Trump administration seeks an equity stake in chipmaker Intel
Aug. 19 (UPI) -- The Trump administration wants U.S. chipmaker Intel to give the federal government an equity stake to receive $8 billion via the CHIPS and Science Act.
Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick on Tuesday confirmed President Donald Trump wants Intel to give the federal government a 10% stake in Intel in exchange for money promised to it by the Biden administration upon passage of the CHIPS and Science Act.
"We should get an equity stake for our money," Lutnick said when interviewed by CNBC on Tuesday.
"We'll deliver the money, which was already committed under theBiden administration," Lutnick continued. "We'll get equity in return for it."
Intel officials in the fall announced the tech company will receive an $8 billion grant via the CHIPS and Science Act.
The president questions why the federal government is giving that much money to a tech firm that is worth $100 billion, Lutnick said.
Commerce Secretary Scott Bessent also confirmed the Trump administration's demand for equity in Intel, saying it's needed to make the tech firm stable and capable of increasing domestic production of chips. Additionally, Taiwan produces most of the global supply of chips, and U.S. national security requires a domestic supply, Bessent told Bloomberg last week.
The Trump administration's request for equity in Intel comes a day after Japan-based tech investor SoftBank on Monday announced it will invest $2 billion in Intel in exchange for Intel common stock.
"Semiconductors are the foundation of every industry," said Masayoshi Son, SoftBank chairman and chief executive officer. "For more than 50 years, Intel has been a trusted leader in innovation."
Son said SoftBank officials believe Intel will have a "critical role" in expanding the United States' semiconductor manufacturing and supply.
SoftBank will pay $23 per share for Intel stock, which would amount to nearly 87 million common shares.
The Trump administration, likewise, wants equity in Intel in exchange for CHIPs and Science Act funding, rather than giving away taxpayer funds.
Intel had begun building U.S. manufacturing facilities near Columbus, Ohio, with an estimated completion date in 2030.
Intel Chief Executive Officer Lip-Bu Tan last month said the company is slowing the pace of construction and will continue work based on market conditions, CNBC reported.
President Joe Biden signed the CHIPS and Science Act into law on Aug. 9, 2022, which provides about $280 billion in funding for the U.S. semiconductor industry.
Biden lauded the act as a success a year ago in August after tech companies pledged more than $395 billion in investments in electronics and semiconductors and created more than 115,000 jobs during the act's first two years.
U.S. tech firms account for about 10% of the global supply of chips that power artificial intelligence and a variety of consumer goods, including appliances and computers.
The United States was on pace to produce about 30% of the global computer chip supply by 2032, Biden announced.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
7 minutes ago
- New York Post
Trump isn't trying to ‘erase history' at Smithsonian — he's reversing a destructive woke takeover
Liberals were up in arms this week after President Trump said he wanted a review of the Smithsonian Institute — saying their displays were too negative, and too focused on slavery. But Trump isn't trying to 'erase history,' he's looking to reverse a woke movement that has indeed rewritten the American story to highlight suffering rather than providing a balanced picture of our past. Trump's criticism that the Smithsonian is overly focused on slavery is not unreasonable: In nearly every exhibit, critical race theory in general, or slavery specifically, makes an appearance. For instance, its new Benjamin Franklin exhibit on his innovations includes a whole section on slavery — with assumptions, but no proof, that slaves assisted Franklin in his electrical innovations. Even if they hadn't, the curators argue that without their work around the house, Franklin couldn't have spent the time on his experiments! 'Franklin held people enslaved during the time he pursued his electrical experiments. Their labor in his household helped make time that he could use to study electricity. Family, friends, and visitors directly participated in electrical experiments. The records are few and unclear, but enslaved people may also have directly assisted his research.' Another example of the obsession with slavery comes from the National Portrait Gallery; nearly every early Founding Father's description includes a statement on slavery. For example, the description for Thomas Jefferson includes the statement: 'Although Jefferson once called slavery 'an abominable crime,' he consistently enslaved African Americans, including his late wife Martha's half-sister, Sally Hemings, with whom he had several children.' The overemphasis on the history of slavery is a fairly recent development, an offshoot of the Black Lives Matter movement. In 2019, Lonnie G. Bunch III took over as the Secretary of the Smithsonian. Prior to that, Bunch was the founding director of the Smithsonian's National Museum of African American History and Culture, which is nearly exclusively focused on the legacy of slavery, with exhibits such as In Slavery's Wake, Slavery and Freedom, and Make Good the Promise, which deal with the history of slavery. Also in 2019, the Smithsonian collaborated with the New York Times on its 1619 Project, which falsely claims that the United States started, not with the Declaration of Independence or Revolutionary War, but when the first slave ship arrived. As curator Mary Elliot remarked at the time: 'This is a shared history, everyone inherited the legacies of slavery.' But America's history is more than just about slavery, and not everyone inherited this legacy — after all, America is also a nation of immigrants who came after the Civil War. In the Smithsonian 2020 annual report, more obsession with slavery comes into view. The Smithsonian is on a mission to have a completely searchable digital museum called 'The Searchable Museum Initiative.' One may think it would begin with digitization of some our greatest moments in history, such as the landing on the moon, the passing of the US Constitution, or even its great Natural History collections. You would be wrong; the digitization began 'with the museum's Slavery and Freedom exhibition.' The annual report claims that 'The Searchable Museum will provide rich, interactive, digital experiences that match the immersive experience of a visit to the physical museum' — unfortunately, likely as biased as a visit to the museum themselves. The problem with modern museums is not just about the obsession with slavery; it's also about dishonestly painting all of American history as evil and full of horrors — with little or no redeeming qualities. For instance, in the Smithsonian's American Indian Museum in NYC, George Washington hardly gets a mention, but his silhouette is used in a description of him as a 'town destroyer' — supposedly a nickname that Native Americans still use to describe our first President. And yet there's no mention in either of the American Indian Museums — in NYC or DC — about slavery practiced by Native Americans, both before Europeans' arrival and afterward. For example, the Cherokee owned slaves. In 1835, 15,000 Cherokee owned 1,592 African slaves; by the Civil War onset, 17,000 Cherokee owned 4,000 African slaves. While museums should provide an honest account of history, they should not be afraid to showcase and celebrate American achievement, which includes ending slavery. At present, however, museums seem more interested in pushing a woke, revisionist history of the United States. With two new Smithsonian museums in development, the National Museum of the American Latino and the Smithsonian American Women's History Museum, we can expect more of the same — unless we take action against woke propaganda now. Elizabeth Weiss is a professor emeritus of anthropology at San José State University and author of 'On the Warpath: My Battles with Indians, Pretendians, and Woke Warriors.'
New York Post
7 minutes ago
- New York Post
Trump's DC takeover is just Step 1 — dysfunctional capital needs a bigger fix
Last week President Donald Trump declared war on crime in Washington, DC, when he sent in the National Guard and federalized the district's police force for the 30-day period allowable under the DC Home Rule Act. Trump's motives were good: He's right that it's shameful our national capital has become one of our most dangerous cities. He's also right that DC's crime epidemic hurts America's competitiveness and prestige. But the president's month-long law enforcement takeover won't fix that problem — because the problem is not, at its core, bad law enforcement. It's the fact that DC's government has for decades now shown itself incapable of even the most basic level of public administration. Blame it, too, on Congress, which transferred control over the district to the city's own elected government in the Home Rule Act of 1973 — but has refused to admit its mistake and reverse course. Both the Senate and the House of Representatives remain aloof from the problems they created, even as federal staffers, visitors and on occasion their own members are routinely harassed and attacked by criminals on the streets and in their homes. But the US Constitution stipulates that DC is a national public resource, not a self-governing city like any other. Under the Constitution, it is Congress's responsibility to competently administrate it — and Congress has abdicated that responsibility. When the 30-day takeover period is up (assuming Congress does not renew his privileges), Trump will turn the keys back over to a capital city government that can't staff a police force, can't keep young violent offenders off the streets and can't run a functioning crime lab. District officials can't claim to have reduced crime without cooking the books, and can't protect visiting diplomats from being shot And they're not just failing at law enforcement: DC can't keep its public schools out of the basement of national performance rankings, and can't prevent huge homeless encampments from forming while thousands of district-owned public housing units go unoccupied. The only possible solution to such a crisis of mismanagement is to overturn the law that gave home rule to DC and start over from scratch. And if President Trump is serious about tackling the district's dysfunction, he should do just that. First, the president should build up some goodwill by ending his police federalization and troop occupation, preferably earlier than planned. No need to make excuses; he can simply explain that he's come to realize DC's dysfunction runs far deeper than anything a few extra officers on the streets can solve. Then he and Republican leadership should begin meeting with members of Congress on both sides of the aisle to generate support for Home Rule repeal. While Trump seems to think the entire district is dead set against him, this is incorrect: Many residents, while no fans of the president, are fed up with not being able to safely walk their dogs at night. Longtime Democratic members of Congress have personally experienced the city's dangers for many years, and they all know the ordeal of their colleague Angie Craig (D-Minn.), who was assaulted in her apartment building's elevator just two years ago. If Trump were to approach this issue firmly but collaboratively, he would find the water warmer than he thinks. Legally, the argument is not a hard sell. Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution says that Congress shall have 'exclusive legislation in all Cases whatsoever' over the federal district. Congress has given a 50-year trial to the notion of delegating its power to the people of DC, and that trial has unequivocally failed to produce a district that serves the interests of the federal government, the American people, or the residents themselves. Therefore, we should return to rule by Congress, as the Constitution mandates. Doing so would require a simple act of Congress, passed by both parties, that overturns the 1973 law and dismisses DC's elected representatives. A third section of the new law should establish a congressional committee to appoint exemplary city managers from cities around United States to reconstitute a competent DC government. In many American cities, like Madison, Wis., Phoenix, Ariz., and Wichita, Kan., elected officials appoint professional administrators to oversee day-to-day municipal operations. Washington, DC, should do the same — with Congress taking ultimate responsibility. Some on the left will bemoan the reversal of Home Rule as yet another federal assault on our democracy. But the District of Columbia was never intended by the Founders to be a self-governing state. It was intended to serve the interests of the country as a whole, by providing a safe and orderly place for public administration. Returning DC's governing prerogative to the people of America, not the district itself, will take us one step closer to being the republic the Founders envisioned. John Masko is a journalist specializing in business and international politics.
Business Insider
8 minutes ago
- Business Insider
Parts of Europe are suspending postal shipments to the US — and your order may not arrive
Postal services operated by Norway, Sweden, Denmark, and Belgium — Posten Bring, PostNord, and bpost — said they will suspend parcel shipments to the US ahead of the end of a customs exemption that allows low-value packages to enter the country duty-free. The conundrum facing postal operators comes as the Trump administration prepares to suspend the " de minimis" exemption starting on August 29. The exemption used to allow international shipments under $800 to cross the border with minimal paperwork and no duties. Now, these shipments will face tariffs, and not every operator can handle the customs declaration paperwork, have a payment mechanism in place, or be responsible for returns should a receiver refuse to pay tariffs. It's unclear when the temporary freeze on shipments will resume. "Due to the short timeframe to adapt to the new specific requirements, PostNord will temporarily halt shipments to the United States and Puerto Rico until a compliant solution has been developed and implemented," wrote the operator owned by the Swedish and Danish governments in a statement on Wednesday. Separately, Posten Bring, Norway's primary postal provider operated by the government, said in a statement that postal services have not been given clear instructions and solutions on how the duties will be paid or who would be responsible for returns. Therefore, Posten Bring sees suspension as the "only option." All three European postal services will suspend shipments starting August 23, which applies to all packages other than letters. This means that if you have a pending purchase that is not shipped by the deadline, your seller may need to cancel your order or arrange alternatives. But even if you're not purchasing from these specific European countries, your shopping options might still dwindle and become more costly. Etsy, the US e-commerce giant and a hub for independent crafters, posted a notice Wednesday that shipping label purchases for Australia Post, Canada Post, Evri, and Royal Mail for US-bound packages will be temporarily suspended starting August 25. Etsy wrote in a statement that these operators are unable to support prepaid duties at the moment, which may result in a large number of rejected packages due to unpaid duties and surprise costs for buyers not listed at checkout. Across social media platforms, many independent sellers based in the UK are also announcing that they can no longer support orders to the US, citing the introduction of an $80 flat fee plus handling charges for using Royal Mail to ship parcels to the US. "We hope to resume shipping as soon as we can, but we really don't want our customers to be hit with an $80+ fee," wrote the Citrine Circle, a UK-based crystal shop, on Instagram. "It feels like the world is getting smaller and smaller."
