“中国早有布局，美国能否在为时已晚之前，认清这一点”

Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes the significant gap between the United States and China regarding the recognition and valuation of data as an economic asset, with China taking proactive steps to classify data as a production factor and implement data assetization practices [1][5]. Group 1: Data Valuation in the U.S. vs. China - The U.S. has a low valuation of data, while China has recognized data as an asset, implementing regulations that allow companies to classify qualifying data resources as intangible assets or inventory [1][5]. - The U.S. has not formally acknowledged the economic value of data, despite the fact that data brokers generate over $200 billion in revenue annually from information not reflected on corporate balance sheets [2][5]. - The U.S. legal system has recognized the value of customer data in bankruptcy cases, indicating that data can be one of the most valuable assets for companies [2][5]. Group 2: Government Data Governance Challenges - The U.S. federal data policy framework is disorganized, lacking a systematic approach to understanding and protecting data, which complicates the establishment of a data valuation framework [5][6]. - The article highlights the need for a structured approach to data valuation to enhance data protection and privacy, referencing past data breaches as evidence of the risks associated with unvalued data [5][6]. - The comparison between the U.S. and China illustrates a stark difference in data strategy, with China actively pursuing data assetization while the U.S. remains indifferent [5][6]. Group 3: Recommendations for U.S. Data Policy - The article suggests that the U.S. Financial Accounting Standards Board should initiate projects to establish standards for recognizing data assets, and the SEC should enhance research on data asset disclosure requirements [6]. - It calls for Congress to mandate federal agencies to assess the value of their data assets, with state and local governments encouraged to follow suit [6]. - The author argues that the current refusal to quantify data value in the U.S. overlooks a vast economic potential, as illustrated by the example of a $2 reward for survey participation, which could multiply across the entire population [6].