The Nvidia Chip Deal Trades Away the United States' AI Advantage
Whatever the true sequence of events, the move has huge implications for both the future of the Chinese artificial intelligence (AI) industry and the Trump administration's ability to control advanced technology sales to China in the future. Right as powerful AI reasoning systems are emerging, the administration has chosen to allow companies to sell China the AI chips suited to running them. And by linking, at least rhetorically, chip sales to the trade talks—talks in which the United States has shown a striking desperation to reach a deal—U.S. officials have revealed to their Chinese counterparts that national security policies that were once off the table are now up for negotiation. In doing so, they may have hamstrung their ability to impose new chip export controls without reigniting a losing trade war.
The H20 chip is designed for inference—running an AI model rather than training one. When the U.S. government first imposed chip export controls on China, in 2022, inference played a relatively minor role in AI capabilities. But recent technical breakthroughs have changed that. Today's leading models, such as OpenAI's o3 and DeepSeek's R1, consume much larger amounts of computing power than past models in running their reasoning capabilities.
This shift has made inference central to the AI race. By 2026, analysts estimate that inference workloads will require nearly five times more computing power than training. While the H20 is less effective for training than chips such as Nvidia's H100, which is still banned from export to China, the H20 is 20 percent faster at inference. Analysts expect that delivering millions of these chips to Chinese firms would boost Nvidia's sales by $10 billion to $15 billion this year, but it would also turbocharge Beijing's ability to build cutting-edge AI systems—systems with growing applications in national security—and to deploy them at scale.
Some Trump administration officials, including David Sacks, the White House AI advisor, seem to have been persuaded by Huang's view that the United States was erring by ceding the Chinese market to Huawei. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick has argued that the United States should keep China 'addicted to the American technology stack.'
Yet exporting H20s is unlikely to keep China hooked for long: Reducing dependence on foreign semiconductors has been official Chinese policy since before the first Trump administration started limiting sales to Chinese tech companies in 2018. Letting Chinese companies buy the H20 will probably reduce the pressure to switch to Huawei chips in the short term. But at this stage, no change in U.S. policy is likely to induce the Chinese government to abandon its efforts to decouple from the West's semiconductor supply chain. Chinese chip makers, for example, are reportedly adopting domestic equipment where possible, even when doing so leads to lower yields—something that would be a non-starter for market-driven Western companies. Convinced that AI chips are critical to national security, Chinese leaders will continue to pour capital and talent into their domestic industry—whatever the United States does.
Prioritizing selling chips to China would thus trade away one of the United States' most important advantages in the AI competition—its access to vastly more AI computing power than its competitors—in exchange for what would likely be a temporary boost to Nvidia's market share in China.
In an alternative explanation for their decision, Lutnick and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent have suggested it was linked to Chinese concessions on rare earths in the broader trade negotiations. Bessent described the reversal as 'all part of a mosaic' in which 'they had things we wanted, we had things they wanted.' Beijing has denied this, instead claiming that the move was a unilateral concession.
Whatever the real story of the H20, the Trump administration has clearly put technology controls on the table in trade talks, as the negotiations also involved removing export controls on some chip design software. That marks a sharp break from the Biden administration, which refused to negotiate with China over what it characterized as core national security questions.
In part, the change is a result of the Trump administration's general inclination to link separate issues to win leverage. Trump has imposed or threatened tariffs in the name of fighting everything from fentanyl smuggling to the prosecution of former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro. But his willingness to compromise on chips also likely reflects the president's instinct that trade simply matters more than technology restrictions. In his first term, for example, Trump was willing to abandon restrictions on China's tech sector in pursuit of a broader trade deal with Beijing.
Yet it's hard to see what the United States won by trading away the H20. The overall deal seems to have bought some relief on the rare earth front, but China's export restrictions were imposed only in response to steep U.S. tariffs that were a mistake in the first place. (Even Trump apparently soon realized they were damaging the U.S. economy and largely paused them.) If, therefore, the administration offered up the H20 in exchange for rare-earth exports, then it traded away a powerful chip for concessions that it should never have needed to ask for.
If, on the other hand, resuming H20 exports was a unilateral move, then Trump gave it away for nothing at all. Even if Sacks is right in suggesting that it's worth accelerating China's AI progress in order to keep the country hooked on U.S. technology, China's eagerness to buy the chips suggests that Washington could have asked for much more in return.
Tactics aside, the administration's willingness to bargain over national security reveals an even bigger problem. Linking otherwise unrelated issues in negotiations can help cut deals: If one country wants lower trade barriers, for example, and the other wants approval for arms sales, connecting the two can unlock an agreement.
But linking issues in this way brings risks, too. If one side miscalculates the relative importance of the issues involved, then it might trade away long-term advantage for short-term headlines. This is especially likely to be true in vital areas such as U.S.-China technology competition. And if a country signals that it will negotiate on issues that it had previously declared off limits, then the other side will know that it can apply pressure in an area that once seemed hopeless.
The administration's strategic mistakes have been compounded by the United States' striking signals of weakness in its trade war. After imposing steep tariffs, the administration backed down rapidly in the face of Chinese restrictions on the export of the rare earths that are essential to critical U.S. industries.
Thanks to Washington's eagerness to meet China's trade demands, Chinese negotiators now know two things: one, that the United States can't live with a cutoff for long; and two, that if Beijing threatens a cutoff, it can win concessions on issues—like chips—that were previously off the table.
If China can now use the threat of a rare-earth shutdown to block new U.S. export controls, then the existing controls will gradually lose their effectiveness. Technology restrictions need frequent updating to adapt to new Chinese evasion tactics and changes in the underlying technology. The Biden administration rolled out regular updates to its controls, and there is much more that the new administration should be doing.
Priorities include expanding restrictions on semiconductor manufacturing equipment, controlling additional key components, targeting Huawei's expanding network of chip fabs, and pushing allies such as the Netherlands and Japan to cut off exports of a much wider range of their equipment to advanced Chinese fabs.
Despite tough talk from U.S. officials about shutting off China's access to advanced AI technology, the administration has so far done none of this. Beyond the now-rescinded H20 restriction, it hasn't announced any major new export control actions since taking office. Even an effort to cut off Chinese smuggling routes through Malaysia and Thailand, which has reportedly been in the works for months, has yet to materialize.
Some of this slowness is likely the result of a new team finding its feet in a complex bureaucratic machine; the Biden administration could also have moved faster on many of its controls. But increasingly, the absence of new controls looks like an admission of U.S. defeat.
Export controls, for all their flaws, have helped the United States establish a significant edge in the computing power required to run and develop the world's most powerful AI systems. Compromising that advantage to win a $4 trillion company a few billion dollars of extra revenue would be a mistake.
If the administration goes ahead with H20 sales, then it should limit licenses to the chips that Nvidia already has in its inventory, rather than approving new production—which would reportedly require several months' lead time thanks to oversubscription at chip-maker TSMC—or allowing future inference-focused chips to be sold to China. Members of Congress could likewise scrutinize potential sales or consider writing new restrictions into law.
One way or another, if the Trump administration is serious about the AI race, then it will have to figure out how to get export controls working again.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
CNN host laughs at Republican senator as he fact-checks him on Epstein ‘sweetheart' deal
CNN's Jake Tapper repeatedly fact-checked a Republican senator on air Sunday as the lawmaker insisted that Democrats and Barack Obama's administration were at fault for a 'sweetheart' deal that allowed Jeffrey Epstein to escape his 2008 conviction on child sex charges virtually unscathed. Sen. Markwayne Mullin appeared on CNN's State of the Union and repeatedly claimed that a plea agreement to keep Epstein from being charged federally for child sex crimes was signed in 2009, under the Obama administration. But Epstein's plea agreement was drafted in 2007 and signed in 2008, when he pleaded guilty to soliciting a minor for sex, before Obama was even president. 'It was 2008,' Tapper corrected him, chuckling. Tapper noted that the U.S. attorney who oversaw the non-prosecution agreement was Alex Acosta, who went on become Donald Trump's secretary of labor during his first administration. 'It all took place in 2008,' Tapper said. Mullin then shot back, asking 'who was in office at the time?' — seemingly making the error of assuming that Obama was the president. Obama won the presidential election that year but was inaugurated in January 2009. 'In 2008, George W. Bush was the president,' Tapper said, as he was cut off by Mullin repeating his question. 'George W. Bush.' Mullin went on to insist that because the case was 'sealed in 2009' that Democrats were somehow involved. A clearly exasperated Tapper responded that 'the point is, the 'sweetheart deal', which was completed in 2008, was under the Bush administration.' The plea agreement inked between Acosta and Epstein's attorney, Alan Dershowitz, was staggering in its leniency. Epstein was allowed to leave the prison facility for hours at a time for 'work release' to the headquarters of a nebulous enterprise called the 'Florida Science Foundation' he founded shortly before beginning his sentence and shut down when it concluded. Inside the prison, Epstein was allowed to maintain his own office, just as he'd done at Harvard University for years, while watching television and was watched by guards who wore suits and were partially on his payroll. Mullin and other Republicans closely aligned with the president are treading a careful line on the issue of the Epstein investigation. The Trump administration ignited a firestorm early in July when the Department of Justice and FBI announced that the agencies would not release any more documents related to the Epstein investigation despite having promised to do so. The agencies cited a refusal to release identifying information about victims and graphic sexual imagery involving children. Most glaringly, the agencies also declared in that early July announcement that a so-called 'client list' of Epstein's alleged co-conspirators had not been found. Having latched on to the issue long before Trump was elected to a second term, his MAGA base descended into chaos. Many of the president's 2024 supporters called the reversal a betrayal by the administration, while some questioned whether Trump himself was involved in a cover-up to protect himself or other powerful men named as Epstein's accomplices in the files. Some Democrats latched on to the issue at the same time, joining calls for transparency. Then, a pair of articles in The Wall Street Journal purported to outline Trump's own connections to the investigation. The newspaper reported the contents of a message allegedly penned by Trump to Epstein as part of a 50th birthday celebration in 2003, including allusions to a 'secret.' Trump firmly denied authoring the note, and sued the newspaper and its reporters in response. A second article from the WSJ days later reported that Attorney General Pam Bondi informed Trump in May that he was mentioned in the Epstein investigation multiple times, thought it was not clear in what context The White House called that story 'fake' and has repeatedly insinuated that Democrats including Joe Biden tampered with the Epstein files in response. Being mentioned in the files does not mean wrongdoing, and hundreds of names are reportedly included. Republicans on Capitol Hill are caught in the middle. Some are joining on to a bipartisan effort led by Thomas Massie — a Republican who clashed with the president over the GOP budget reconciliation package earlier this year — and Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna to force the Justice Department to release the entirety of its document trove, with redactions for child sexual assault material and the names or identifying information of victims. Others more aligned with leadership, including House Speaker Mike Johnson. But Johnson and others have been careful not to label the Epstein story a distraction, to the White House's annoyance. Johnson called the August recess early this past week, sending lawmakers home for the month to avoid a vote legislation from Massie and Khanna.
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Number of Democratic voters who are ‘extremely motivated' to vote in next election skyrockets
Nearly three-quarters of Democratic voters say they are 'extremely motivated' to cast their ballots in the 2026 midterm elections, a dramatic uptick from four years ago, polling shows. Just six months after Republicans took control of the White House and Congress, 72 percent of Democrats and Democratic-aligned voters say they are 'extremely motivated' to vote in the next election, a CNN poll conducted by SSRS this month found. By contrast, only 50 percent of Republicans say the same. Democrats are now looking to enter midterm elections in 2026 under similar circumstances as 2018 in an attempt to break up the GOP's control of both chambers of Congress and the White House. During the 2018 elections, voters dealt a massive blow to President Donald Trump's first-term agenda, with House Democrats gaining 23 seats to take control of the House. In October 2022, two years into President Joe Biden's term when Democrats narrowly controlled the trifecta, just 44 percent of Democratic voters expressed the same motivation to vote in the midterm. That figure was just slightly higher for Republicans, with 48 percent saying they were eager to vote. In that election, Republicans clinched the House of Representatives while Democrats retained control of the Senate. Still, the poll shows Democrats could have some work cut out for them. Just 28 percent of respondents said they view the Democratic Party favorably. Meanwhile, 33 percent expressed a favorable view of the Republican Party. 'I think that the Democratic Party, we have a lot of work to do to make sure we are meeting voters where they are, listening to what they have to say, and talking to them about issues that they want us to take action on,' Virginia Democratic Congresswoman Jennifer McClellan told CNN in response to the poll. "What's going to matter is what we're doing on the ground in these districts.' Recovering from Kamala Harris' defeat to Trump in 2024, Democrats are looking to harness an electorate that they lost in the last election. A separate poll by Lake Research Partners and Way to Win analyzed 'Biden skippers,' those living in battleground states who voted for Biden in 2020 but sat out of the 2024 presidential election. The survey poked holes in the idea that Harris was 'too far left.' Progressive lawmaker Vermont Independent Senator Bernie Sanders and New York Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez topped the list of public figures respondents viewed positively, with 78 percent having a favorable view of Sanders and 67 percent having a favorable view of Ocasio-Cortez. Republicans are also making moves ahead of the 2026 midterms. The White House is already strategizing to ensure the GOP retains the trifecta. The plan reportedly includes Trump returning to the campaign trail as well as him having a hand in advising which candidates run and which 'stay put' in the upcoming election, sources told Politico.


CNN
13 minutes ago
- CNN
‘Tesla Takedown' protestors have a new target: Elon Musk's Tesla Diner
For months, protesters have gathered outside Tesla showrooms in response to Elon Musk's role in reducing US government spending as part of the Department of Government Efficiency. This weekend, protesters in Los Angeles found a new destination: Musk's new 24-hour Tesla Diner in the Hollywood area. Musk had touted the concept of an 'old school drive-in, roller skates & rock restaurant' in 2018. Since opening on Monday, the retro-futuristic diner with electric vehicle-charging stations has had long lines of customers who are served burgers in Cybertruck-designed boxes. One customer posted to YouTube that he waited 11 hours for the restaurant to open. But Joel Lava, who has helped organize 'Tesla Takedown' demonstrations and has spearheaded protests at the diner, believes that protests could continue throughout the summer and that the buzz around the new restaurant will soon die down. '(Customers are) waiting 11 hours so they can have Tesla-brand burgers and fries,' Lava told CNN. 'This is the world's most renowned anti-trans advocate who just opened a diner in West Hollywood. The community is not very supportive of Elon.' Lava estimates as many as 75 demonstrators joined the diner protest on Saturday. He said organizers began planning protests for this weekend after the diner abruptly opened on Monday. 'Our main message is Tesla funds fascism. Elon Musk, via DOGE, has destroyed our government agencies and people's jobs, and people are dying around the world because of him,' Lava said. Tesla did not immediately respond to CNN's request for comment. Lava said protest attendance for Tesla Takedown events peaked at the end of March, but has 'been going strong.' Protests outside of Tesla showrooms across the United States have remained a weekly staple in many cities, with 40 protests planned on the 'Tesla Takedown' website for the weekend. 'We've already been successful in tarnishing the Tesla brand,' he said. During last week's second-quarter earnings call, Musk highlighted Tesla's future — not its gloomy present-day — by reaffirming ambitious plans for the company's robotaxi service and mass production of its humanoid robot, Optimus, which was serving popcorn at Musk's diner. Tesla's auto revenue fell 16% from April to June and overall revenue was down 12%, according to its earnings report. Sales of its best-selling Model Y and Model 3 fell 12% compared with a year ago, while sales of its more expensive models, including the Cybertruck, plunged 52%. Shares of Tesla (TSLA) were down more than 4% last week, closing at $316.06 on Friday, after falling 9% on Thursday. Since peaking at $479.86 on December 17, Tesla shares have plunged 34%. CNN's Chris Isidore contributed to this report.