Intel getting help from Commerce Secretary Raimondo as part of effort to spur U.S. production

[hist78]

Trump's approach to such matters is rooted in his business acumen and a straightforward view of economic relationships, where he sees the imposition of tariffs as a means to correct what he considers imbalances in trade. His comments also imply a confidence in his ability to see through what he might describe as 'propaganda'—narratives that downplay the challenges posed by foreign competition—to focus on what he believes are the core economic realities facing the United States.

Former President Trump's comments reflect his business-oriented perspective on international trade and his belief in protecting American economic interests. As a successful businessman known for his assertive approach to negotiation, Trump often advocated for measures such as tariffs and taxes as tools to level the playing field and safeguard American businesses.
His statement suggests that he perceives Taiwan's success in certain industries, particularly in technology and manufacturing, as a competitive threat that could have been mitigated by more aggressive trade policies. Trump's perspective is that he has identified the crux of the issue—foreign competition impacting American industry—and believes that direct action should have been taken to address it.

My answer is the same:

"Mr. Trump probably had no time or interest to talk to his own cabinet members (like Secretary Mike Pompeo) about TSMC and the semiconductor industry in general. He likely didn't have time or interest to speak with senators and representatives from both the Republican and Democratic parties who worked hard to architect the Chips Act and bring TSMC to Arizona."

 

[jim_22222]

My answer is the same:

"Mr. Trump probably had no time or interest to talk to his own cabinet members (like Secretary Mike Pompeo) about TSMC and the semiconductor industry in general. He likely didn't have time or interest to speak with senators and representatives from both the Republican and Democratic parties who worked hard to architect the Chips Act and bring TSMC to Arizona."

nope,

It's important to recognize that Mr. Trump's comments regarding Taiwan and the semiconductor industry are not made in isolation but are part of a broader dialogue on trade and economic policy. As President, Mr. Trump was known for his hands-on approach to trade issues and his willingness to engage in direct negotiation tactics. It is plausible that he had substantive discussions about the semiconductor industry with key cabinet members, including Secretary Mike Pompeo, and was briefed on the intricacies of the CHIPS Act and the efforts to attract TSMC to Arizona.
Given the strategic importance of the semiconductor industry to national security and economic competitiveness, it is likely that Mr. Trump was aware of the significance of TSMC's investment and the bipartisan efforts to bolster the U.S. semiconductor manufacturing capacity. His statement may reflect a calculated stance, informed by investigations and conversations with advisors and legislators, rather than a lack of engagement with the subject.

 

[tooLongInEDA]

Trump's approach to such matters is rooted in his business acumen and a straightforward view of economic relationships, where he sees the imposition of tariffs as a means to correct what he considers imbalances in trade. His comments also imply a confidence in his ability to see through what he might describe as 'propaganda'—narratives that downplay the challenges posed by foreign competition—to focus on what he believes are the core economic realities facing the United States.

Former President Trump's comments reflect his business-oriented perspective on international trade and his belief in protecting American economic interests. As a successful businessman known for his assertive approach to negotiation, Trump often advocated for measures such as tariffs and taxes as tools to level the playing field and safeguard American businesses.
His statement suggests that he perceives Taiwan's success in certain industries, particularly in technology and manufacturing, as a competitive threat that could have been mitigated by more aggressive trade policies. Trump's perspective is that he has identified the crux of the issue—foreign competition impacting American industry—and believes that direct action should have been taken to address it.

This - your read of Trump's view (which may or may not be correct) - reflects a deluded zero sum game view of the world. The US has made a massive net gain from Taiwan and TSMC's tech industries - what the fabless companies and their customers gained vastly outweighs anything companies like Intel have lost. And let's not forget that for decades, Taiwan was the place for all the very low margin stuff in PCs while Intel and Microsoft were eating almost all the profits. And you cannot have all of the benefits and none of the drawbacks.

If Trump believes that tariffs and subsidies are the route to lasting US success here, that's not "business acumen". It's delusion.

 

[jim_22222]

This - your read of Trump's view (which may or may not be correct) - reflects a deluded zero sum game view of the world. The US has made a massive net gain from Taiwan and TSMC's tech industries - what the fabless companies and their customers gained vastly outweighs anything companies like Intel have lost. And let's not forget that for decades, Taiwan was the place for all the very low margin stuff in PCs while Intel and Microsoft were eating almost all the profits. And you cannot have all of the benefits and none of the drawbacks.

If Trump believes that tariffs and subsidies are the route to lasting US success here, that's not "business acumen". It's delusion.

tsmc is quitely strangling intc if you are not sleeping.

Shared pain shared gain: the start of a monopoly in leading-edge logic chip manufacturing ?

so you think Arizona is large enough to have multiple fabs in same neighbor hood. a lot of work ers like it for job opportunity. intc maybe is just dumb. or smart, they know tsmc can't compete with them. what you think Arizona has been courting TSMC since 2013, so after dating for many years it...

semiwiki.com

 

[XYang2023]

The analyst in Taiwan mentioned that there is an abundance of Nvidia’s GPUs in mainland China (he said it is likely that they are from Singapore). This shows that the ban on high-end GPUs is ineffective.

Given that is the case, I don’t understand the logic of the Commerce Department not allowing Intel to sell client CPUs to Huawei. The revenue could be used to build fabs.

What the government is doing is not helping to relocate leading-edge production back to the US.

 

[tooLongInEDA]

tsmc is quitely strangling intc if you are not sleeping.

Shared pain shared gain: the start of a monopoly in leading-edge logic chip manufacturing ?

so you think Arizona is large enough to have multiple fabs in same neighbor hood. a lot of work ers like it for job opportunity. intc maybe is just dumb. or smart, they know tsmc can't compete with them. what you think Arizona has been courting TSMC since 2013, so after dating for many years it...

semiwiki.com

Not sure what your point is here.

Besides which, TSMC is succeeding because it offers products and services that its customers want. No one is stopping Intel from doing the same. Apart from Intel themselves. Just how is that TSMC's fault ?

 

[jim_22222]

Not sure what your point is here.

Besides which, TSMC is succeeding because it offers products and services that its customers want. No one is stopping Intel from doing the same. Apart from Intel themselves. Just how is that TSMC's fault ?

I would suggest you to play some monopoly game with some one and get some idea of it.

 

[Mooredaddy]

What Happened: Trump had earlier suggested that Taiwan should compensate the U.S. for defense, accusing the island nation of taking American semiconductor business.
"Taiwan, they took our business away. We should have stopped them. We should have taxed them. We should have tariffed them," said Trump,

so you think you are smarter than trump on this subject?

Trump Misunderstands Taiwan's Role In Chip Industry, Says Economy Minister: 'The President Has A Lot On His Plate' - Taiwan Semiconductor (NYSE:TSM)

Trump had earlier suggested that Taiwan should compensate the U.S. for defense, accusing the island nation of taking American semiconductor business.

www.benzinga.com

Anyone is smarter than trump on any subject, especially semi conductors. The man is a total idiot. Just listen to him speak

 

[Mooredaddy]

Trump's approach to such matters is rooted in his business acumen and a straightforward view of economic relationships, where he sees the imposition of tariffs as a means to correct what he considers imbalances in trade. His comments also imply a confidence in his ability to see through what he might describe as 'propaganda'—narratives that downplay the challenges posed by foreign competition—to focus on what he believes are the core economic realities facing the United States.

Former President Trump's comments reflect his business-oriented perspective on international trade and his belief in protecting American economic interests. As a successful businessman known for his assertive approach to negotiation, Trump often advocated for measures such as tariffs and taxes as tools to level the playing field and safeguard American businesses.
His statement suggests that he perceives Taiwan's success in certain industries, particularly in technology and manufacturing, as a competitive threat that could have been mitigated by more aggressive trade policies. Trump's perspective is that he has identified the crux of the issue—foreign competition impacting American industry—and believes that direct action should have been taken to address it.

Business “acumen” you cannot be serious. He’s gone bankrupt how many times? The man has no idea what he is talking about. Dunning Kruger much…

 

[tooLongInEDA]

I would suggest you to play some monopoly game with some one and get some idea of it.

Still no idea what your point actually was !!!

 

[prime007]

nope,

It's important to recognize that Mr. Trump's comments regarding Taiwan and the semiconductor industry are not made in isolation but are part of a broader dialogue on trade and economic policy. As President, Mr. Trump was known for his hands-on approach to trade issues and his willingness to engage in direct negotiation tactics. It is plausible that he had substantive discussions about the semiconductor industry with key cabinet members, including Secretary Mike Pompeo, and was briefed on the intricacies of the CHIPS Act and the efforts to attract TSMC to Arizona.
Given the strategic importance of the semiconductor industry to national security and economic competitiveness, it is likely that Mr. Trump was aware of the significance of TSMC's investment and the bipartisan efforts to bolster the U.S. semiconductor manufacturing capacity. His statement may reflect a calculated stance, informed by investigations and conversations with advisors and legislators, rather than a lack of engagement with the subject.

Given what's been reported about how Trump previously educated & handled important national security issues, I do NOT believe he would take the time to "be aware of the significance of TSMC's investment" nor would he try to understand "the bipartisan efforts to bolster the U.S. semiconductor manufacturing capacity".
US intelligence community ‘struggled’ to brief Trump, CIA study says

My opinion...Trump is not fit to be President of the United States. The fact that the Republican base can't find/won't accept a better alternative (and there are plenty) speaks to how far the party has fallen.

 

[DepthFirst]

In some ways, Pat Gelsinger seems to have a limited ability to sense his surroundings and the world.

For example, during the peak of the pandemic, he informed the White House that Intel was considering utilizing a non-Intel idle fab in mainland China to help address the semiconductor shortage. The White House's response was: "You’ve got to be kidding!"

Under his leadership, Intel published a series of videos ridiculing Apple Mac computers. After that, he still had the audacity to say that Intel hopes Apple will one day become a customer of Intel Foundry.

Pat Gelsinger also likes to remind people how dangerously located TSMC and Taiwan are. But he seems to forget that Intel itself has fabs, R&D centers, and about 12,000 employees in Israel, a region with ongoing and serious conflict.

The list can go on for a while. In corporate America, Pat Gelsinger is a unique case.

Having 10% of employees located in Israel vs what, ~90% of 3nm and below fab market share in Taiwan? These are entirely different orders of magnitude of risk profiles.

 

[delong.height]

Good luck with that. I can assure you Apple, Nvidia, and AMD all know that but it comes down to competitive silicon (PPAC). Will the US consumer pay more for US made silicon that is less competitive? Will investors accept lower margins and lower profits? I can assure you the answer will be a resounding no. Raimondo should know that, she is deflecting.

The Question I have for Raimondo is: Do you enjoy your job? Because if you do not help Intel your legacy will be muddied. I will rally the SemiWiki community and we will march! No semiconductors no peace!!!! Bring mud!!!!

That is why Donald Trump should be elected, he will force them to allocate more chip production to US, whether it be Intel or TSMC. That's the only way now.

 

[soAsian]

Initially, I thought Pat would be like Lisa Su and turn Intel around, but it seems I was mistaken. Pat's approach has been to create a grand vision without tangible results, downplay his competitor's achievements in AI chips as luck, and cry a lot.

 

[delong.height]

I believe the U.S. government already knew that Intel was going to face enormous difficulties and that many building blocks, such as ecosystems, manufacturing technology, management effectiveness, financial viability, customer relationships, and trust, are not things that can be built solely with taxpayers' money.

I don't think they know it. I do believe the TSMC + its customers want to kill Intel. When TSMC held its event in Dec 2022, CEOs of Apple, AMD, Nvidia, ASML all shown up. Has anyone shown up during Intel's Arizona opening or Ohio's. I don't think any ever participated, not even ASML. All these competitors know how a mighty Intel could potentially disrupt their business model, and they don't want to give it a second life.

And the government don't really care about taxpayers' money, in fact no one does. And you won't either because everyone know there are even more money that have been distributed to Israel, Taiwan, and Ukrine for the past decades and more. People don't give a shit over how it's spent, otherwise the government would've listened years ago.

And based on the governments' actions. Intel plan on spending 100B in US, 90B in Europe before the most recent fiasco. There hasn't been much of government support, and let's face it. Intel was awarded with 8B. TSMC and Samsung both get 6B each. But what is their scale of investment? Samsung, sure it does spend a good amount.

But for TSMC, and let's be critical. It's not the best technology at that time these fabs are operational, nor does it have the same level of planned investments (65 billion vs Intel's 100 billion.) The government subsidy are not proportional to how the investment is.

First fab: Production is expected to begin in the first half of 2025, using 4nm technology.Second fab: Production is expected to begin in 2028, using 2nm and 3nm technology.Third fab: Production is expected to begin by the end of the decade, using 2nm or more advanced technology.The total investment in the project is $65 billion

With intel's original plan as follows

Intel's plan to expand its semiconductor manufacturing facilities in the United States includes:

Arizona
Intel is building two new fabs, Fab 52 and Fab 62, at a $20 billion project that started in 2021 (but actually at 30B later on). Fab 52 is expected to be operational this year, and Fab 62 is expected to be operational next year.

Ohio
Intel's largest fab will be built in Ohio, and mass production is expected in 2027–2028. The plant will create 3,000 new jobs, with over 70% of those being manufacturing technicians.

Oregon
Intel is expanding its chipmaking plant in Oregon.

Intel's overall plan is to invest $100 billion over the next five years in these locations

So I don't think anyone on this forum can blame Pat Gelsinger for his talking. US government literally stabs him at the back. The only thing I would to blame is that he trust this country too much.

 

[delong.height]

The U.S. government, policymakers, and TSMC are likely more practical and programmatic than people think.

TSMC's major R&D centers, supply chain, ecosystem, and fabs are in Taiwan or close to Taiwan. If the U.S. government demands that TSMC replicate everything on U.S. soil within three years to produce the most advanced chips in Arizona, it would not only be far from realistic but would also pose many challenges and risks to both the U.S. government and TSMC. It would be reckless!

For example, ASML has 3,600 employees from 25 countries currently working in Taiwan to support TSMC and other semiconductor companies' operations. Several Japanese chemical manufacturers that provide materials to TSMC have their biggest or most advanced factories located in Taiwan rather than Japan. TSMC can build one or two fabs in Arizona, but will those partners and suppliers follow TSMC to Arizona in time?

The U.S. government has no intention to harm TSMC. Helping TSMC succeed, and in turn, rebuilding U.S. semiconductor manufacturing capability, is a prerequisite for achieving many other important policy goals.

TSMC's N5/N4 fab in Arizona will start high-volume manufacturing (HVM) in 2025. It's a good, solid, and more measured start for all the parties involved. The N3/N2 nodes are scheduled to start HVM in 2028. By the way, N5/N4 are definitely not mature nodes.

The trust and collaboration between the U.S. government and TSMC are strong and extensive. IMO, the mutual trust level is probably on par with or even stronger than the trust between the U.S. government and Intel nowadays.

Yes, it's not mature nodes, but it definitely not the leading edge. And I don't think this country want it. I do believe that everything has to be the best, espically in semiconductor manufacturing. If you don't have the most cutting edge process node here, all those suppliers to TSMC are not going to bring their best to USA. Everything will still reside in Asia. What America has is just a shell with TSMC logo on the building.

The best R&D does need to live in USA, you cannot simply trust that and hand over to Taiwan. Those best things in the world may not be retained much in case there is a war.

 

[delong.height]

What Happened: Trump had earlier suggested that Taiwan should compensate the U.S. for defense, accusing the island nation of taking American semiconductor business.
"Taiwan, they took our business away. We should have stopped them. We should have taxed them. We should have tariffed them," said Trump,

so you think you are smarter than trump on this subject?

Trump Misunderstands Taiwan's Role In Chip Industry, Says Economy Minister: 'The President Has A Lot On His Plate' - Taiwan Semiconductor (NYSE:TSM)

Trump had earlier suggested that Taiwan should compensate the U.S. for defense, accusing the island nation of taking American semiconductor business.

www.benzinga.com

Trump is doing the right thing. And I do think he better elected.

 

[delong.height]

This - your read of Trump's view (which may or may not be correct) - reflects a deluded zero sum game view of the world. The US has made a massive net gain from Taiwan and TSMC's tech industries - what the fabless companies and their customers gained vastly outweighs anything companies like Intel have lost. And let's not forget that for decades, Taiwan was the place for all the very low margin stuff in PCs while Intel and Microsoft were eating almost all the profits. And you cannot have all of the benefits and none of the drawbacks.

If Trump believes that tariffs and subsidies are the route to lasting US success here, that's not "business acumen". It's delusion.

Yes TSMC has made the past ten year a better world than Intel. But now, it is threat. And TSMC is the biggest of all because it controls 99% of advanced semiconductor manufacturing, and pose to increase further in the coming years. And there's no rebalancing act that can be done less than a decade, it take more than a decade given the current disbursement of CHIPS ACT

 

[osnium]

Yes, it's not mature nodes, but it definitely not the leading edge. And I don't think this country want it. I do believe that everything has to be the best, espically in semiconductor manufacturing. If you don't have the most cutting edge process node here, all those suppliers to TSMC are not going to bring their best to USA. Everything will still reside in Asia. What America has is just a shell with TSMC logo on the building.

The best R&D does need to live in USA, you cannot simply trust that and hand over to Taiwan. Those best things in the world may not be retained much in case there is a war.

Is the US capable of doing the best R&D anymore? It’s something that needs to be earned by commitment, competence , hard work and perseverance, which are all qualities starting to fade away in the US. You can also argue that once Samsung gets out of its current slump, there will be much more balance in the world.

 

[delong.height]

Not sure what your point is here.

Besides which, TSMC is succeeding because it offers products and services that its customers want. No one is stopping Intel from doing the same. Apart from Intel themselves. Just how is that TSMC's fault ?

I can't argue with that, but you do need to understand that there's a far more need in balancing the two/three companies in need of greater competition. And TSMC may be good. It has a good act in place, but not its customers. Their customers always want to have a secondary sources that is cheap and good. Intel can be good, but it will never be cheap. Doing so just hurts its bottom line. This is TSMC's fault. It is in a position that is soo good that even if it does nothing obvious. Its clients are refusing to switch because there is no replacement.

And the market position and geographic, the government support (that Taiwan enabled both in terms of talent and resources) are unbalanced for so long.

Putting a tariff in place is the best way to protect America's interest.