TSMC posts 60% jump in record quarterly profit, but wary of U.S. tariffs
Saying demand for artificial intelligence was getting stronger and stronger, TSMC predicted another leap in sales for the third quarter and hiked its revenue outlook for the full year.
It also noted that key client Nvidia NVDA-Q had recently been allowed by the U.S. government to resume sales to China of its H20 AI chip.
'China is a big market, and my customer can continue to supply the chip to the big market, and it's very positive news for them and in return it's very positive news for TSMC,' Chief Executive C.C. Wei told a press conference.
But momentum for fourth-quarter earnings could be different.
'We are taking into consideration the possible impact of tariffs and a lot of other uncertainties, so we are becoming more conservative,' he said, though he added that TSMC had yet to see any changes in customer behavior so far.
In April-June, net profit hit a historic high of T$398.3-billion ($18.6 billion), up 60.7 per cent year-on-year and marking its fifth straight quarter of double-digit growth. That was well ahead of a T$377.9-billion LSEG SmartEstimate.
For the current quarter, it predicted a leap in revenue of up to 40 per cent and for the full year, it now estimates revenue growth of around 30 per cent in U.S. dollar terms, up from a previous forecast of 'close to the mid-20s.'
But while sales are roaring, TSMC said the Taiwan dollar's appreciation against the U.S. dollar - around 12 per cent so far this year - would dent margins.
Its third-quarter gross margin is expected to fall to between 55.5 per cent and 57.5 per cent, down from 58.6 per cent in the second quarter, also hurt by TSMC's ramp-up of investment in new U.S. and Japanese factories.
However, the company stuck to its capital expenditure plan for the year of $38-billion to $42-billion, and Chief Financial Officer Wendell Huang said it was very unlikely such spending would suddenly drop going forward.
TSMC announced plans for a $100-billion U.S. investment with U.S. President Donald Trump at the White House in March, on top of $65 billion pledged for three plants in the state of Arizona, one of which is up and running.
But Trump has said semiconductor-specific tariffs could come soon. Taiwan was also threatened with a 32 per cent reciprocal tariff rate in April, although it has yet to be notified of an updated figure that some countries have received.
TSMC's second-half earnings could also be affected if sales for Apple AAPL-Q, another major customer, disappoint, said Allen Huang, a vice president at Taiwan's Mega International Securities Investment Services.
Apple typically launches new products in the fourth quarter.
'One warning sign is that Apple's sales in China have been soft,' he said, adding that this was likely a factor in TSMC's caution about earnings towards the end of the year.
Taiwan-listed shares in TSMC surged some 80 per cent last year but have climbed just five per cent for the year to date on worries about tariffs and unfavorable currency exchange rates.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Globe and Mail
an hour ago
- Globe and Mail
Amazon's Earnings: What Comes Next and How to Play It
Shares of tech giant Inc. (NASDAQ: AMZN) finished Thursday's session up nearly 2%, only to tumble more than 6% in after-hours trading following the company's Q2 earnings release. This sharp reversal underlines just how high expectations had gotten after the 40% rally from April's low. The stock's multi-month move meant anything less than a near-perfect report risked triggering a wave of profit-taking, and that appears to be exactly what's happening already. As we'll see below, however, this is also creating a couple of interesting plays for investors to consider depending on their belief in Amazon's potential over the long run, and their near-term appetite for risk. Let's jump in and take a look. The Report Looked Good, But It Had to Be Great At first glance, Amazon seemed to deliver. The company's earnings per share came in more than 25% above expectations, while revenue was up 13.3% year-over-year. Both metrics landed hot and were well above analyst expectations, adding to Amazon's impressive track record of delivering strong headline numbers quarter on quarter. But investors weren't satisfied based on the after-hours price action. As anticipated earlier in the week, any sign of weakness in last night's report could send the bulls running and the bears raging. And Amazon's weaker-than-expected guidance for operating income and some free cash flow concerns seem to have done just that. The range shared by management on the former was notably conservative, while the latter figure is now at its lowest in two years. In that context, it's perhaps not all that hard to see what investor sentiment would swing from risk-on to risk-off so quickly. It remains to be seen how long this switch will last, but in our view, there's little to be worried about regarding Amazon's long-term potential. What the Market Might Be Missing While the overnight sell-off might feel sharp, it's also arguably overdone. This was still an impressive report for Amazon, with revenue growth accelerating across the board and profitability improving at the same time. Overall growth remains strong despite ongoing infrastructure investments and competitive pricing pressures. The bears will point to growing concerns around the company's ability to stay in the lead group of the artificial intelligence (AI) arms race, but CEO Andy Jassy was not overly concerned. He spoke about this on the post-earnings conference call, saying, "I don't believe that we will have fully resolved the capacity we need for the amount of demand that we have in a couple of quarters. I think it will take several quarters, but I do expect that it's going to get better each quarter". Taken in total, there's a strong case to be made that Amazon is still in the early innings of its next growth phase, and Thursday's after-hours drop is more about positioning than fundamentals. 2 Ways to Play It For those of us on the sidelines, what kind of plays should we be looking for? Option one might be to sit back and let the correction play out. A move down to around the $220 level would take the stock back to a key area of support, and, given how one-directional the recent rally has been, would actually be quite healthy. If that $220 level were to hold, and or if we were to see a fresh bullish crossover in the MACD, it would likely mark the start of the next leg higher. Waiting for confirmation here gives you better risk/reward and protects against a deeper pullback. The other option is to start accumulating right away. This argument rests on the idea that Amazon's core thesis remains intact and the bears' concerns are already, or at least close to being, priced in after last night's drop. For big-time believers and long-term investors, this dip could be a gift - especially considering the company's strength across multiple verticals and its growing strength in high-margin, AI-driven businesses. Remember, multiple firms have been reiterating their Buy and Overweight ratings all through 2025, and even as recently as this week. The most recent price target from the team over at UBS Group sees the stock trading north of $270, a move that points to additional upside of around 15% from current levels. Don't expect their bullishness, and that of their peers, to change anytime soon. Before you make your next trade, you'll want to hear this. MarketBeat keeps track of Wall Street's top-rated and best performing research analysts and the stocks they recommend to their clients on a daily basis. Our team has identified the five stocks that top analysts are quietly whispering to their clients to buy now before the broader market catches on... and none of the big name stocks were on the list. They believe these five stocks are the five best companies for investors to buy now...
CTV News
an hour ago
- CTV News
LeBlanc says he expects Carney, Trump will speak in the coming days
President of the King's Privy Council for Canada Dominic LeBlanc speaks at a press conference while Prime Minister Mark Carney listens, on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, Thursday, June 19, 2025. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Patrick Doyle OTTAWA — Dominic LeBlanc says he expects Prime Minister Mark Carney and U.S. President Donald Trump will speak 'over the next number of days' as the United States ratchets up pressure in trade talks. The Canada-U.S. trade minister appeared on CBS's 'Face the Nation' on Sunday and spoke about where talks stand between the two countries. LeBlanc told host Margaret Brennan that while Canada is 'disappointed' with Trump's new 35-per-cent tariffs, he is continuing to work toward a deal that would hopefully strike down trade restrictions between the nations. LeBlanc was in Washington last week attempting to find common ground with the Trump administration ahead of Friday's deadline to secure a new deal between the trading partners. While Mexico was granted a 90-day delay on new duties, Trump on Friday hit Canada with a 35-per-cent tariff on all goods that are not compliant with the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement on trade. Canada also continues to face U.S. tariffs on steel, aluminum and automobiles as well as Trump's new 50-per-cent tariffs on semi-finished copper products. This report by The Canadian Press was first published Aug. 3, 2025. Craig Lord, The Canadian Press
Canada News.Net
2 hours ago
- Canada News.Net
Heres why the EU keeps losing to China
The summit Brussels-Beijing economic summit spotlighted the blocs mounting strategic confusion and accelerating drift toward isolation The China-EU summit held in Beijing late last month could have been a celebration of 50 years of diplomatic relations between two of the world's largest economic powers. Instead, it served as a sobering reminder of the EU's growing strategic confusion, and its inability to capitalize on the immense opportunities offered by cooperation with China. The summit came at a sensitive moment in global politics. What was once hailed as a mutually beneficial partnership has now become entangled in geopolitics, internal divisions within the EU, and the enduring shadow of Washington's influence. The global turbulence of recent years - the pandemic, and the war in Ukraine - has not only strained relations but also reinforced the EU's dependence on the United States. Rather than renewing a partnership that once stood as a pillar of global economic integration, the EU leaders arrived in Beijing with a familiar agenda: accusations over trade practices, warnings about "security threats," and renewed calls for China to "rein in" Russia. Predictably, no breakthrough was achieved. The deterioration of China-EU relations cannot be understood without revisiting the European Commission's strategic shift in 2019. Under Ursula von der Leyen, Brussels officially categorized China as not just a partner but also a "systemic rival" - a move that introduced suspicion into virtually every area of engagement. Since then, an ideological lens has increasingly shaped EU policy, replacing the pragmatism that once underpinned economic cooperation. The consequences have been stark. Brussels has launched measures to restrict Chinese investment, imposed high tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles, and - most recently - barred Chinese firms from public tenders worth over €5 million. Further escalation came when the EU included two Chinese banks in its latest sanctions package against Russia, signaling that Europe is willing to weaponize economic tools for political purposes. These steps are justified by the EU as "de-risking." By pushing for reduced interdependence in strategic sectors - raw materials, high-tech supply chains, and digital infrastructure - Brussels has aligned itself with Washington's containment playbook, even as European leaders publicly insist on independence. In Beijing, von der Leyen struck a conciliatory tone, declaring the EU's openness to Chinese investment and cooperation. But such statements ring hollow when juxtaposed with her recent warnings at the G7 summit about a looming "China shock" and accusations of Beijing "weaponizing trade." Similarly, the head of EU diplomacy, Kaja Kallas - also present in Beijing - has accused China of fueling the war in Ukraine and waging hybrid operations against Europe. These mixed signals undermine credibility and reinforce perceptions in Beijing that the EU lacks a coherent, autonomous China strategy. More fundamentally, Brussels' approach is internally contradictory. The EU dreams of "strategic autonomy," yet ties its foreign policy to transatlantic priorities. It seeks economic resilience, yet undermines its own competitiveness by disrupting supply chains and limiting market access. It aspires to global leadership, yet isolates itself from the rest of the world by clinging to zero-sum geopolitics. By contrast, China's position at the summit was clear: focus on complementarity, promote free trade, and pursue win-win cooperation in areas that matter for global stability - digital transformation, green development, and infrastructure connectivity. Beijing emphasized its willingness to deepen exchanges in artificial intelligence, clean energy, and scientific research, seeing these sectors as essential to both sides' modernization. For China, the EU remains a strategic partner, not an adversary. Beijing has long supported European integration and consistently encourages the EU to play an independent role in global affairs. From China's perspective, a strong, autonomous Europe is a counterweight to unilateralism and an anchor of multipolarity. This vision aligns with Europe's own interests - but diverges sharply from Washington's preference for a subordinate EU within the transatlantic alliance. From Beijing's perspective, the EU's current challenges - economic slowdown, energy insecurity, and geopolitical vulnerability - are not caused by China. Rather, they stem from internal divisions and policy choices that tether Europe to US strategies. China fears that Europe's drift into a hardline camp could destabilize the international order, a scenario contrary to Beijing's vision of stability and connectivity across Eurasia. The single most contentious issue remains the war in Ukraine. Brussels insists that China's ties with Moscow "destabilize" Europe, while Beijing argues that it is maintaining an independent and neutral position aimed at facilitating a peaceful settlement. EU leaders, however, continue to press China to "use its influence" to end Russia's military operations - effectively asking Beijing to abandon a key strategic partnership. This is neither realistic nor conducive to diplomacy. For now, this geopolitical deadlock overshadows other areas of potential cooperation. So long as the EU views the Ukraine conflict through an existential lens - and equates neutrality with complicity - China-EU relations will remain constrained, regardless of shared economic interests. Despite political frictions, economic ties remain robust. The EU is China's largest trading partner, and China ranks second for the EU. Together, they account for over one-third of global GDP and nearly 30% of global trade in goods and services. Chinese investment in Europe has surpassed $100 billion, and annual flows are roughly balanced with EU investment in China. These numbers underscore a basic truth: the China-EU relationship is too significant to be defined by ideological posturing. Global supply chains, green technology cooperation, and digital innovation cannot advance without mutual engagement. The question is whether Brussels will recognize this before further damage is done. The EU portrays its current trajectory as "rebalancing" and "de-risking." In reality, these policies risk strategic isolation. By securitizing economic ties and subordinating its diplomacy to US priorities in relation to China, the EU undermines its own competitiveness and alienates partners across the globe. The result is an inward-looking bloc that struggles to influence global norms as it dreams of geopolitical power. For China, the lesson is clear: The EU is not ready for a genuine reset. Beijing will continue to engage constructively but will not expect rapid progress. In the long run, the revival of a balanced partnership may depend on a political shift within Europe - a leadership willing to replace ideological rigidity with pragmatic cooperation. The Beijing summit, rather than rekindling optimism, has confirmed the structural divergence between China and the EU. However, it also highlighted what remains at stake: two economic giants whose cooperation - or confrontation - will shape global stability for decades to come. China stands ready to pursue a future based on multilateralism, open trade, and shared development. Whether the EU can free itself from delusions and anxieties and rediscover the value of partnership with Beijing remains an open question. Until then, the EU's fixation on "de-risking" may turn into what it fears most: self-inflicted decline.
