EO 14110 Was Rescinded — But Its Voice AI Guardrails Are Now in Procurement Contracts

TL;DR — EO 14110 (Biden, October 2023) was rescinded by EO 14179 (Trump, January 2025) and superseded by America's AI Action Plan (July 2025) and the December 2025 framework on state preemption. The headline policy flipped, but the technical safeguards — red-teaming, content provenance, watermarking, NIST testing — survived inside agency contract clauses.

What the rule said and where it went

EO 14110 directed 50+ federal entities to take 100+ AI safety actions. EO 14179 rescinded it in 2025; America's AI Action Plan re-anchored federal policy around three pillars: innovation, infrastructure, international leadership. Then a December 2025 White House action targeted state-level "AI patchwork" and pushed for federal preemption.

For voice AI, three threads survived the political flip:

1. NIST AI Safety Institute red-teaming — AISI continues to test frontier models; agencies still cite results.
2. OMB M-24-10 successors — agency-level AI inventory, impact assessments, and risk management.
3. Treasury's Financial Services AI RMF (Feb 2026) — 230 controls, applied to banks and their vendors.

flowchart LR
  EO110[EO 14110 2023] -->|rescinded| EO179[EO 14179 2025]
  EO179 --> PLAN[AI Action Plan Jul 2025]
  PLAN --> AISI[AISI red-team]
  PLAN --> OMB[OMB AI inventory]
  PLAN --> TREAS[Treasury 230 controls]
  AISI --> RFP[Federal RFPs]
  OMB --> RFP
  TREAS --> RFP

What this means for AI vendors

If you sell to federal, federal-adjacent, or financial buyers, the EO flip changes the rhetoric, not the work. Three buyer behaviors:

• NIST RMF + GenAI Profile is still the baseline ask in federal RFPs.
• AISI red-team participation is a strong buyer signal even when not contractually required.
• State law layers (CO, CA, NY, IL) are still enforceable until federal preemption is enacted, which has not happened.

CallSphere posture

CallSphere is built to the union of federal and state requirements. 37 agents, 90+ tools, 115+ DB tables, 6 verticals, HIPAA + SOC 2, with mappings to NIST AI RMF, ISO/IEC 42001, EU AI Act, Treasury 230, NYC LL144, CAITA, and Colorado AI Act.

• Starter — $149/mo · 2,000 interactions · NIST RMF mapping included
• Growth — $499/mo · 10,000 interactions · workspace-level federal + state evidence binder
• Scale — $1,499/mo · 50,000 interactions · Treasury 230 attestation + AISI-style red-team

50+ businesses, 4.8/5, 14-day trial, 22% affiliate. Start a trial or request the federal pack.

Compliance checklist

1. Map all voice agents to NIST AI RMF and the GenAI Profile.
2. Maintain an AISI-style red-team report on file (semiannual).
3. Track agency-level OMB requirements relevant to your buyers.
4. Watch the federal preemption fight; do not assume state law is gone.
5. Update RFP responses quarterly to reflect new agency guidance.
6. Keep a public model card and a private impact assessment per agent.
7. Document training data provenance and watermarking for synthetic voice.

FAQ

Q: Is EO 14110 still binding? No. It was rescinded January 2025.

Q: Did the safety actions in EO 14110 disappear? No — they were absorbed into agency policy, NIST publications, and procurement clauses.

Q: Does the AI Action Plan deregulate voice AI? It loosens federal posture but does not affect state laws (yet) or sectoral regulators (HHS, FTC, FCC).

Q: Should I still red-team my voice agent? Yes — buyers ask for it, NIST publishes evals, and AISI runs benchmark studies you can reference.

Q: What about FTC? FTC continues to enforce against deceptive or unfair AI practices under Section 5; voice cloning fraud is a 2026 enforcement priority.

Sources

• Executive Order 14110 — Wikipedia
• Removing Barriers to American Leadership in AI — White House
• America's AI Action Plan PDF
• Trump rescinds Biden's AI EO — A&O Shearman

## Why "EO 14110 Was Rescinded — But Its Voice AI Guardrails Are Now in Procurement Contracts" Is a Sequencing Problem The trap inside "EO 14110 Was Rescinded — But Its Voice AI Guardrails Are Now in Procurement Contracts" is treating it as a one-shot decision instead of a sequencing problem. You don't need every workflow on AI in Q1 — you need the right two, in the right order, with measurable cost-of-waiting on each. Get sequencing wrong and even a strong vendor choice underperforms. The deep-dive below is structured around that ordering question. ## AI Strategy Deep-Dive: When AI Buys Advantage vs. When It's Just Expense AI buys real advantage in three places: workflows where speed-to-response is the moat (inbound voice, callback windows, after-hours coverage), workflows where 24/7 staffing is structurally unaffordable, and workflows where vertical depth — knowing the language, regulations, and edge cases of one industry — makes a generalist tool useless. Outside those three, AI is mostly expense dressed up as innovation. The cost of waiting is the metric most strategy decks miss. Every quarter without AI in a high-volume customer-contact workflow is a quarter of measurable lost revenue: missed calls, slow callbacks, after-hours leads going to a competitor that picks up. We've seen single-location healthcare and home-services operators recover 15–25% of "lost" inbound volume in the first 60 days simply by eliminating the after-hours and overflow gap. That recovery is the floor of the ROI case, not the ceiling. Vertical AI beats horizontal AI in regulated, language-dense, or workflow-specific environments. A horizontal voice agent that can "do anything" usually does nothing well in healthcare intake or real-estate showing scheduling. A vertical agent that already knows insurance verification, HIPAA-aligned messaging, or MLS workflows ships in days, not quarters. What to measure: containment rate, escalation accuracy, after-hours capture, average handle time, and cost per resolved interaction — not raw call volume or "AI conversations." ## FAQs **How does eo 14110 was rescinded — but its voice ai guardrails are now in procurement contracts actually work in production?** In production, the answer is less about the model and more about the workflow wrapping it: the function tools, the escalation rules, and the integration handshakes with CRM and calendar. Channels run on one platform: voice, chat, SMS, and WhatsApp. That avoids the typical mistake of buying voice from one vendor, chat from another, and SMS from a third — then paying systems-integration cost to stitch the conversation history together. **What does eo 14110 was rescinded — but its voice ai guardrails are now in procurement contracts cost end-to-end?** Total cost of ownership is the line item that surprises buyers six months in — not licensing, but operating overhead. CallSphere ships 37 specialty AI agents across 6 verticals (healthcare, real estate, salon, sales, escalation, IT/MSP), with 90+ function tools and 115+ database tables backing real workflow logic — not a single horizontal model with a system prompt. Compared with a hire (or a 24/7 BPO contract), the math usually clears inside one quarter on contained workflows. **Where does eo 14110 was rescinded — but its voice ai guardrails are now in procurement contracts typically break first?** The honest failure modes are integration drift (a CRM field changes and the agent silently misroutes), undefined escalation rules (the agent solves 80% but the 20% has no human owner), and prompt rot (the agent works on launch day, drifts in week eight). All three are operational, not model problems, and all three are fixable with the right ownership model. ## Talk to a Human (or Hear the Agent First) Book a 20-minute working session with the CallSphere team — we'll map the workflow, scope a pilot, and quote it on the call: https://calendly.com/sagar-callsphere/new-meeting. Or hear a live agent on the matching vertical first at https://escalation.callsphere.tech.