Editorial Team The year 2026 was a make-or-break moment for anyone operating across international borders, thanks to a new wave of supply chain scrutiny. For Anya Sharma, CEO of the startup VeriTrace, this was both a threat and a massive opportunity. Her company which specializes in blockchain-secured supply chain data, was built on the idea that truly granular, immutable data could revolutionize compliance, but she knew getting regulators to bet on new technology is always an uphill fight.
Key Takeaways
- Startups aren’t just complying with new supply chain rules. Firms like VeriTrace are helping write them by pushing practical data solutions and advocating for their use.
- Government agencies like U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) know they need private sector help to create workable data standards for global trade.
- To get new tech into policy, startups need to get in the door early and run collaborative pilot programs with government agencies to prove their case with real data.
- The biggest roadblocks to adopting better supply chain data systems are still a lack of standard data formats and making sure different systems can actually talk to each other.
Anya’s story really kicked off in late 2025 after the U.S. Department of Commerce dropped its proposed “Global Trade Transparency Act.” The act was a direct shot at the persistent problems of counterfeit goods and murky sourcing that hit everyone from pharma to electronics, aiming to mandate far more data sharing for all imports. The goal was to build a more resilient and verifiable global trade network. The problem? The government’s ambitious data requirements were designed around legacy systems that Anya, and most of the industry, knew would simply choke under the load.
“Our initial reaction was a mix of excitement and dread,” Anya recounted during a recent industry webinar. “They were asking for the right things, proof of origin, real-time transit data, ethical sourcing validation, but the methods they outlined felt like trying to run a marathon in lead boots. We knew our platform could do it better, faster, and with far greater integrity.”
The Challenge: Getting Bureaucrats to Listen
VeriTrace’s platform used a distributed ledger to create a permanent, unchangeable record of a product’s entire journey, from raw material to final delivery, with every single handling event timestamped and cryptographically secured. This provided a degree of transparency that made traditional Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) systems or paper trails look ancient. But government agencies, stuck with long budget cycles and rigid procurement rules, are notoriously slow to embrace that kind of change. A Reuters report from January 2026 confirmed that federal agencies were struggling, with many still propped up by IT infrastructure that was decades old.
Anya knew a great product was useless if the rules made it irrelevant. To actually influence the final text of the Global Trade Transparency Act, VeriTrace had to stop acting like just another vendor and start behaving like a policy partner. That meant actively engaging with regulators, doing more than just filling out Requests for Information (RFIs).
Strategic Engagement: Getting a Seat at the Table
VeriTrace’s strategy for getting its input heard was straightforward. First, they submitted incredibly detailed comments on the proposed act that laid out the real-world limitations of existing data systems and pitched their blockchain alternative as a working solution. These comments included practical mock-ups of data flows and cost-benefit analyses from pilot programs they’d already run with a couple of manufacturing clients.
“We had to show them it worked, not just tell them,” Anya explained. “For example, we showed how our system could automatically flag discrepancies in origin declarations, which cut the manual audit burden by an estimated 30% in one pilot. That kind of tangible impact gets you a callback.”
Their second step was to get face time. Working through industry groups like the National Customs Brokers and Forwarders Association of America (NCBFAA), VeriTrace got invited to workshops and roundtables with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and the Department of Commerce. These meetings were collaborative workshops for solving complex problems, not sales pitches. Anya went herself, bringing her engineers and data scientists to answer the nitty-gritty technical questions directly from agency staff.
A key moment came in a CBP working group on data standards for critical minerals. The proposed rules demanded immutable records of mining locations and processing steps, but existing systems relied on attestations that were comically easy to forge. VeriTrace walked them through a case study for a tantalum supply chain, demonstrating how embedding NFC tags at the mine site and linking them to their blockchain platform provided irrefutable proof of origin. This was a practical application the regulators hadn’t even thought was possible.
Overcoming Skepticism: The Power of Pilot Programs
Skepticism was their biggest hurdle. “Officials heard ‘blockchain’ and thought ‘expensive, complicated buzzword,’” Anya admitted. “Our job was to de-mystify it.” So VeriTrace offered to run small, no-strings-attached proof-of-concept pilots with the CBP. One pilot tracked a batch of imported medical devices from a plant in Southeast Asia to a distribution hub in Atlanta, Georgia. Using VeriTrace, CBP officials could see every single transfer of custody, every temperature reading, and every customs filing in near real-time, all verifiable on the blockchain ledger. For the agency staff watching, that level of granular visibility was a big deal.
The three-month pilot produced hard numbers. An internal CBP memo, shared with industry partners, confirmed the VeriTrace system cut the average customs clearance time by 15% for those shipments and flagged two potential misdeclarations that would have slipped through otherwise. The data from that pilot did the real work, shifting the entire conversation from “if” this technology could work to “how” it should be integrated into their workflow.
“The data from these pilots became our strongest argument,” Anya stated emphatically. “We didn’t have to say our tech was great. The regulators saw the tangible benefits for themselves.”
The Outcome: A More Adaptable Framework
By late 2026, the final version of the Global Trade Transparency Act looked very different. The act wisely avoided mandating a specific technology and instead incorporated key principles that VeriTrace and other startups had championed. It emphasized the need for things like immutable data records and interoperable data standards, which would give regulatory bodies access to **real-time, verifiable supply chain information**. It also included provisions for pilot programs and technology sandboxes, creating official pathways for startups to keep contributing to how regulations evolve. AP News reported on December 1, 2026, that industry groups praised the revised act for its forward-thinking approach.
For VeriTrace, this outcome was a huge win. They had helped define the future of global trade compliance. Their direct work providing actionable supply chain data and engaging with regulators turned a potential regulatory burden into an accelerator for the whole industry.
VeriTrace’s journey shows how agile startups, with their deep and narrow expertise, are perfectly positioned to provide the technical ground truth that regulators often lack. By focusing on specific problems, running pilots that show real results, and engaging proactively with government agencies, these companies can do more than just comply with regulations, they can help shape them for a more transparent and secure global economy.
How do startups give input to regulatory bodies?
Startups engage through formal channels by submitting comments on proposed regulations, participating in industry association working groups, and setting up direct meetings with agency officials. Pilot programs that demonstrate the technology’s effectiveness in a real-world scenario are an especially powerful tool.
What supply chain data is most useful for regulators?
Regulators are most interested in data that verifies product origin, tracks custody transfers, monitors environmental conditions like temperature, and confirms ethical sourcing with real-time visibility. The data must be immutable and verifiable to be trusted.
Why are pilot programs so important for startups trying to influence regulations?
Pilot programs allow a startup to prove its technology’s practical application and benefits in a controlled, low-risk setting. This provides regulators with concrete evidence of efficacy, cost savings, and improved compliance, moving the discussion beyond just theory.
What are the main challenges for startups in providing regulatory input?
The challenges often involve overcoming bureaucratic inertia, proving the security and scalability of a new technology, working through a complex and unfamiliar regulatory field, and building trust with government agencies that are naturally risk-averse.
How can regulators build frameworks that can integrate new technologies?
Adaptable regulatory frameworks create space for innovation with things like technological sandboxes and pilot programs. They also tend to set performance-based standards (what the tech must do) rather than mandating a specific technology, while emphasizing interoperability and data security.
“Beverley Griffiths, senior lecturer in security and resilience at Bucks New University told PA that this was "a clear sign that major brands are firmly in the crosshairs of cyber attackers".”
