A third country creates a deregulated zone for AI or robotics

Where things stand (17 Oct 2026)

I found no qualifying enactment since the window opened on 16 Sep 2026. In 2024–26 a wave of special legal zones was created, but every one was enacted before the window, and most of them do not pass the question's "general exclusion with a closed list" test:

• Kazakhstan, Alatau City. Constitutional Law No. 286‑VIII was signed 8 May 2026. Article 3(2) says other Kazakh laws apply "unless otherwise provided", with the zone's own rules taking priority. That is the priority model, which the question excludes (adilet.zan.kz Z2600000286).
• Uzbekistan, TIFC. Constitutional Law ZRU‑1158 was adopted 13 Jul 2026. Uzbek law applies to matters outside the centre's jurisdiction, and eligibility covers finance, professional services and fintech (gazeta.uz 15 Apr 2026; yuz.uz 14 Jul 2026).
• Kyrgyzstan, Tamchy. Law No. 136 dates from 10 Jul 2025. Kyrgyz law applies, and the zone's own acts supplement or replace it only in some areas (Legal500/Gratanet).
• Bhutan, Gelephu (GMC). Royal Charter of 2024 plus the Application of Laws Act 2024. Bhutanese law is the default for anything not covered (BhutanWiki).
• Oman, AI Special Zone. Royal Decree 50/2026 gives free‑zone incentives only (The National, 30 Apr 2026).
• Philippines, Pax Silica zone. It will be governed by Philippine special-economic-zone law and the law of the Bases Conversion and Development Authority. Manila rejected the US request for American common law (The Diplomat 22 May 2026; GMA Sept 2026).
• South Korea, "MEGA" special zones. These are sandbox-style exemptions (Korea Herald 15 Apr 2026).

The clearest structural match is the International Financial Centre of Oman (Royal Decree 8/2026, 12 Jan 2026). Article 7 lists the Omani laws that still apply (criminal, tax, anti-money-laundering, cybercrime, national security) and switches off all other Omani law. Article 3 places it in Madinat Al‑Irfan (qanoon.om). It predates the window. Its registration and licensing laws are due "shortly" (The National 12 Oct 2026; Shabiba 13 Oct 2026). A resolver could treat those laws as the eligibility instrument that completes qualification, but Article 8 already allows any licensed activity, so I give this path only a few percent. A future Royal Decree adding new premises could count more cleanly.

Paths to YES

1. St Kitts and Nevis, "Destiny" zone. The Special Sustainability Zones Act No. 21 of 2025 lets a development agreement set which national laws apply in a zone and set up the zone's own laws. The agreement must then be ratified by both the National Assembly and the Nevis Island Assembly and declared by an Order in the Gazette (sknis.gov.kn). The Destiny application has waited about 10 months for federal approval. The Prime Minister stresses that federal law, police and courts stay in charge (WINN 27 Jun and 29 Sep 2026). I put this at about 6–8%.
2. Gulf financial-centre model. New zones (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain) or expansions of existing ones. ADGM expanded by Cabinet Resolution 41/2023, and the new DIFC Zabeel district includes an "AI Campus" (DIFC, 27 Jan 2026). The UAE law excludes federal civil and commercial law rather than listing the national laws that still apply, so I give UAE cases only partial credit.
3. Smaller paths. Honduras restoring its ZEDE charter-city regime (ruled unconstitutional; no bill exists), US Pax Silica zones run under US law in some partner country, and copies of the Oman model elsewhere.

Base rate

Clear-cut cases are rare: Honduras's ZEDE zones (2013–21) and Oman (2026), with the UAE zones (2004, 2013, 2023) as borderline cases. That works out to roughly 0.1–0.2 effective qualifying events a year, which implies about 40–65% over 5.25 years before allowing for resolver strictness. My bottom-up list of paths gives about 40%.

Hazard series

I computed the quarterly hazards in Python: 3.5% for Q4 2026, then about 10.5% a year in 2027, 9.5% in 2028–29 and 9% in 2030–31. That gives cumulative probabilities of 13.6% by end‑2027, 29% by end‑2029 and 41% by end‑2031.

Strongest case against

• Higher: the 2024–26 wave and Gulf competition could produce one or two qualifying zones or expansions, and DIFC and ADGM are plainly open to AI firms.
• Lower: strict resolvers may reject UAE-type exclusions and finance-only eligibility. Most new regimes use priority or residual models, and charter-city plans face strong local opposition.

My reading: expansions into new areas can count, but implementing rules under a regime enacted before the window do not.

Question. By the last day of each quarter, has a country other than the United States or China enacted a law establishing a geographic zone open to AI developers or robot manufacturers in which national business regulation is generally inapplicable except for enumerated exceptions?

Definitions.

• Country: a UN member state or UN General Assembly non-member observer state. Zones within the United States or the People's Republic of China, including their territories and special administrative regions, are excluded.
• Enacted law: a statute, constitutional law, or decree having the force of law that has completed the jurisdiction's required enactment and promulgation procedures. A future commencement date does not prevent qualification. A subnational enactment counts only if it has legally effective authority to disapply national law.
• Geographic zone: a physically bounded area within the country, identified by boundaries, a map, or an existing legally defined territory. The law must establish the zone or establish the qualifying legal regime for an existing zone; authority to designate unspecified future zones is insufficient.
• Open to AI developers or robot manufacturers: the legal eligibility rules permit businesses to develop or train AI systems, or manufacture physical robots, within the zone. Either activity suffices. General business eligibility counts if it encompasses at least one of these activities; the zone need not be exclusively or expressly branded for AI or robotics. Ordinary registration, licensing, or investment conditions are permissible. Mere use, sale, or import of AI products or robots does not suffice.
• National business regulation generally inapplicable except for enumerated exceptions: the enacted regime establishes a default rule that national laws regulating business establishment and operation do not apply in the zone, with applicable national requirements identified through a closed list of laws or subject-matter categories. This must be a general exclusion of the national business-regulatory regime, not a list of selected exemptions from an otherwise applicable national regime. Retention of constitutional law, criminal law, treaty obligations, and expressly enumerated regulatory subjects is permissible. Zone-specific replacement regulation is permissible; the zone need not be unregulated.

Resolves YES if an official publication within the Resolution window establishes enactment of a law satisfying all the definitions above. The law and any legally incorporated schedules, maps, or eligibility instruments must together establish the geographic scope, qualifying business access, and default exclusion of national business regulation. Actual tenant admission, construction, or commencement of operations is not required.

Resolves NO / Exclusions.

• Bills, policy announcements, memoranda of understanding, investment offers, and proposed charter cities do not count.
• Tax holidays, customs-free areas, simplified permits, waivers of specified laws, or AI regulatory sandboxes do not count without the general default exclusion described above.
• Giving zone rules priority over conflicting national rules does not count if national business regulation otherwise continues to apply by default.
• An exemption limited to AI regulation, robotics regulation, or a single business-regulatory field does not count.
• Enabling legislation without establishment of an identified zone does not count. A later legally effective designation may complete qualification.
• A newly published description or republication of a regime fully enacted before the opening date does not count. A new law establishing a qualifying regime in an existing zone can count.
• Resolve NO at a quarter-end if no qualifying enactment has been officially published by that date.

Resolving source. The enacting country's official gazette or official legislative database, including incorporated legal instruments published by the legally competent national or subnational authority. The enacted legal text controls over press releases, promotional material, and secondary commentary. Sources are narrower than Public confirmation (A2): third-party accounts alone cannot resolve YES. Apply the Resolution window and Resolution date (A3), using publication of the last official instrument necessary to establish qualification, not the announcement, signing ceremony, or operational start date. Later repeal does not undo an earlier YES.