Anthropic's Supported Regions Policy makes Claude access depend on both where users are located and the organisations they work for. The version effective from 12 November 2026 can exclude an overseas firm if it is majority-owned or controlled by persons or entities in an unsupported region, even when all its staff work in supported countries.
Mainland China is absent from the supported list. For firms controlled from there, locating staff abroad does not by itself make their use eligible.
Staff Location Is Only One Test
The policy sets out three separate grounds for unsupported use. The first concerns people physically located in unsupported regions, including employees of organisations that would otherwise be supported. An employer's eligibility therefore does not override the restriction on where an individual uses the service.
The second concerns entities incorporated or headquartered in unsupported regions. Their users and personnel remain covered by that organisational restriction even when those individuals are physically in a supported country. An overseas work location does not change where the employer is incorporated or headquartered.
The third reaches entities majority-owned or controlled, directly or indirectly, by persons or entities in unsupported regions. This can bring an overseas firm within the restriction even if neither its headquarters nor its staff are located there.
Ownership and Control Define the Threshold
The wording does not make every Chinese investment a ground for exclusion. It specifies majority ownership or control, rather than any financial connection. Equally, a minority shareholding does not establish eligibility: control is an alternative condition, and the supplied policy does not define every arrangement that could satisfy it.
Nor does the policy state a blanket exclusion based on Chinese nationality. Its wording refers to persons or entities in unsupported regions. Describing it as a ban on Chinese employees abroad would substitute citizenship for the geographical and organisational relationships the document specifies.
The scope also extends beyond Claude's own website. It includes Claude.ai, Claude Code and Cowork, the API and developer platform, and Claude models supplied through cloud platforms and authorised resellers. Using another provider is not an exemption stated in the policy.
Anthropic Describes a Clarification of Earlier Rules
The effective date does not establish that every restriction begins on 12 November. In an explanation published on 8 October, Anthropic describes the regional update as a clarification of how it enforces its policy, rather than presenting all the restrictions as newly introduced.
The company says it introduced a restriction the previous year covering firms majority-owned by entities headquartered in unsupported regions. That earlier formulation establishes some history behind the current rules, but does not provide a complete account of when each element of today's wording first appeared.
The documents establish eligibility conditions, not a new wave of account closures. They do not show how a particular overseas firm's ownership has been assessed, whether its access has been withdrawn or how a disputed control relationship would be resolved.
For an overseas business, staff location is therefore only part of the access question. Its incorporation, headquarters and ownership or control can still place its use outside the supported policy, including when Claude is supplied through another provider.
