No CHIPS for Applied?

[Tanj]

Hard to imagine who it would have been better to invest in for USA -

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/applied-materials-denied-us-chips-grant-for-4-billion-project-in-silicon-valley/ar-BB1qZrH5

 

[nghanayem]

Hard to imagine who it would have been better to invest in for USA - https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/applied-materials-denied-us-chips-grant-for-4-billion-project-in-silicon-valley/ar-BB1qZrH5

They are in hot water with the USG for selling sanctioned equipment to china. It would be pretty weird if they got even a nickel.

 

[blueone]

They are in hot water with the USG for selling sanctioned equipment to china. It would be pretty weird if they got even a nickel.

To be more specific, Applied Material's Korean subsidiary shipped regulated equipment to SMIC in China without a required license from the US Dept of Commerce.

 

[Barnsley]

To be more specific, Applied Material's Korean subsidiary shipped regulated equipment to SMIC in China without a required license from the US Dept of Commerce.

Thats still Applied is it not?

Seems like looking for an excuse for poor practice.

 

[blueone]

Thats still Applied is it not?

Seems like looking for an excuse for poor practice.

Of course it is still Applied Materials. Foreign subsidiaries of US multi-nationals are expected to obey the same US laws as the company headquarters. (My clarification wasn't intended to present an excuse, it was simply the facts.)

US government reminds non-US companies of requirement to comply with US sanctions and export controls | DLA Piper

www.dlapiper.com