Nvidia CEO downplays role in lifting US ban on chip sales to China
CEO Jensen Huang, speaking Wednesday in the Chinese capital Beijing, was upbeat about the prospects for the H20 chip, which was designed to meet U.S. restrictions on technology exports to China but nonetheless blocked in April.
He met U.S. President Donald Trump before his trip and his company announced this week it had received assurances that sales to China would be approved.
'I don't think I changed his mind,' Huang told a cluster of journalists, many of whom asked for his autograph or to take selfies with him.
A carefully organized press conference at a luxury hotel descended into a crowd scene when Huang arrived in his trademark leather jacket and started taking questions randomly in his characteristic casual style.
Export controls and tariffs were something companies must adapt to in a world he said was reconfiguring itself. He described his role as informing governments in the U.S. and elsewhere of the nature and unintended consequences of their policies.
The decision to lift the ban on the H20 chip was entirely in the hands of the American and Chinese governments and whatever trade talks they had, he said.
'We can only influence them, inform them, do our best to provide them with facts,' Huang said. 'And then beyond that is out of our control.'
Nvidia said in April that sales restrictions on its chip in China on national security grounds would cost the company $5.5 billion. The White House also blocked a chip from Advanced Micro Devices. Both companies say the Commerce Department is now moving forward with license applications to export them to China.
Huang said his company would likely be able to recover some of its losses but it's unclear how much. That will depend on how many H20 orders are received and how quickly Nvidia can meet the demand.
'I think that H20 is going to be very successful here,' he said, noting the chip's memory bandwidth makes it a good fit for the AI models being developed by Chinese companies such as DeepSeek and Alibaba.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
9 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Unity Stock Has Ben Red Hot. Should You Buy, Sell, or Hold U Shares Here?
Unity (U) has been on an impressive run, with its stock surging 97% over the past three months. Much of the momentum comes from growing optimism around Unity's innovation in advertising technology. The company has introduced a new AI platform designed to enhance ad performance within games and apps, a key revenue stream for Unity. Adding to the positives is the strength in the broader macroeconomic environment. With the economy remaining relatively resilient, expectations for increased advertising spending are also helping lift the market's outlook for Unity stock. As more companies boost their ad budgets, Unity stands to benefit through its ad-tech ecosystem. More News from Barchart Dear Google Stock Fans, Mark Your Calendars for July 23 Dear UnitedHealth Stock Fans, Mark Your Calendars for July 29 Peter Thiel Is Betting Big on This Ethereum Treasury Stock. Should You Buy Shares Now? Our exclusive Barchart Brief newsletter is your FREE midday guide to what's moving stocks, sectors, and investor sentiment - delivered right when you need the info most. Subscribe today! However, with Unity stock gaining significantly in value and its business still in transition toward a sustainable growth platform, is now the right time to buy, or is it time to cash in? A New Engine for Ad Revenue: Enter Unity Vector Notably, Unity has swiftly rolled out its Unity Vector, the company's new AI-powered ad platform. Vector has already begun to show strong performance gains compared to Unity's legacy ad products. For a company that derives a large chunk of its revenue from ad-based Grow Solutions, largely structured on revenue or profit-sharing models, these improvements are important. Unity's advertising clients rely heavily on the company to generate their income, so higher performance means stronger incentives to keep spending on Unity's platform. Early results are promising. On Apple's iOS platform, Unity Vector is driving higher install rates and better in-app purchase values, a win-win for app developers and advertisers alike. Though the Android rollout is still in its early stages, performance indicators are trending in a similar direction. This has already translated to a stronger-than-expected result in Unity's first-quarter Grow segment revenue, which came in at $285 million, down 4% year-over-year, but still ahead of management's guidance, thanks to the accelerated Vector rollout. While the full impact of Vector won't be fully visible in the company's financials until future quarters, Unity is already setting expectations. In Q2, it projects the Grow segment's revenue to hold steady, as gains from Vector are likely to offset declines in older ad products. The bigger bet is that Vector's AI-driven adaptability will provide Unity's customers with better return on investment over time, anchoring long-term loyalty and spending. Strength in Create: A More Diversified Growth Story Unity's Create segment, which provides tools for game and interactive content development, has also been gaining traction. Subscription revenue is showing double-digit year-over-year growth, even as the company transitions away from its lower-margin professional services. Create segment's revenue in Q1 was $150 million, down 8% year-over-year. However, the quality of that revenue has improved, with the subscription business now comprising nearly 80% of the total. A significant part of that success is Unity 6. Since launch, Unity 6 has surpassed 4.4 million downloads, with 43% of active users already upgraded. What's especially compelling is Unity's growth beyond gaming. Its use case in industries such as healthcare, manufacturing, and architecture is now the fastest-growing segment of its subscription business. This diversification is opening new revenue streams and buffering the company against cyclicality in mobile gaming. Unity Transforming Into a Leaner, More Disciplined Company Despite some short-term revenue softness resulting from the strategic pivot, Unity's operational improvements are evident. Its adjusted EBITDA margins grew 200 basis points year-over-year in Q1, reflecting cost discipline. The company also reported adjusted EPS of $0.24 for the quarter, signaling a renewed focus on shareholder returns, including tighter management of stock-based compensation and dilution. Looking ahead, Unity expects second-quarter revenue to be between $415 million and $425 million, with adjusted EBITDA likely to be in the range of $70 million to $75 million. The company is confident that improved ad performance will help return the Grow segment to revenue growth, while Create continues to benefit from rising subscription momentum. Analysts Remain Cautious, But Unity's Long-Term Potential Is Solid While Unity is poised to deliver strong financial performance driven by Vector and broader platform adoption, not all analysts are endorsing the stock due to the recent run. Unity currently has a 'Moderate Buy' consensus rating, reflecting a mix of enthusiasm and caution. Furthermore, the stock is already trading above its Street-high price target, implying that analysts see limited upside. That said, the long-term story remains compelling. The company is modernizing its core ad business, strengthening relationships with developers, and making real inroads into high-value industries outside of gaming. If Unity can maintain its execution and continue delivering on its AI and platform-driven vision, the company could evolve from a turnaround play into a sustainable growth story. Final Take: A Stock to Watch, If Not Chase With strong performance drivers, including Vector, improved financial metrics, and diversified growth avenues, Unity appears well-positioned for the future. While some caution is warranted after the recent price surge, investors may want to keep Unity on their radar, especially as a pullback offers a more attractive entry point. On the date of publication, Amit Singh did not have (either directly or indirectly) positions in any of the securities mentioned in this article. All information and data in this article is solely for informational purposes. This article was originally published on Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
The Hill
10 minutes ago
- The Hill
The rescission package is a chance to get serious about cutting spending
Senate passage of the $9 billion rescissions package compiled by the Trump administration marks the first reduction in federal spending since the Tea Party era. Over a decade ago, fiscal conservatives led by my former boss, the late Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), forced the first year-to-year reduction ($150 billion) in federal spending since the end of the Korean War. Between fiscal years 2012 and 2013, Coburn and his colleagues added on an earmark moratorium that saved $140 billion over 10 years and an additional $725 billion in savings from consolidating duplicative programs through Government Accountability Office recommendations. That brought the tally to over $1 trillion. The Trump administration was right to aspire to eclipse that total and cut spending by more than $2 trillion, but it still has a long way to go. In fact, if the clock were to stop today, the Trump administration and Republican Party would have to defend expanding the administrative state by $75 billion. The recently passed budget reconciliation bill directs $45 billion to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency's detention budget and nearly $30 billion to ICE's enforcement and deportation operations over the next four years. The bill directs an additional $46.5 billion to border security infrastructure, which is more of a fixed cost than an agency expansion. Congress and the administration do deserve credit and praise for slowing the growth rate of Medicaid by $1 trillion over 10 years. But that win does not reverse the progressive left's quest to expand the administrative state. Supporters of spending more on immigration enforcement have a strong case that spending $75 billion to grow a federal agency will more than pay for itself over time. According to the Federation for American Immigration Reform, illegal immigration and 'open borders' costs American taxpayers $150.7 billion annually. Most of these costs (about $70 billion) are imposed on state and local communities through K-12 education expenses, while $22 billion goes to medical expenses. The Manhattan Institute estimated that the surge of 8.7 million illegal immigrants would cost $1.15 trillion over the lifetime of the new illegal immigrants. They conclude, 'Mass deportations would significantly reduce the national debt over the long run, but a policy of selective legalization, coupled with mass deportations, would be even more fiscally beneficial, reducing the debt by about $1.9 trillion.' The plan in the 'big, beautiful' bill is both well-intentioned and well-conceived, but no Congress can guarantee a future Congress or administration will ensure the plan is well executed. If history is any guide, these funds could become a permanent expansion of a bureaucracy rather than a prudent surge designed to address an emergency. The uncertainty about whether a plan could be spectacularly successful or wasteful underscores the urgent need for Congress to take serious steps to reduce our unsustainable debt and deficits. The Senate rescissions package only saves $9 billion, leaving Trump's second-term administrative state expansion at around $65 billion. Even that modest package faced serious headwinds in the Senate. Some Republican senators balked at proposed cuts to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Others are expressed concerns about cuts to life-saving humanitarian assistance. In moments like this, I am often asked, 'What would Coburn do?' I suspect his colleagues who served with him, who will determine the fate of this package in the House, were asking the same question. Coburn was an unapologetic supporter of the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief or PEPFAR. He said the program is 'not an earmark; it is a policy that's proven, that's worked.' But Coburn was also not afraid of insisting that funds go to those who had contracted HIV instead of those wanting to help people with HIV. In 2008, he was vilified for placing a hold on PEPFAR reauthorization until he could be assured that 55 percent of PEPFAR funds be spent on treatment rather than overhead. But that distinction was critical. I suspect Coburn would remind his colleagues that the 'E' in PEPFAR stands for 'emergency.' The program was never meant to be an open-ended entitlement to be funded in perpetuity. Today, he would be working with his colleagues to continue life-saving humanitarian assistance that advances American national interests, while eliminating spending that advances faddish ideological agendas and bloated bureaucracy. All sides should agree that our foreign aid process, which has funded fraud and terrorism, needs a dramatical overhaul. The administration has said that if Congress passes this rescissions package it will send more. This a chance for Congress to assure taxpayers that instead of expanding federal agencies, they want to expand Americans' personal agency and their ability to pursue happiness on their terms, with their own resources and talents. Some progress toward that goal would be better than no progress.
San Francisco Chronicle
10 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Border Patrol hiring spree offers lessons as another immigration agency embarks on massive growth
McALLEN, Texas (AP) — In 2006, top U.S. Border Patrol officials were asked how long it would take to hire 6,000 agents, a roughly 50% increase at the time. Michael Fisher, then deputy chief in San Diego, says the officials concluded they would need five years. 'You have 2 1/2 years,' Fisher recalls being told. With Immigration and Customs Enforcement now preparing to add 10,000 employees within five years to assist with President Donald Trump's mass deportation efforts, the Border Patrol's torrid expansion in the early 2000s serves as a cautionary tale. Hiring and training standards were changed and arrests for employee misconduct rose. Pressure to turbo-charge growth can also lead to attrition. "If they don't uphold pretty rigorous standards and background checks, you can end up hiring the wrong people, and then you pay a huge price in how the public perceives them,' said Gil Kerlikowske, who was commissioner of Customs and Border Protection, the Border Patrol's parent agency, from 2014 to 2017. ICE, the main agency responsible for arresting and deporting people within the U.S., is set to get $76.5 billion, nearly 10 times its annual budget, under a bill Trump signed on July 4. Most of that money is for detention, but some is for hiring and other uses. The White House says ICE will grow from 20,000 employees to about 30,000. 'To do it today is an effort that needs to start years ago,' said Matthew Hudak, former Border Patrol deputy chief. 'The funding is there, but it is nearly impossible to bring in that many people that quickly because you hit challenges." The Border Patrol nearly doubled its workforce from 11,264 agents in October 2005 to 21,444 agents six years later. To recruit officers, the agency sponsored a NASCAR race car and bull riding contests. It aired ads during Dallas Cowboys football games. It advertised at military bases. Billboards and job fairs hundreds of miles from the border promised fulfilling careers, resulting in thousands of applications a week. The agency also loosened some hiring guidelines and training requirements. The age limit for new hires was raised to 40 years old from 37. Spanish language training was cut by up to 30 days, some training was moved online and other instruction was shifted to the field to lessen time at a training academy that the agency opened in Artesia, New Mexico, during the hiring surge, according to a Government Accountability Office report. Arrests for illegal crossings fell to their lowest levels in decades — a sign for some that the strategy succeeded. But other measurements were more troubling. In 2008, the Border Patrol struggled to keep new agents, with about 20% failing to graduate from the academy and more leaving after returning to their stations. Arrests of CBP employees for misconduct increased to 336 in the 2012 fiscal year from 190 seven years earlier. The agency saw a spate of high-profile corruption cases, including agents accused of smuggling people across the border or working with drug cartels to bring illegal drugs into the U.S. The polygraph pass rate for new applicants tumbled to 33% in 2012 from 58% four years earlier. While the accuracy of the tests came under scrutiny, one applicant admitted that his brother-in-law, a known Mexican drug smuggler, asked him to use his employment to facilitate cocaine trafficking. Another admitted to using marijuana 9,000 times, including the night before the exam. A 2015 Homeland Security report found that the number of investigators assigned to internal wrongdoing was 'woefully inadequate' for the agency's growth. "Any time you have massive political pressure to beef up overnight, it never turns out well," said T.J. Bonner, the former president of the Border Patrol agents union who retired in 2011. "Too many corners have to be cut. Then when things go wrong. the fingers get pointed.' ICE and Homeland Security did not respond to questions about lessons that the Border Patrol's hiring spree or detailed plans for hiring at ICE. 'The unprecedented funding for ICE will enable my hard-working officers and agents to continue making America safe again by identifying, arresting and removing criminal aliens from our communities,' Todd Lyons, the acting ICE director, said after Trump signed the bill. Critics say the administration's policy to target anyone in the country illegally, not just those with criminal records, could lead to abuses. Stephen Miller, Trump's deputy chief of staff and lead architect of his immigration policies, had set an aggressive target of at least 3,000 arrests a day even before any additional hiring. 'When there are no priorities, everybody's a priority,' said Nayna Gupta, policy director of the American Immigration Council. 'You're very likely to see confusion, delay, wrongful arrest, more mistakes when law enforcement agencies, especially large ones, don't have clear direction and guidance for prioritization.' Chuck Wexler, executive director of the Police Executive Research Forum, said competition for qualified law enforcement is tough, with departments now offering signing bonuses of $10,000 to $100,000. Border Patrol staffing has yet to return to its peaks of the early 2010s. Trump tried to increase staffing in his first term. A contract with consulting firm Accenture PLC cost $13.6 million to set up in 2018 and resulted in only two hires over 10 months. ___ Spagat reported from San Diego.
