Will more US AI models be subject to US export control directives by the end of 2026?

• Price has not updated recently (stale)
• Low recent movement on light volume — quote may lag new information

Resolution

The United States Government has issued an export control directive to suspend all access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5 by any foreign national, whether inside or outside the United States. See https://www.anthropic.com/news/fable-mythos-access. The basic question I have is "Is something like this going to happen again this year?" There are other already-existing restrictions in place though, so here are more detailed resolution criteria: Resolution. This market resolves YES if, at some point between now and the start of the new year, the US government takes a qualifying action (defined below) against any AI models belonging to a US company. The model must be a different model from Fable 5 or Mythos 5. Otherwise it resolves NO. Qualifying action. A binding action by a US government entity — an export-control directive, a BIS/Commerce rule (final or interim-final), an OFAC action, an executive order, a statute, or a court-enforced order — that newly restricts access to, export of, serving of, or deployment of the model. The restriction can be total (e.g. all foreign nationals) or partial/country-specific (e.g. "this model may not be served to China"). Excluded baseline (does NOT count). The action must impose a new restriction beyond what is already in force at market creation. The following standing apparatus is explicitly excluded, and mere continuation or routine enforcement of it does not resolve YES: OFAC comprehensive sanctions compliance (Iran, North Korea, Cuba, Syria, occupied Ukrainian regions) and any access cutoffs that flow from them. Existing Entity List / SDN designations and screening already in effect. Pre-existing EAR controls and license requirements in effect at market creation. The developers' own voluntary supported-country allowlists, geoblocking, payment/KYC gating, and Terms-of-Service restrictions (including Anthropic's ownership-based bans on China/Russia/Iran/NK-owned entities). Any controls targeting semiconductors, hardware, or compute rather than a model itself. China carve-in. Because US frontier models being unavailable in China is currently substantially the developers' own voluntary policy rather than a compelled directive, a new binding US government order that affirmatively compels a developer to restrict a qualifying model's availability to China (or to Chinese-owned entities) does resolve YES. Edge cases. A qualifying directive resolves YES upon issuance even if it is later rescinded, reversed, or successfully challenged in court. The action only needs to have been issued and operative. Mere proposals, threats, draft/proposed rules (NPRMs that never take effect), congressional statements, or agency commentary do not count. The action must be actually issued and binding on the developer. If a single action covers multiple developers/models, it still resolves YES. Resolution sources. Official US government publication (Federal Register, BIS, OFAC, or White House), the affected developer's own confirmation, or credible reporting from established outlets. Where these conflict, I'll weight official/primary sources highest. I will not trade on this market.