini 2.0 Pro model ranks top of multiple leaderboards across a range of testing areas, but this hasn't always been reflected in the number of users. Google's CEO, Sundar Pichai, said in May that the company's Gemini app has more than 400 million monthly active users. That's well behind the 500 million weekly active users for ChatGPT, according to figures shared by Altman in April.

"DeepMind doesn't get nearly as much credit and attention as they deserve, and that's because comms is vastly underperforming capabilities," communications executive Lulu Meservey posted on X in May. Responding to another person, she wrote: "Logan is like 90% of their comms."

Some of the struggle, insiders say, is due to Google owning multiple products that aren't always clearly distinct. Developers can build using Vertex in Google Cloud or AI Studio. Meanwhile Google has a consumer-facing app simply called Gemini. The same models aren't necessarily always available across all three places at the same time, which can get confusing for users and developers.

There's also the problem of being a quarter-century-old tech behemoth with more nimble startups nipping at its heels. "OpenAI can put all their messaging arrows behind one thing, while Google has messaging arrows behind 10,000 things," former Google product manager Rajat Paharia told BI.

Kilpatrick recognizes that Google has work to do. "I think Google on a net basis is doing so much in the world right now, and AI is around everything that we're doing, and I think a lot of narrative doesn't capture innovation is happening," he said.

A big part of Kilpatrick's job is trying to cement that narrative among the global developer base. At OpenAI, Sam Altman's Jobsian showmanship has made him a highly effective salesman both for his company's products and his vision for the future of this technology. Or, as Paharia described Altman to BI, a "showman with rizz."

Google may have found its equivalent in Kilpatrick. He told BI that he often posts on X because it has become something of a town square for AI developers and enthusiasts, all champing at the bit for the latest crumb of news. It's a community filled with hype, AI "vagueposting", and steeped deeply in lore (what did Ilya see?).

On a day that OpenAI's latest release sucking is grabbing everyone's attention, Kilpatrick may log on and post a single word — "Gemini" — just to rev the hype engine a little.

Kilpatrick often has "a thousand" emails from developers that need responding to, he told BI. "I spend probably as much time as I physically can responding to stuff these days," he said. And that's between the numerous product meetings (he had 22 meetings scheduled on the day we spoke in early July, 23 the day before). He once posted on X: "I am online 7 days a week, ~8+ hours a day. If you need something as you build with Gemini, please ping me!"

Developers say they like that Kilpatrick takes the time to engage and listen to their feedback. "The few times I've emailed him to get help with something, they near-instantly responded and helped resolve the issue," said Near, the startup founder. "This is the opposite of my experience through normal support channels."

Andrew Curran, an AI commentator who frequently posts to X, wrote last month that Kilpatrick had been "an incredible hire" for Google. "To a lot of people he is now the face of Gemini, I bet most people don't even remember his OAI days," he wrote.

Kilpatrick told BI that because he is a developer himself, he finds it easy to understand the core target user. He said this has helped in building out Google's AI Studio, and that engaging with developers comes naturally. "It's just the obvious thing to do if you want to build a product for developers, is like, go talk to your users," he said.

But the definition of developer is changing with approaches like vibe coding, which lets non-technical people create software by describing what they'd like to an AI tool.

"What it means to be a developer right now looks a little different than it did two years ago or three years ago, and I think it's going to look fundamentally different in 10 years," said Kilpatrick. He believes the developer group will "massively expand" in the next five years. His job at Google is to make the next generation believe Google is where they should be developing, but that job is also evolving in this new era of artificial intelligence.

"Our mandate is actually AI builders, already encompassing this group of people who maybe don't identify as developers and don't write code, but they build software using AI, and I think that's going to accelerate in the next few years," he said.

Have something to share? Contact this reporter via email at [email protected] or Signal at 628-228-1836. Use a personal email address and a nonwork device; here's our guide to sharing information securely.

• Patrick Lyons was laid off from Microsoft twice and worked there for a total of six years.
• Despite layoffs, Lyons maintained financial stability through side businesses and severance.
• Lyons advises pursuing monetizable passions to mitigate the impact of potential layoffs.

This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Patrick Lyons, a 29-year-old ex-Microsoft employee, based in Austin. It's been edited for length and clarity.

After five years at Microsoft, the last three of which I was a technical product manager for Microsoft Teams, I felt fulfilled and completely secure in my job.

I learned new things every day, pushed boundaries, and collaborated with brilliant minds. I saw how people needed me and called upon me at work for my expertise, and it brought me a real sense of purpose.

I had also been running three side businesses outside of work for several years, namely an online fitness coaching company. This allowed me to pursue my fitness passion while having bidirectional income streams. I had no plans for anything to change.

Then, in October 2024, I woke up to an early call from my VP letting me know that my role had been permanently eliminated due to business restructuring. I was shocked, but my next thought was, "How can I get rehired?"

During my unemployment, I enjoyed my hobbies

The next day, I started looking at Microsoft's internal job portal, which I'd only have access to for two more weeks. I didn't have any success in that period, so I started applying to jobs at other companies while keeping an eye on Microsoft openings.

Despite the stress about my sudden layoff, I was financially stable because of my businesses and a generous severance.

I spent the next few months applying to jobs and pouring my time into hobbies like improv comedy, fitness, and movies. It was one of the best times of my life. I started having such a good time away from work that a big part of me started questioning if I shouldn't go back to corporate at all and just fully commit to my fitness businesses.

I kept finding myself coming back to how much I missed Microsoft

I missed the ritual of logging into Microsoft Teams, doing my job, and collaborating with the same great people. I loved feeling as though I was really contributing to something larger than myself.

Microsoft's work culture is unbeatable. The idea of a growth mindset was tangible in our daily work, and our expectation was not to be a "know-it-all" but a "learn-it-all." I was surrounded by brilliant minds who wanted to help me become just as brilliant, not put me down for making mistakes or questioning the status quo.

A few months into unemployment, a former mentor of mine at Microsoft forwarded my résumé to a hiring manager, and I got rehired at Microsoft as a program manager for Azure, a cloud computing platform.

I got rehired and laid off in two months

When I returned to Microsoft, I treated my job the same as before, but I doubled down on my communication to make sure I was always on the same page with my team and superiors. It might sound counterintuitive, but I felt even more job security this second time around, because Microsoft had invested a massive amount of money into Azure.

Two months later, I woke up to a nearly identical message inviting me to a meeting where I would be laid off again. It was so jarring. I've already started applying to jobs again, but to be honest, I would still go back to Microsoft if I had the chance.

Even though Microsoft can be political at times, as there is a clear hierarchical structure in which you often have to cater to leaders' preferences, I feel as though I've learned how to navigate it. I can't always just "do" things; I need to consistently present and seek out buy-ins from various leaders.

My advice for people going through layoffs

I've stayed so level-headed while navigating two layoffs because I have diverse income streams.

My businesses allow me to completely support myself and remain in a comfortable financial position. However, I'm still choosing to seek out full-time employment because of health insurance and my desire for multiple streams of income.

I don't think it's possible to be lay-off proof, but you can limit the ability of a layoff to cause harm to your life. If you have something outside of work that you're passionate about that you can realistically monetize, do it.

If you have a unique layoff experience you'd like to share, please email the editor, Manseen Logan, at [email protected].

• Alvaro Munevar Jr. leveraged middle management jobs to help him retire early from his tech career.
• Now, Big Tech companies are culling middle managers, a reduction that Munevar Jr. said makes sense.
• He said he witnessed how middle managers allowed fiefdoms to thrive and slowed down productivity.

I spent nearly all of my 30-year tech career in middle management. I managed teams that built and delivered web and mobile business applications.

I intentionally stayed in the middle management bracket, where I was paid well and typically worked 40 to 45 hours most weeks. This meant I had enough time to build a real-estate side business. Doing that helped me achieve my goal of early retirement.

In 2024, I left my corporate job and live off my real-estate passive income.

My retirement at 59 came as the wider tech industry began eliminating many middle management positions.

Big Tech companies like Microsoft, Amazon, Meta, and Google have been trying to flatten their company structure by removing managers. Google's CEO, Sundar Pichai, has said this is to increase efficiency, while Amazon's Andy Jassy, who has said he wants the company to run like the "world's largest startup," has suggested that removing management layers can cut bureaucracy.

Although I really enjoyed working and learning as a middle manager, I did occasionally question the value I was bringing at that level.

I worked in startups and bigger companies alike

Beginning in the late 1990s, I worked in both engineering and middle management roles for a few small startup companies.

These startups maintained a flat management structure where the CEO worked directly with individual contributors to quickly make key decisions and deliver software products. There were few middle managers, and little bureaucracy. This leaner model meant we had fewer scheduled meetings and fewer roadblocks to building out products.

In the startups I worked for, everyone was focused on rapidly solving problems to reach the objective. Your job and future stock awards were based on the team's ability to focus and deliver quickly. Teams could make and execute plans more rapidly without the bureaucracy of a middle management layer — the reviews and approvals that middle managers tend to oversee in larger companies often only slow things down.

When I worked in tech roles at larger companies, my role often involved monitoring progress and confirming that software development teams were meeting the project timelines. I was responsible for explaining the delays to senior management and recommending improvements to avoid future hold-ups.

I spent significant time relaying status updates to the leaders above me and directives to the individual contributors below me. From working at startups, I knew that this back and forth could be reduced in a leaner management environment.

While working at larger companies, I also noticed that fiefdoms began to thrive due to the large number of middle managers.

Fiefdoms, a well-known phenomenon in tech, are essentially siloed groups of workers who are closely controlled by middle managers. These managers oversee what information about the group they share with the rest of the company.

I noticed that fiefdoms often benefited managers. By overseeing a larger head count, they had a greater perceived value. However, it unfortunately ended up isolating teams and departments from one another, leading to duplicated efforts across the company due to limited communication between groups.

On several occasions, my team and I would spend months building out a new software solution only to learn upon presenting our work that another manager's silo of engineers had already built out a similar one.

This is a management fiefdom scenario at its worst, and it negatively impacted morale. My team members were furious that their efforts had been wasted because of the lack of communication.

I'm not sad to see middle managers go

I built my tech career in middle management, so it may seem odd that I recommend removing the very role I once performed.

But after working in tech for over 30 years, I've witnessed significant wasted effort, duplicated results, and territorial management practices in the traditional, heavier middle management model.

There may be disruption and some confusion until the new model has fully worked itself out, but I expect that flattening companies will ultimately create leaner, better working environments.

Do you have a story to share about middle management in tech? Contact the editor, Charissa Cheong, at [email protected]

• Republicans are trying to pass Trump's "One Big Beautiful Bill" in the coming weeks.
• It includes new tax cuts, changes to Medicaid, saving accounts for kids, and other provisions.
• Here's what you should know about the centerpiece of Trump's legislative agenda.

For months, President Donald Trump has pursued his sweeping agenda through executive actions. Now comes the hard part.

Republicans on Capitol Hill are finally putting pen to paper on what Trump has called the "One Big Beautiful Bill," a sweeping fiscal package that will serve as the centerpiece of the president's legislative agenda.

The bill includes GOP priorities like no taxes on tips or overtime, cuts to Medicaid, "MAGA accounts" for children and several other provisions.

It will take weeks for lawmakers in the House and Senate to work out the final details, and it's likely that some changes will be made along the way. Republicans hope to send the bill to Trump's desk by July 4.

Here's what you should know about what's in the "One Big Beautiful Bill."

The bill includes cuts to Medicaid, and millions could lose health coverage

As part of the plan approved by the House Energy and Commerce Committee, states would implement work requirements in 2029 for childless adults on Medicaid who do not have a disability, mandating they work for 80 hours a month.

A component of the plan would increase the price of doctors' visits, mandating beneficiaries making above the federal poverty limit to pay co-payments of up to $35. States would also be required to stop taxing hospitals and nursing homes in order to secure more federal funding.

Medicaid recipients in some states would have more paperwork to regularly confirm their residency status and income. And the plan would lower federal funding for some recipients in states that fund medical coverage for undocumented immigrants.

The Congress Budget Office estimated the legislation would save about $912 billion over the next decade in federal spending, about $715 billion of which would derive from Medicaid and Affordable Care Act cuts. The CBO said about 8.6 million people could lose their insurance coverage.

The plan came short of expectations among some ultraconservatives who wanted more Medicaid cuts at the federal level. Some GOP leaders wanted per-capita caps for those in Medicaid expansion states and a lower across-the-board rate at which the federal government supplements each state's funding for Medicaid programs.

Democrats have strongly opposed the bill, emphasizing that millions of Americans will potentially have their lives uprooted by Medicaid cuts.

No tax on tips or overtime, making Trump's 2017 tax cuts permanent, and more

Some of Trump's flashiest campaign promises were to remove taxes on tips, overtime, and Social Security. This bill largely gets those done, but only for the next four years — lawmakers will have to decide whether to renew the cuts in 2029.

The bill would allow workers in an "occupation that traditionally and customarily receives tips" to claim a tax deduction for the sum of all tips that they received in the previous year. It would also do the same for overtime wages. Neither deduction is available to anyone who is a "highly compensated employee."

To help accomplish Trump's "no taxes on Social Security" pledge, Republicans created a new $4,000 tax deduction for seniors making less than $75,000 per year. There's also a provision in the bill to fulfill Trump's promise of no taxes on car loan interest.

There's also an extension of the child tax credit, which is currently $2,000 but was set to decrease to $1,000 after this year. The bill would increase the credit to $2,500 through 2028, then it would drop to $2,000 permanently after that.

If you're thinking of buying an electric vehicle, you might want to do so before the end of the year. The bill would eliminate existing tax credits for new and used EVs, and it would impose an annual registration fee of $250 for EV owners.

The bill also makes permanent a slew of tax cuts that Trump and Republicans enacted in 2017. The average American won't feel much of a difference, since they've probably gotten used to the existing tax rates and brackets that have existed since 2018. But it's the most consequential part of the bill from a budgetary perspective, adding trillions to the deficit over the next several years.

MAGA savings accounts

The bill establishes "Money account for growth and advancement" accounts, or MAGA accounts, for children. The idea was originally proposed by Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas.

The federal government would pay $1,000 to babies born from 2024 through 2028. After the cutoff, parents will still be able to put $5,000 per year into each account.

Cruz's proposal is similar to previous Democratic-led efforts for "baby bonds," but the biggest difference is that there is no income cutoff. Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey, a Democrat, envisioned a program primarily targeted at low-income families.

A repeal of Biden's student loan forgiveness plans

If enacted, the reconciliation bill would mean major changes for student-loan borrowers. The legislation proposes terminating all existing income-driven student-loan repayment plans, including Biden's SAVE income-driven repayment plan, which would have shortened the timeline for debt relief and provided cheaper monthly payments. While SAVE is currently paused due to litigation, Trump and Republican lawmakers have said they would not carry out the plan if it survives in court.

Under the bill, borrowers would have two repayment plan options: one, called the Repayment Assistance Plan, would allow for loan forgiveness after 360 qualifying payments, and the other option would be a standard repayment plan with a fixed monthly payment over a fixed time period set by the servicer.

Payments made under the Repayment Assistance Plan would be calculated based on the borrower's income and would count toward Public Service Loan Forgiveness.

A 10-year ban on state-level AI laws

House lawmakers handed a major win to Big Techby including a 10-year federal preemption on all state artificial intelligence laws in the larger bill. Congress has talked about a federal AI policy, but no serious legislative proposals have emerged.

In the meantime, states have tried to fill to void. Major tech companies have long fought state-level AI regulations. Last year, California lawmakers passed the nation's most sweeping AI legislation only for Gov. Gavin Newsom to veto it.

Meta, OpenAI, and Anthropic lobbied against California's bill. Meta recently wrote to the White House that state laws "could impede innovation and investment."

The issue isn't going away. In the 2024 legislative session, lawmakers in at least 45 states introduced AI-related bills, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Unlike most of the other provisions on this list, the AI regulation ban faces major hurdles to making it into law. Republicans must adhere to strict parliamentary rules to pass Trump's bill without facing a Democratic filibuster in the Senate. One rule is that all provisions must be primarily fiscal in nature, and many expect that the AI provision will fail that test.

A debt ceiling hike, the end of IRS Direct file, money for a border wall, and more

Avoiding default: Republicans would raise the debt limit by $4 trillion, staving off a potential default that could come later this summer. One way or another, Congress will have to address the debt issue soon. The federal government is expected to exhaust its borrowing ability sometime in August.

Billions for missile defense: Trump wants the US to have a futuristic missile defense system inspired by Israel's vaunted "Iron Dome" air defenses, but the US shield would include space-based components and focus on longer-range missile threats rather than the smaller weapons Israel faces. House Republicans have allocated roughly $25 billion for overall missile defense, most of which will go to the "Golden Dome" project.

700 more miles of Trump's border wall: Republicans proposed spending roughly $47 billion on border barriers, which will cover 701 miles of "primary wall," 900 miles of river barriers, and 629 miles of secondary barriers. Trump repeatedly fought in his first term to build a massive border wall between the US and Mexico but struggled to get funding through Congress.

A big tax increase on large university endowments: Republicans would significantly increase Trump's 2017 groundbreaking tax on colleges and universities with large endowments. Under the bill, the tax rate would be tied to the size of their endowment, adjusted by student enrollment.At the low end, the rate would remain at 1.4%. At the highest level, universities would pay 21% tax if they have an endowment of $2 million or more per student.

IRS direct file: The big beautiful bill would officially kill off the IRS's Direct File program, a Biden-era initiative that has long been a subject of Republican ire. In April, a Treasury Department official told BI that it was a failed and disappointing program. The new legislation would instead allocate funding towards studying a public-private partnership to provide free filing for a majority of taxpayers.