CapCut is back online in the US after going dark with TikTok. The return marks a significant development in the ongoing saga between Chinese tech companies and US regulators.
Both the video-editing app and the video-sharing platform are owned by Chinese firm ByteDance and went down last weekend after being banned in the US amid security concerns. ByteDance, valued at over $220 billion, has faced increasing scrutiny over its data handling practices.
However, on Tuesday (21.01.25), a day after President Donald Trump signed an executive order giving a 75-day reprieve from the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, which meant apps owned by ByteDance had to be sold to a non-Chinese buyer by January 19 or face a nationwide ban, the site is back up and running for Americans. The act represents one of the most significant attempts to regulate foreign-owned technology platforms in US history.
Despite some users being greeted with a message welcoming them back to the app, CapCut and TikTok are reportedly still not available to download on the Apple and Google stores. These platforms combined represent over 95% of mobile app distribution channels in the United States.
“Welcome back!” the note read.
“Thanks for your patience and support.
“CapCut is back in the U.S.! You can continue to create, edit and discover all the things you love on CapCut.”
Trump is determined to save TikTok but still wants it to have 50 per cent American ownership. This stance reflects ongoing concerns about data security and foreign influence in American technology infrastructure.
The temporary restoration of CapCut’s services comes as a relief to its massive user base in the United States, where the app has accumulated over 200 million downloads since its launch. The platform has become particularly popular among content creators and small businesses who rely on its editing features for their digital content production.
Industry analysts suggest that the 75-day extension provides a critical window for ByteDance to negotiate potential deals with American buyers. Several major US tech companies and investment firms have reportedly expressed interest in acquiring stakes in both CapCut and TikTok operations.
The ban’s impact has extended beyond just user access, affecting thousands of content creators who depend on these platforms for their livelihood. Studies indicate that the creator economy linked to ByteDance apps generates approximately $12 billion annually in the United States alone.
Security experts continue to debate the effectiveness of the ban, with some arguing that data privacy concerns could be addressed through stricter regulations rather than outright prohibition. Others maintain that Chinese ownership of popular social media platforms poses inherent risks to national security.
The situation has also sparked international discussion about digital sovereignty and the future of global technology platforms. Several other countries are closely monitoring the US approach as they develop their own policies regarding foreign-owned social media applications.
Market research indicates that during the brief ban period, competing video editing apps saw a surge in downloads, with some reporting increases of up to 300% in new user registrations. However, many users expressed preferences for CapCut’s specific features and functionality.
The temporary reprieve has also raised questions about the long-term stability of Chinese-owned tech platforms in the US market. Investment analysts suggest that the uncertainty could lead to increased development of domestic alternatives to popular foreign-owned applications.
ByteDance‘s efforts to comply with US regulations while maintaining its technological innovation have become a case study in international business relations. The company has reportedly invested heavily in data security measures and transparency initiatives to address American concerns.
Consumer advocacy groups have emphasized the need for clear guidelines regarding data privacy and security in social media platforms, regardless of ownership. They argue that the focus should be on establishing universal standards for user data protection rather than targeting specific companies based on national origin.
