Array
(
    [content] => 
    [params] => Array
        (
            [0] => /forum/index.php?threads/intel-warns-ohio-factory-could-be-delayed-because-congress-is-dragging-its-feet-on-funding.16277/
        )

    [addOns] => Array
        (
            [DL6/MLTP] => 13
            [Hampel/TimeZoneDebug] => 1000070
            [SV/ChangePostDate] => 2010200
            [SemiWiki/Newsletter] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/WPMenu] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/XPressExtend] => 1000010
            [ThemeHouse/XLink] => 1000970
            [ThemeHouse/XPress] => 1010570
            [XF] => 2021370
            [XFI] => 1050270
        )

    [wordpress] => /var/www/html
)

Intel warns Ohio factory could be delayed because Congress is dragging its feet on funding

While there might be multiple factors, it is clear that Intel made a decision to build Ohio FAB(s) with understanding that they were going to get funds from CHIPS act. They are not going to go ahead without these funds irrespective of other factors and circumstances. If/once they get these funds they may or may not be inclined to go ahead with the original plans anyways. They may scale down or slow down the original plans. Slowing demand for semiconductors might force them to do that. But with these funds they probably will start building (they can't just take the funds and do nothing with them)
 
So now we have terror threats? (give us money or else...)

Biden is blaming others again... Meanwhile lately he is bragging about reducing deficit - means no more spending on anything (expect wars off course).

Meanwhile Intel is planning to buy/build new facilities in china...
 
  • Like
Reactions: VCT
So now we have terror threats? (give us money or else...)

Biden is blaming others again... Meanwhile lately he is bragging about reducing deficit - means no more spending on anything (expect wars off course).

Meanwhile Intel is planning to buy/build new facilities in china...

Ohio is a interesting place in supporting or against the Chips Act. There are two senators, one is Republican and one is Democrat. Both of them voted "Yes".

There are 16 representatives from Ohio in US Congress. 12 of them are Republicans and all of them are against the Chips Act. Rest 4 representatives are Democrats and all of them are supporting the Chips Act.

If we measure the level of support for the Chips Act by Ohio's Congregational districts, 75% of them are against it.

It means 75% of Ohio Congressional districts do not want to give free money to Intel!

I have no idea what Ohio Governor (a Republican) and Intel can expect. From such overwhelming opposition of Chips Act within Ohio, does Intel understand they are actually not welcome by the majority of Ohio if the free federal money is a must? Does the governor of Ohio understand he needs to sort out the Republican internal feud in order to expect free federal money to flow to Ohio through Intel's new fab?
 
Last edited:
Ohio is a interesting place in supporting or against the Chips Act. There are two senators, one is Republican and one is Democrat. Both of them voted "Yes".

There are 16 representatives from Ohio in US Congress. 12 of them are Republicans and all of them are against the Chips Act. Rest 4 representatives are Democrats and all of them are supporting the Chips Act.

If we measure the level of support for
the Chips Act by Ohio's Congregational districts, 75% of them are against it.

It means 75% of Ohio Congressional districts do not want to give free money to Intel!

I have no idea what Ohio Governor (a Republican) and Intel can expect. From such overwhelming opposition of Chips Act within Ohio, does Intel understand they are actually not welcome by the majority of Ohio if the free federal money is a must? Does the governor of Ohio understand he needs to sort out the Republican internal feud in order to expect free federal money to flow to Ohio through Intel's new fab?
Are you suggesting that Intel should build in, say, Oregon instead of Ohio? I suspect Intel would not particularly care one way or another.
 
So now we have terror threats? (give us money or else...)

Biden is blaming others again... Meanwhile lately he is bragging about reducing deficit - means no more spending on anything (expect wars off course).

Meanwhile Intel is planning to buy/build new facilities in china...
CHIPS act was a government idea not Intel's. Intel can build FABs in other countries. I believe they just got $6B from EU to build FAB in Germany. And there was a competition between EU countries for this FAB. If US want to get rid of semiconductor industry, they just need to keep doing what they have been doing in recent decades. And "terror"? Seriously?
 
Are you suggesting that Intel should build in, say, Oregon instead of Ohio? I suspect Intel would not particularly care one way or another.

I don't know where Intel should build a fab or how many fabs Intel needs to build. But I do know Intel and Ohio Governor didn't convince 75% of congressmen from Ohio to support Chips Act.

Who can help to resolve this overwhelming opposition from Ohio where Intel wants build a fab with federal subsidies? Do we expect California, Oregon, Arizona, or New York to come to Ohio to mediate their internal disputes?

I think Intel and Ohio governor need to work on it.
 
I don't know where Intel should build a fab or how many fabs Intel needs to build. But I do know Intel and Ohio Governor didn't convince 75% of congressmen from Ohio to support Chips Act.

Who can help to resolve this overwhelming opposition from Ohio where Intel wants build a fab with federal subsidies? Do we expect California, Oregon, Arizona, or New York to come to Ohio to mediate their internal disputes?

I think Intel and Ohio governor need to work on it.
I am not sure why exactly Intel needs to do anything here. It's all up to Ohio authorities. If Ohio governor and state legislature are against it, I am sure Intel would not be building there. But are they against it? They are not. It's kind of important. While Ohio representatives in the US senate/congress are fighting their partisan battles on federal level, local authorities have totally different priorities. I am not sure what is this "overwhelming opposition from Ohio" that you referred to. You are not saying that Ohio authorities are so against Intel building their FABs in Ohio that they decided to give Intel $2B, right? And when you say how many Ohio representatives in congress voted against CHIPS that's not a very nuanced take. Perhaps they were just against providing funds for worker training. So far I have not seen any evidence that either party was against building FABs.

The [sad] reality is that with every project like this (building some big business/plant etc.) there is always a competition between the states for landing the projects and there are always tax incentives. This project is no different. If Ohio did not want these FABs there would be a queue of other states competing for them. To suggest that Intel should do something special to resolve internal state political issues is something we probably do not want ever see happening in US. Business should stay out of politics as much as possible.

I understand why some people might be against government giving money to businesses in general. But it does not sound like most people here are against the CHIPS act per se. It looks like some people are against giving money specifically to Intel and some prefer TSMC instead (which is very strange for, obviously, American taxpayers could be very unhappy to learn that their money is used to fund foreign companies).
 
I am not sure why exactly Intel needs to do anything here. It's all up to Ohio authorities. If Ohio governor and state legislature are against it, I am sure Intel would not be building there. But are they against it? They are not. It's kind of important. While Ohio representatives in the US senate/congress are fighting their partisan battles on federal level, local authorities have totally different priorities. I am not sure what is this "overwhelming opposition from Ohio" that you referred to. You are not saying that Ohio authorities are so against Intel building their FABs in Ohio that they decided to give Intel $2B, right? And when you say how many Ohio representatives in congress voted against CHIPS that's not a very nuanced take. Perhaps they were just against providing funds for worker training. So far I have not seen any evidence that either party was against building FABs.

The [sad] reality is that with every project like this (building some big business/plant etc.) there is always a competition between the states for landing the projects and there are always tax incentives. This project is no different. If Ohio did not want these FABs there would be a queue of other states competing for them. To suggest that Intel should do something special to resolve internal state political issues is something we probably do not want ever see happening in US. Business should stay out of politics as much as possible.

I understand why some people might be against government giving money to businesses in general. But it does not sound like most people here are against the CHIPS act per se. It looks like some people are against giving money specifically to Intel and some prefer TSMC instead (which is very strange for, obviously, American taxpayers could be very unhappy to learn that their money is used to fund foreign companies).
Let me repeat several facts:

First: 12 out of 16 congressmen from Ohio voted "Nay" to the Chips Act. That means 75% of Ohio congressional districts are against the Chips Act. They are not teenagers who don't know the consequence of their votes. If Governor of Ohio and Intel can't win their support, don't count on other states to help Ohio out and don't blame people outside of Ohio for the delay of passing the Chips Act.

Second: For DoD and other national security related federal agencies, it's very common to have foreign suppliers from friendly countries. It's also common for them to subside R&D and manufacturing capabilities to foreign suppliers in order to secure good and stable supplies, preferable to setup a manufacturing operations in US eventually. DoD needs real bolts and nuts to build and maintain US weapon systems. In managing supply chains, DoD does have a very realistic view.

TSMC is a critical component of DoD's supply chain. What needs to be done, including subsidies, is understood and supported by Congress, Senate, and DoD.
 
Let me repeat several facts:

First: 12 out of 16 congressmen from Ohio voted "Nay" to the Chips Act. That means 75% of Ohio congressional districts are against the Chips Act. They are not teenagers who don't know the consequence of their votes. If Governor of Ohio and Intel can't win their support, don't count on other states to help Ohio out and don't blame people outside of Ohio for the delay of passing the Chips Act.

Second: For DoD and other national security related federal agencies, it's very common to have foreign suppliers from friendly countries. It's also common for them to subside R&D and manufacturing capabilities to foreign suppliers in order to secure good and stable supplies, preferable to setup a manufacturing operations in US eventually. DoD needs real bolts and nuts to build and maintain US weapon systems. In managing supply chains, DoD does have a very realistic view.

TSMC is a critical component of DoD's supply chain. What needs to be done, including subsidies, is understood and supported by Congress, Senate, and DoD.
You are conflating two distinct issues: support for CHIPS act in congress and support for Intel building the FABs in Ohio. The fact that 12 Ohio congressmen voted against CHIPS act (in its specific form) has nothing to do with which company is going to get the funds and where the FABs will be built. The need for the CHIPS act is understood and supported by both parties. The disagreements are on the specific details and those details do not include Intel building FABs in Ohio. The fact that you ignore this distinction implies that you believe that Ohio congressmen do not want US investing in semiconductor industry period (which also means that they are against funding for TSMC FAB in Arizona).

DoD needs are important but CHIPS act goes way beyond them. CHIPS act is about US competitiveness in semiconductor industry. DoD orders represent just a tiny fraction of semiconductor market. The reason why TSMC is a "critical component of DoD's supply chain" is because US lost competitiveness in foundry business. DoD simply does not have a choice. The reason for CHIPS act is to restore US competitiveness and you can't do it by funding foreign companies. CHIPS act may (and probably will) include funds for some foreign companies. There is no problem in that. But the focus will be on domestic companies. I am pretty sure DoD and US government in general are aware of the China/Taiwan situation. Here are just a couple of quotes from U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo (from a month ago):

“It is a huge national security issue and we need to move to making chips in America, not friend-shoring"

“America buys 70% of its most sophisticated chips from Taiwan. Those are the chips in military equipment. There’s like, 250 chips in a javelin launching system. You want to be buying all that from Taiwan? That’s not secure”


Quote from the same article: “Friend-shoring” refers to working with countries that possess a “strong adherence to a set of norms and values about how to operate in the global economy and how to run the global economic system,” Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen outlined in a speech in April.

I am actually not arguing much one way or another. I am pretty sure that whatever I post here is not going to influence US government decisions :) I am just listening to what the government is telling us and I am surprised how many people here have their own (and seemingly totally different) interpretation of what US government is doing or should be doing.
 
You are conflating two distinct issues: support for CHIPS act in congress and support for Intel building the FABs in Ohio. The fact that 12 Ohio congressmen voted against CHIPS act (in its specific form) has nothing to do with which company is going to get the funds and where the FABs will be built. The need for the CHIPS act is understood and supported by both parties. The disagreements are on the specific details and those details do not include Intel building FABs in Ohio. The fact that you ignore this distinction implies that you believe that Ohio congressmen do not want US investing in semiconductor industry period (which also means that they are against funding for TSMC FAB in Arizona).

DoD needs are important but CHIPS act goes way beyond them. CHIPS act is about US competitiveness in semiconductor industry. DoD orders represent just a tiny fraction of semiconductor market. The reason why TSMC is a "critical component of DoD's supply chain" is because US lost competitiveness in foundry business. DoD simply does not have a choice. The reason for CHIPS act is to restore US competitiveness and you can't do it by funding foreign companies. CHIPS act may (and probably will) include funds for some foreign companies. There is no problem in that. But the focus will be on domestic companies. I am pretty sure DoD and US government in general are aware of the China/Taiwan situation. Here are just a couple of quotes from U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo (from a month ago):

“It is a huge national security issue and we need to move to making chips in America, not friend-shoring"

“America buys 70% of its most sophisticated chips from Taiwan. Those are the chips in military equipment. There’s like, 250 chips in a javelin launching system. You want to be buying all that from Taiwan? That’s not secure”


Quote from the same article: “Friend-shoring” refers to working with countries that possess a “strong adherence to a set of norms and values about how to operate in the global economy and how to run the global economic system,” Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen outlined in a speech in April.

I am actually not arguing much one way or another. I am pretty sure that whatever I post here is not going to influence US government decisions :) I am just listening to what the government is telling us and I am surprised how many people here have their own (and seemingly totally different) interpretation of what US government is doing or should be doing.

US legislation process is surely complicated. After debate and modifications, they have to vote on the final version the act. A No vote means No to the whole act. A congressman can't pick some parts of the act to support while rejecting other parts of the act. 12 out of 16 congressmen from Ohio voted against the Chips Act. They have spoken and there's no need to sugar coating their decisions.

If Intel wants federal money but can not get Ohio Representatives' support, Intel has failed to understand Ohio and picked a wrong place to begin with.
 
Pat Gelsinger threatens to do more in Europe if he can't get whatever money he wants from the US government in the timeframe he likes.

I won't feel too bad if Taiwanese or Korean companies demand subsidies otherwise they will build fabs in other countries. Above all they are foreign companies and no body expects them to show American patriotism.

But Intel?! Pat Gelsinger spelled out his threat so clearly without any hesitation, without any minimum politeness.

I don't have good feeling on Intel (allegedly an American company) today.

Yahoo Finance: Intel CEO threatens to expand in Europe over U.S. if Congress doesn’t unlock funding for new $20 billion Ohio chip plant.

 
Gelsinger announced the Ohio site before the bill passed, and now he's in a tight spot if it doesn't pass. His behavior is not surprising me.
 
I wonder how AZ feels about this. They funded Intel and TSMC now Ohio gets a Federal handout? Politics......
 
I wonder how AZ feels about this. They funded Intel and TSMC now Ohio gets a Federal handout? Politics......
True but Ohio is not getting any Federal funds, Intel is (if they actually get it). I believe Ohio actually is giving Intel $2B in incentives which is probably more than AZ ever did and might be a reason why Intel chose Ohio in a first place.
 
True but Ohio is not getting any Federal funds, Intel is (if they actually get it). I believe Ohio actually is giving Intel $2B in incentives which is probably more than AZ ever did and might be a reason why Intel chose Ohio in a first place.

Yes but Ohio is getting fabs that include federal funding, AZ did not. We shall see how many fabs Intel actually builds in Ohio. The problem with Federal handouts is that it changes the funding landscape. Will other states go it alone or will they wait for Federal help? If they wait for federal money it is going to be a much longer wait and it may never come, my opinion.

I'm all for reshoring manufacturing of all types. My first job was in a fab, I get it. I am concerned however with the costs associated and oversupply. To me it should stay at the state level for better control. If the feds want to play, reward the states that do the best job at reshoring. Don't make reshoring contingent on federal money.
 
Back
Top