logo
Nvidia and AMD will give US 15% of China sales. But Chinese state media warns about their chips

Nvidia and AMD will give US 15% of China sales. But Chinese state media warns about their chips

CNN5 hours ago
Asia
China
Tech giants
Donald TrumpFacebookTweetLink
Follow
Nvidia and AMD have agreed to pay the US government 15% of their revenues from semiconductor sales to China in exchange for export licenses, an unprecedented quid pro quo arrangement aimed at solidifying America's AI business dominance while maintaining trade ties with China.
The deal with the Trump administration allows the companies to obtain export licenses to sell Nvidia's H20 chips and AMD's MI308 chips in China, a US official told CNN. The Financial Times first reported the story Sunday.
The deal came together after Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang met with President Donald Trump on Wednesday, the official said. Although the export licenses were granted Friday, no shipments have yet been made. It's still unclear how the deal will be structured, but the White House may use its recent trade agreements as a template.
'We follow rules the US government sets for our participation in worldwide markets,' a Nvidia spokesperson said in a statement. 'While we haven't shipped H20 to China for months, we hope export control rules will let America compete in China and worldwide.'
Trump said Monday that the AI chips he approved for sale to China are 'obsolete,' but he left open the possibility that Nvidia could export its super high-end Blackwell chips for a higher price.
'The chip that we're talking about, the H20, it's an old chip,' Trump said at a press conference Monday. 'China already has it in a different form, different name, but they have it.'
Trump said Huang, who met with the president Wednesday, wanted to sell the H20 AI chip to China after the Trump administration expressed openness to lifting its export ban on the technology. But Trump demanded payment to the US government in exchange for the export license.
At first, Trump said he wanted Nvidia to pay the US government 20% of sales of its AI chips exported to China, but they negotiated a rate of 15%.
'I said, if I'm going to do that, I want you to pay us, as a country, something, because I'm giving you a release,' Trump said.
The H20 is a sophisticated AI processor, although it is not Nvidia's highest-end processor. The Blackwell chip is significantly more advanced, and the Trump administration has closed the door on the export of that technology to China — even after reversing course on the H20.
However, Trump on Monday said that he'd consider allowing Nvidia to sell the Blackwell chip if Nvidia pays the US government an even steeper cost.
'The Blackwell is superduper advanced. I wouldn't make a deal with that, although it's possible,' Trump said. 'I'd make a deal – a somewhat enhanced in a negative way. Blackwell, in other words, take 30% to 50% off of it, but that's the latest and the greatest in the world. Nobody has it. They won't have it for five years.'
Trump said Huang will return to the White House in the future to discuss selling an 'unenhanced' version of Blackwell.
'I think he's coming to see me again about that, but that will be a unenhanced version of the big one,' Trump said. 'You know, we will sometimes sell fighter jets to a country and we'll give them 20% less than we have.'
The AI chips are in extremely high demand and the arrangement could raise billions of dollars for the US government. But it's unclear how successful the venture will be, because China may not be willing to play ball: Nvidia's H20 chips pose security concerns for China, a social media account linked to Chinese state media said Sunday, as Washington and Beijing near a deadline to strike a deal in trade negotiations in which technology has also emerged as a key issue.
China could choose not to buy US tech firm Nvidia's H20 chips, said the account, Yuyuan Tantian, which is affiliated with state broadcaster CCTV, as it claimed that the artificial intelligence (AI) chips could have 'backdoors' that impact their function and security.
'When a type of chip is neither environmentally friendly, nor advanced, nor safe, as consumers, we certainly have the option not to buy it,' said the commentary, which came after China's cybersecurity administration also raised concerns over backdoor access in those chips.
Nvidia has repeatedly denied that its products have backdoors.
China's access to American technology, especially high-end chips that can be used in the development of artificial intelligence, has become a key issue in trade and tech frictions between the rival economies – as both vie for tech dominance.
A trade truce between the two countries that reduced triple-digit tariffs is set to expire on August 12, though officials have signaled an extension could come into effect following talks in Sweden last month.
Nvidia last month said it would resume sales of the H20 chip to China after the White House changed course on export controls it imposed in April as its trade frictions with China deepened. US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told Bloomberg in an interview at the time that the Nvidia export controls have been a 'negotiating chip' in the larger US-China trade talks.
Nvidia released the H20 chip last year to maintain access to the Chinese market following strict export controls put in place under the Biden administration that stopped the export of chips with greater processing power.
Nvidia's announcement last month that it would be able to export the H20 chip to China raised concerns among some US lawmakers, who support tight controls to prevent China from using American technology to advance its military and AI systems.
Trump administration have correctly said that the H20 chips aren't the top-of-the-line AI chips that can build large language models. As a result, the White House has been willing to open up the market for those chips to maintain US business dominance in AI – without giving up the cream-of-the-crop chips to China, which administration officials say could still pose a national security threat.
China's mounting concern about the security of the chips comes after the White House last month recommended implementing export controls that would verify the location of advanced artificial intelligence chips. China's cyberspace regulator late last month summoned Nvidia over security concerns about 'tracking and positioning' and 'remote shutdown' capabilities.
In a blog post published last week, Nvidia reiterated that its chips did not have back doors, spyware or kill switches and said that 'embedding backdoors and kill switches into chips would be a gift to hackers and hostile actors.'
China's security concerns appear to mirror those that the US has in the past expressed about Chinese technology, most prominently the first Trump administration's campaign against the growing foothold of Chinese tech giant Huawei in global communications infrastructure.
Chinese leaders have also pushed for the country's tech firms to become self-sufficient and reduce reliance on American-made chips to achieve Beijing's AI and tech ambitions, and experts have said that controls on chips like the H20 could push China to speed up its own innovation.
But the H20 is not the only technology that reports suggest is entangled with negotiations between the two sides.
According to another report from the FT also published Sunday, China wants the US to ease export controls on a critical component for artificial intelligence chips as part of a trade deal ahead of a possible summit between President Donald Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping.
Chinese officials have told experts in Washington that Beijing wants the Trump administration to relax export restrictions on high-bandwidth memory (HBM) chips, the FT reported, citing several people familiar with the matter.
The US government imposed export controls on the sale of such memory chips to China last year.
CNN's Nectar Gan contributed to this report.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump meets with Intel CEO after demanding he resign
Trump meets with Intel CEO after demanding he resign

Yahoo

time10 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump meets with Intel CEO after demanding he resign

US President Donald Trump on Monday said he had a "very interesting" meeting with the chief of US chip maker Intel, just days after calling for his resignation. Trump said on his Truth Social platform that he met with Lip-Bu Tan along with Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick and Secretary of Treasury Scott Bessent. "The meeting was a very interesting one," Trump said in the post. "His success and rise is an amazing story." Trump added that members of his cabinet are going to spend time with Tan and bring the president "suggestions" next week. Intel did not respond to a request for comment. Trump demanded last week that the recently-hired boss of Intel resign "immediately," after a Republican senator raised national security concerns over his links to firms in China. "The CEO of INTEL is highly CONFLICTED and must resign, immediately. There is no other solution to this problem," Trump posted on Truth Social last Thursday. Tan released a statement at the time saying that the company was engaged with the Trump administration to address the concerns raised and ensure officials "have the facts." Intel is one of Silicon Valley's most iconic companies but its fortunes have been dwarfed by Asian powerhouses TSMC and Samsung, which dominate the made-to-order semiconductor business. In a statement, Tan said there has been "a lot of misinformation circulating" about his past roles at Walden International and Cadence Design Systems. "I have always operated within the highest legal and ethical standards," Tan said. The Malaysia-born tech industry veteran took the helm at struggling Intel in March, announcing layoffs as White House tariffs and export restrictions muddied the market. Intel's niche has been chips used in traditional computing processes, which are steadily being eclipsed by the AI revolution. gc/bjt Sign in to access your portfolio

Of course Trump wants to flex on D.C. Where are the Democrats to stop him?
Of course Trump wants to flex on D.C. Where are the Democrats to stop him?

Los Angeles Times

time11 minutes ago

  • Los Angeles Times

Of course Trump wants to flex on D.C. Where are the Democrats to stop him?

Remember 'I alone can fix it'? Donald Trump, who made that laughable statement in his 2016 convention acceptance speech, is now testing the theory in Washington. Trump and his party have been threatening a D.C. takeover for years and made it part of the Republican platform last year. But it was all just empty talk and random uppercase words until a former staffer at the Department of Government Efficiency was reportedly attacked in an attempted carjacking in the wee hours of Aug. 3 in a busy area of bars and restaurants. It doesn't matter at all to Trump that D.C.'s violent crime rate fell to a 30-year low last year and is down another 26% so far this year compared with 2024, or that a police report suggests police saw the incident and intervened. This particular victim — a teenage Elon Musk protégé and notorious DOGE operative — gave this particular president the 'emergency' he needed to declare a 'public safety emergency.' Of course, he called it 'a historic action to rescue our nation's capital from crime, bloodshed, bedlam and squalor and worse.' He has federalized the city's Metropolitan Police Department and deployed 800 members of its National Guard (to start). Over the weekend he sent 450 federal police officers from 18 agencies to patrol the city. It's the second time this year that Trump has played the National Guard card to show who's boss. He sent 4,000 Guard troops and 700 Marines to Los Angeles in June, over the objections of Gov. Gavin Newsom and Mayor Karen Bass, ostensibly to restore order amid immigration raids. But the move sparked new tensions, protests and at least one surreal foray by armed, masked agents into a park where children were attending summer camp. It also drew a legal challenge from Newsom, which is unfolding in court this week. There will be no similar lawsuit in D.C., where I've lived for decades. That's because the U.S. president controls our National Guard. The hard truth is that though Wyoming and Vermont each have fewer people than D.C.'s 700,000-plus residents, D.C. is not a state. It's still in a semi-colonial status, with a mayor and city council whose actions can be nullified by Congress, and with no voting representation in that Congress. In fact, Congress accidentally slashed $1.1 billion from D.C.'s budget — our own money, not federal dollars! — in its cost-cutting frenzy last spring. A promised fix never came, forcing cuts that affect public safety and much else. And yet the city's crime rate has continued to fall. Compared with California, an economic juggernaut of more than 39 million people located thousands of miles from Washington, D.C. is a minuscule and all too convenient target for an executive aiming to prove his manhood, show off to autocrats in other countries or create headlines to distract from news he doesn't like. I could go off on Trump for his lies, overreach and disrespect for D.C. and its right to govern itself. Or the various Republicans who have imposed conservative policies on D.C. for years and now are trying to repeal its home rule law. But what really enrages me is the lack of Democratic nerve — or even bravado — that has left D.C. so vulnerable to Trump and conservative-run Congresses. Where was the modern-day Lyndon Johnson (the 'master of the Senate,' in Robert Caro's phrase) in 2021, to whip support in the narrowly Democratic Senate after the House passed a D.C. statehood bill for the second year in a row? Trump has no mastery beyond bullying and bribery — but those tactics are working fine with Congress, corporations, law firms, academia and sovereign nations across the globe. As former House Speaker Newt Gingrich put it last week: 'You have this rock standing in the middle of history called Donald Trump. And he's saying: 'Do you want to do it my way, or do you want to be crushed? I prefer you do it my way, but if you have to be crushed, that's OK.' ' Gingrich correctly characterized most responses to Trump as 'You know, I've always wanted to be part of the team,' and added: 'If he can sustain this, he's moving into a league that, other than Washington and Lincoln, nobody has gotten to the level of energy, drive and effectiveness that we see with Trump.' Unfortunately, Trump is aiming to speed-raze what Washington and Lincoln built. (He keeps claiming it's 'Liberation Day' for D.C., but the last 'Liberation Day' — his April 2 tariff announcements — tanked the stock market.) The only conceivable antidote is to elect a mad-as-hell Democratic Congress in 2026 and, in 2028, an arm-twisting, strong-arming, terror-inspiring Democratic president who's in a hurry to get things done. Someone who's forceful, persuasive and resolved to use the power they have while they have it. The top priorities, beyond reversing as much institutional and constitutional damage as possible, should be structural: Supreme Court term limits and ethics rules with teeth, a national gerrymandering ban, a sensible and uniform national voter ID policy, and minimum national standards for early voting and mail voting — to protect the will of the people and the republic itself. Equally important, make D.C. the state of Douglass Commonwealth, named after the abolitionist Frederick Douglass rather than the colonizing Christopher Columbus. Rural America has wielded disproportionate power since the late 1800s, when Republicans added sparsely populated states and permanently skewed the Senate. Two new D.C. senators would help correct that imbalance. The problem is that the next president, or even the next Congress, might arrive too late for D.C. Trump has already begun the federal takeover he has threatened so often for so many years. He took over the Kennedy Center. He took over Congress. We should have expected we'd be next. Back in March, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) proposed that D.C. seek temporary sanctuary with Maryland, which ceded most of the land to create the capital in the first place. 'You'd definitely be safer,' he said he told Mayor Muriel Bowser. That offer, joke or not, practical or not, is looking increasingly inviting by the day. Jill Lawrence is a writer and author of 'The Art of the Political Deal: How Congress Beat the Odds and Broke Through Gridlock.' @

SOS: Who will throw fact-checked reporting a life raft?
SOS: Who will throw fact-checked reporting a life raft?

Fast Company

time11 minutes ago

  • Fast Company

SOS: Who will throw fact-checked reporting a life raft?

AI is gobbling up journalism for many of the same reasons humans do: to develop a concrete understanding of the world; to think critically; to differentiate between what is true and what's not; to become a better writer; and to distill history and context into something accessible. But what happens to AI when our journalistic institutions crumble? Upon what foundation of truth will it answer everyone's questions? Write their emails? Do their jobs? Because while the alarm bells have been ringing for journalism for decades, the so-called end of search feels like the potential death knell. What does that mean for AI, and for us as we try to make sense of an increasingly confusing world? In our rush to integrate generative AI into every corner of our lives, we've ignored a fundamental truth: AI cannot function without a baseline of verified facts. And, at the moment, that baseline is built and maintained by so-called 'traditional' journalism (the kind with fact checkers and editors). As AI threatens to upend search, media monetization, and news consumption behaviors, it's also undercutting the very industry that feeds it the facts it depends on. A society cannot function without objective journalism, and neither can AI. Loss of accuracy Recent Apple research says that, 'It doesn't take much to cause generative AI to fall into 'complete accuracy collapse.'' It goes on to show that generative AI models lack strong logical reasoning, unable to function beyond their complexity threshold. I immediately thought of a recent piece from The New Yorker, in which Andrew Marantz weaves together various examples of autocracy, set against thousands of years of history, to (attempt to) make sense of what is happening in America right now. I imagined AI trying to do the same, essentially short-circuiting before being able to form the salient points that make the piece so impactful. When asked to think too hard, the AI breaks. An even more damning report from the BBC reports that AI can't accurately summarize the news. It asked ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, and Perplexity to sum up 100 news stories and asked expert journalists to rate each answer. 'As well as containing factual inaccuracies, the chatbots 'struggled to differentiate between opinion and fact, editorialised, and often failed to include essential context,'' says the report. Almost one-fifth of the summaries included false facts and quote distortions—19%! There's more, of course. This study from MIT Sloan shows that AI tools have a history of fabricating citations and reinforcing gender and racial bias, while this Fast Company article argues that AI-driven journalism's 'good enough' standards are accepted because of the revenue these tools create. And that, of course, is the less human reason AI is gobbling up journalism: the money. None of that money is going back into funding the journalistic institutions that power this whole experiment. What happens to our society when the core pillar of a true and free press collapses under the weight of the thing that has sloppily consumed it? Our AI lords must place real value on fact-checked reporting—right now—to ensure its continued existence.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store