Daily, in-house counsel at multinationals navigate tariffs, sanctions, and export controls to reduce risk
The corporate legal landscape evolves rapidly. As global trade routes shift and regulations tighten, in-house counsel at multinational companies manage tariffs, sanctions, and export controls to balance opportunity and risk. With compliance, technology, and geopolitics overlapping, legal teams serve as both gatekeepers and strategic partners, enhancing business resilience.
As board-level risk agendas expand to include autonomous technologies, shifting sanctions regimes, and fragmented global standards, the in-house role becomes increasingly pivotal and complex.
This week, Modern Counsel examines ten key challenges testing cross-border in-house counsel today.
1 | Agentic AI and autonomous decision liability
AI is shifting from simply generating content to enabling systems that take real action. Companies are transitioning from assistive AI to agentic AI, allowing systems to handle multi-step tasks with little oversight. As this trend picks up speed, boards face new accountability risks. If AI negotiates, approves transactions, or interacts with customers, mistakes can lead to legal and regulatory trouble. Directors need to set clear guardrails, escalation processes, and standards for human oversight, particularly in highly regulated sectors.
2 | Systemic cybersecurity and third-party concentration
Cybersecurity now reaches far beyond company networks into third-party ecosystems. As businesses lean on a handful of cloud and AI providers for critical operations, any single disruption can cause serious operational and financial fallout. AI-powered attacks make the threat even greater. Vendor risk is enterprise risk. Boards should focus on building measurable resilience by mapping dependencies, running scenario tests, and tracking response metrics, especially in banking, energy, telecom, and SaaS infrastructure.
3 | Antitrust enforcement and labor competition
Antitrust enforcement is back to focusing on traditional theories of harm. Regulators are taking a close look at sectors that impact household budgets, such as food, healthcare, and consumer technology. Agencies review actions that influence pricing, quality, and labor competition. They’re also watching information sharing and coordinated activity, even if it’s under the ESG or industry collaboration umbrella. Companies need to structure joint initiatives, data sharing, and algorithmic tools thoughtfully to avoid antitrust issues, especially in technology, agribusiness, healthcare, and media.
4 | UFLPA and the forensic supply chain burden
The Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA) stops goods linked to forced labor in China’s Xinjiang region from entering the US. Enforcement now goes beyond apparel and covers raw materials like polysilicon, steel, aluminum, and lithium. US Customs detain shipments unless importers present clear and convincing evidence that no forced labor was involved. Companies need to go beyond paper audits and use detailed supply chain mapping, data tracking, and supplier verification to lower operational, financial, and reputational risk.
5 | Geopolitical volatility and trade weaponization
Geopolitics increasingly shapes corporate strategy. Governments now use tariffs, export controls, and sanctions more frequently than coordinated global agreements, and supply chains face growing uncertainty. Companies must quickly adapt sourcing, investment, and customer strategies. Boards also face the risk of “tariff-washing” if disclosures fail to reflect true trade exposure. Strong oversight and alignment between operations and reporting are critical, especially in manufacturing, energy, agribusiness, and transportation.
6 | Workforce classification and non-compete patchwork
Managing a US workforce now requires navigating a patchwork of federal oversight and evolving state laws. Federal regulators continue to scrutinize worker misclassification and restrictive covenants, while states such as California, Colorado, and Minnesota impose their own limits on non-competes. The patchwork creates significant compliance pressure for multistate employers. Companies should regularly review contractor models, compensation thresholds, and employment agreements, especially in logistics, healthcare, hospitality, and gig-based platforms.
7 | DEI, ESG, and discrimination risk
Boards face increasing scrutiny over Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) and ESG programs. Courts and regulators now examine whether these initiatives comply with anti-discrimination laws and fiduciary duties. Companies are reassessing hiring targets, supplier programs, and industry partnerships to reduce litigation and antitrust risk. Many now frame DEI and ESG around equal opportunity, risk management, and long-term value. Clear documentation, neutral criteria, and strong oversight are essential, particularly for government contractors, financial institutions, energy companies, and higher education institutions.
8 | State privacy hegemony and the failure of preemption
US privacy regulation remains fragmented. Without a comprehensive federal law, nearly twenty states now enforce their own privacy frameworks, each with different definitions, thresholds, and consumer rights. Such patchwork creates significant compliance challenges for nationwide businesses. State regulators increasingly target dark patterns, children’s data, as well as sensitive health and location information. Companies in e-commerce, digital marketing, healthcare, and data analytics must carefully align disclosures, opt-out tools, and risk assessments to manage growing enforcement and litigation risks.
9 | PFAS and the diffused liability crisis
Liability related to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) has expanded from a technical environmental issue to a major board-level concern. Large settlements and ongoing litigation show that exposure extends far beyond chemical manufacturers. Downstream users, distributors, and property owners now face personal injury and contamination claims. Regulators continue to tighten reporting requirements and drinking water standards, raising the stakes. Companies in manufacturing, apparel, utilities, and consumer goods should review historical use, strengthen disclosures, and prepare for higher compliance costs and increased litigation risk.
10 | Consumer protection: junk fees and design accountability
Consumer protection enforcement now focuses as much on product design as on advertising. Regulators increasingly examine pricing structures, consent flows, subscription mechanics, and so-called junk fees. Hidden charges and confusing cancellation processes draw rapid scrutiny. Agencies treat user interface decisions as compliance issues, not just UX choices. Boards must ensure automated offers, bots, and AI-driven pricing remain transparent and fair. Companies in e-commerce, financial services, hospitality, ticketing, and SaaS face growing pressure to provide clear disclosures and simple cancellation processes.
The board’s strategic roadmap for 2026
In 2026, boards must do more than identify risks; they must shape how the business responds. Technology, geopolitics, supply chains, and regulation increasingly intersect, so disruptions in one area can quickly affect others. Effective boards highlight operational discipline, clear legal workflows, responsible AI governance, and alignment between pricing and sourcing strategies. By prioritizing transparency, critical risk areas, and data-driven oversight, boards can turn regulatory complexity into resilience and long-term competitive advantage.
