Global governments restrict DeepSeek AI over China data security fears

Chinese AI startup DeepSeek has triggered a global regulatory backlash, with governments across multiple continents restricting or investigating the company’s popular ChatGPT rival over data security and privacy concerns. The widespread scrutiny reflects growing international wariness about Chinese AI systems and their potential access to sensitive user information.

DeepSeek gained international attention in January 2025 when it claimed to have developed an AI model capable of matching ChatGPT’s performance at significantly lower costs. However, the company’s own privacy policy reveals that it stores user data—including chat requests and uploaded files—on servers located in China, raising red flags for government officials and privacy regulators worldwide.

The regulatory response has been swift and comprehensive, spanning developed economies from Australia to Germany, with actions ranging from outright government bans to formal investigations into the company’s data practices.

Government device restrictions lead the charge

Several countries have moved quickly to ban DeepSeek from government systems entirely. Australia led this trend in early February, prohibiting the AI tool from all government devices due to security concerns. Taiwan followed suit with a similar ban on government departments, citing both security risks and concerns about potential censorship built into the platform.

The Netherlands took a particularly firm stance, with government officials banning civil servants from using the app under policies specifically targeting countries with “offensive cyber programs.” This language reflects broader concerns about state-sponsored cyber activities and their potential connection to AI platforms.

India’s finance ministry took a more cautious approach, advising employees to avoid DeepSeek and other AI tools for official purposes rather than implementing an outright ban. The guidance specifically highlighted risks to the confidentiality of government documents and sensitive data.

App store removals and download suspensions

Beyond government restrictions, some countries have targeted DeepSeek’s availability to general consumers. Germany requested that Apple and Google remove DeepSeek from their app stores due to data safety concerns, according to a data protection authority commissioner.

South Korea’s response proved more nuanced but equally restrictive. The country’s data protection authority suspended new downloads of the DeepSeek app after the startup acknowledged failing to comply with local personal data protection rules. The service remained unavailable until compliance improvements were made.

Formal regulatory investigations

Italy’s approach exemplifies the formal investigative route several regulators have chosen. The country’s antitrust authority opened an investigation into DeepSeek for allegedly failing to warn users that the AI system might produce false or misleading information. Italy had previously blocked the app over insufficient transparency regarding personal data usage.

The Netherlands’ privacy watchdog launched its own investigation into DeepSeek’s data collection practices while simultaneously urging Dutch citizens to exercise caution when using the company’s software. This dual approach of investigation and public warning reflects the balance regulators are trying to strike between protecting citizens and avoiding overreach.

Geopolitical complexities emerge

The global response to DeepSeek hasn’t been uniformly negative, highlighting the complex geopolitical dynamics surrounding AI technology. Russia has taken a notably different approach, with President Vladimir Putin instructing Sberbank, the country’s largest financial institution, to collaborate with Chinese researchers on joint AI projects.

This divergence underscores how AI regulation is becoming intertwined with broader international relations and strategic alliances. While Western nations and their allies have generally moved to restrict or investigate DeepSeek, countries with closer ties to China are exploring collaboration opportunities.

United States considers comprehensive restrictions

The Trump administration has reportedly considered the most comprehensive response to DeepSeek. Officials are weighing penalties that would prevent DeepSeek from purchasing U.S. technology components, while also debating whether to block American users’ access to the service entirely.

Such measures would represent a significant escalation in AI-related trade restrictions and could set precedents for how democratic governments handle AI systems developed by strategic competitors.

Broader implications for AI governance

The coordinated international response to DeepSeek reflects several converging concerns about AI systems developed in countries with different data protection standards and governance structures. The primary worry centers on data sovereignty—the principle that sensitive user information should remain within the legal jurisdiction of the user’s home country.

DeepSeek’s practice of storing user data on Chinese servers means that conversations, uploaded documents, and other personal information could potentially be accessed by Chinese authorities under the country’s national security laws. This concern is particularly acute for government employees and businesses handling sensitive information.

The regulatory actions also highlight the challenge of balancing innovation access with security concerns. Many of the countries restricting DeepSeek have done so reluctantly, recognizing that the AI tool offers genuine utility and cost advantages over alternatives.

Looking ahead

The DeepSeek controversy represents a significant moment in the evolution of AI governance, demonstrating how quickly regulatory concerns can spread across international borders when they involve sensitive technologies and geopolitical tensions.

For businesses and individual users, the varied international responses create a complex landscape where AI tools available in one country may be restricted or investigated in another. This patchwork of regulations suggests that AI governance will likely remain fragmented as countries balance innovation benefits against security and privacy concerns.

The outcome of ongoing investigations in Italy, the Netherlands, and potentially other countries will likely influence how other nations approach similar AI systems in the future, potentially establishing new precedents for international AI regulation and cross-border data governance.