Taiwan's semiconductor firms brace for weaker Q3 amid tariff pressures
Empower your mind, elevate your skills
Several semiconductor firms in Taiwan are approaching the third quarter with caution, despite traditionally Q3 being a high-demand period, as US tariff moves cloud the industry outlook.As per a report by Focus Taiwan, smartphone IC designer MediaTek Inc. said the rush of orders from clients in the first half of the year, triggered by fears over US tariffs, has left little room for the usual seasonal spike in demand. "Customers front-loaded purchases to avoid potential tariffs," the company noted, warning that third-quarter revenue could fall by 7 to 13% from the previous quarter, landing between NTD 130.1 billion ($4.35 billion) and NTD 140 billion ($4.68 billion).The US tariff plan, announced April 2, initially proposed a steep 32% duty on Taiwanese goods. The rollout was delayed twice, eventually setting a 20% rate that took effect Friday. More uncertainty arrived when US President Donald Trump said on Wednesday that a 100% tariff on imported semiconductors is on the table; however, manufacturers with US operations could be exempt.Other Taiwanese chipmakers share similar worries. PixArt Imaging Inc., a sensor chip designer known for components used in computer mice, said clients had also placed large orders earlier this year but demand is now set to slow. Display driver IC maker Novatek Microelectronics Corp. reported that its customers have turned more cautious about new purchases.The report further stated that the Taiwan dollar appreciated 10.97% against the US dollar in the second quarter, ending June. The stronger currency hit export revenues and triggered foreign exchange losses for several companies. While the Taiwan dollar has eased slightly in the current quarter, it is expected to remain stronger than last quarter's average, keeping pressure on earnings.One notable exception to the downbeat tone is Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co . (TSMC). The world's largest contract chipmaker expects robust demand for artificial intelligence applications to lift its third-quarter revenue by 8% from the second quarter, based on an exchange rate of NTD 29 to one US dollar. For 2025, TSMC projects 30% revenue growth in US dollar terms, nearly double the 15.4% rise forecast for the global semiconductor industry. (ANI)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Déjà vu in Delhi! India knows the sting of tariffs
US President Donald Trump's decision to impose punishing tariffs on India might seem unprecedented — until you flip the calendar back 36 years. In 1989, Washington tried to pry open the Indian economy by threatening tariffs, leading to a 12-month bitter stand-off between the two nations. Eventually the US backed down, but the conflict left a scar on the bilateral relationship. A look back at the Super 301 episode can help us better understand the dynamics at play today. In the late 1980s, the US was engaged in an intense trade war with Japan, its primary economic rival at the time. Washington developed an arsenal of diplomatic and economic weapons for its war including Super 301, a legal mechanism upgraded in 1988. It authorised the US President to identify countries with 'unfair' trade practices and punish them with retaliatory tariffs. Once the statute came into force, President George HW Bush did not limit its use to Japan. His administration sought to address America's rising trade deficit by using the threat of Super 301 to strong-arm several countries, including American allies like Europe, South Korea and Taiwan. Parallels with the current administration are evident. In his first term, Trump used tariffs to battle China; now he uses them on friends and foes alike. Once Washington develops a policy tool to coerce one country, it becomes all too tempting to use that tool indiscriminately and sometimes unthinkingly. It is an important facet of US hegemony, regardless of who occupies the White House. Many countries tried to avoid Super 301 by hastily cutting deals with Washington to open their markets or voluntarily restricting their exports. In June 1989, the Bush administration declared that it would target three countries — Japan, Brazil and India. New Delhi was taken by complete surprise. Its relations with Washington had been improving in the previous few years. Its trade surplus with the US was relatively paltry. Washington's two central demands, that India allow American investments and foreign insurance companies, seemed arbitrary. Unlike Japan and Brazil, India refused to even enter into negotiations with the US. Then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi said he wouldn't let the US dictate how to run the country. American heavy-handedness sparked intense outrage in the Parliament, further tying the govt's hands politically. At the same time, the American threat of tariffs posed serious risks for the Indian economy. US share in India's exports at the time was about one-fifth, the same as it is today. India was much less dependent on foreign trade in 1989 than it is today, but it was also a much smaller and more vulnerable economy. India failed to enlist world opinion to its side. Western countries, including even Japan, agreed with Washington that India was too restrictive of foreign investments. Today, Indian diplomats looking for international solidarity against US tariff assault may discover a similar situation. Many countries may deplore Trump's ham-fisted tactics, while endorsing his goals of lowering Indian protectionism and weaning it away from Russian oil. PM VP Singh, elected in December 1989, tried to placate Washington through a tightrope act. While India continued to refuse negotiations on the two demands under Super 301, it offered concessions on other economic fronts. Americans were not satisfied with Indian offerings. In April 1990, Japan and Brazil were dropped from the Super 301 list, leaving India as the sole target. Washington issued a two-month ultimatum to New Delhi. American 'bullying' was loudly condemned by Indian media and politicians. In the end, the showdown never arrived. At the expiration of the ultimatum deadline, the Bush administration determined that following through with its threats was not worth it. It declared that while India was an 'unfair trader', it was not in American interest to take retaliatory actions. The Super 301 process against India was discontinued. The Bush administration backed down without much loss of face because Washington's trade campaign was global and India was only a small piece of it. Same remains true today. Although the tariffs are a major issue for New Delhi, they are just one battle among dozens that Trump is fighting on multiple fronts. The Indo-US relationship quickly bounced back, buoyed by alignment of certain economic and geopolitical interests. However, the Super 301 episode left a bad taste in the Indian mouth. It was yet another reminder that American power can unexpectedly become capricious and overbearing. In the last few years, many commentators have expressed befuddlement at why New Delhi resists moving closer to Washington despite its persistent conflict with Beijing. Its reticence partly stems from its fear that greater dependence on the US will leave it more vulnerable to Washington's volatile high-handedness that manifests from time to time. Trump's tariff assault has again affirmed the wisdom behind India's caution. Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Disclaimer Views expressed above are the author's own.
India.com
an hour ago
- India.com
Reliance Industries Gross Debt Rises 7 pc At Rs 3.47 Lakh Crore In FY25, Net Debt Hits Rs 1.17 Lakh Crore
New Delhi: Reliance Industries Limited's (RIL) gross debt and net debt for the financial year 2024-25 stood at Rs 3.47 lakh crore (USD 40.7 billion) and Rs 1.17 lakh crore (USD 13.7 billion) respectively, according to the company's integrated Annual Report 2024-25. The company had registered Rs 3.24 lakh crore in gross debt in FY24. Despite a strong internal cash flow generation, India's biggest private sector conglomerate's leverage remains noteworthy, underscoring the capital-intensive nature of its operations. "Robust internal cashflow generation supported investments in growth opportunities across business, while maintaining a conservative balance sheet and investment grade credit ratings," the company said in its Annual Report. Meanwhile, the Mukesh Ambani-led company reported capital expenditure for the financial year at Rs 1,31,107 crore ($15.3 billion). In FY 2023-24, capex stood at Rs 1,31,769 crore. According to the company's annual report, in FY25, investments were largely directed towards new O2C projects, Retail store expansion, augmenting Digital Services infrastructure and building manufacturing assets in New Energy. Meanwhile, RIL's standalone revenue was at Rs 5,57,163 crore ($65.2 billion), lower by 3.1 per cent as compared to Rs 5,74,956 crore in FY24. EBITDA for the standalone entity fell 14.2 per cent to Rs 74,163 crore ($8.7 billion) from Rs 86,393 crore for the year-ago period, the company said. Despite strong coverage from leading brokerages after the Indian conglomerate reported better-than-expected earnings in the first quarter of the current fiscal year (Q1 FY26), RIL shares fell more than 7% over the past 30 days. According to market analysts, the stock is currently in a corrective phase because the Mukesh Ambani-led company has suffered a significant setback as a result of US President Donald Trump's crackdown on India's imports of Russian oil. In order to process the cheap crude at its massive oil refinery in Jamnagar, Gujarat, RIL was a major importer. However, the shares may start attracting investors from next week as the US hinted at not imposing additional 25 per cent tariffs on the import of Russian oil. Brokerages like Morgan Stanley, Motilal Oswal, Novuma, and Macquarie have either maintained or increased their rating for RIL's stock after the company reported a strong 78 per cent year-over-year increase in its net profit at Rs 26,994 crore in Q1.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Hell hath no fury like Donald Trump scorned
Trump has not threatened China and Turkey, the largest and third largest importers of Russian oil. Nor Hungary and Slovakia, two European and Nato countries that import Russian oil. And he's ignored the fact that Japan has started to do so from June this year Has Donald Trump got it in for India? He's slapped 50% tariffs, he's suspended trade talks till the tariff dispute is resolved, he says he doesn't care if India's 'dead economy' sinks and Peter Navarro, his trade advisor, has said India is threatening America's national security by buying Russian oil. Worst of all, Scott Bessent, the treasury secretary, has revealed that secondary tariffs on India could increase if Trump's talks with Putin fail. He also wants Europe to impose its own secondary tariffs. Does all of this suggest India has fallen out of America's favour? There is a view that Trump is using India to send a message to China and Russia. It's not a comforting one. It means we're collateral damage and he doesn't really care what happens to us. On the other hand — and this is equally galling — Trump seems to have fallen in love with Pakistan. He's only imposed 19% tariffs, his government considers Islamabad a 'phenomenal partner' in the fight against counter-terrorism — last week it lauded Pakistan's 'continued successes in containing terrorist entities' — he invited Field Marshal Asim Munir for lunch and wants to help Pakistan prospect for oil. In fact, Trump has taunted India with the tease that Pakistan could one day sell oil to Delhi. So, is Pakistan the new belle of the ball? Let's focus on the issue of Russian oil, both because it rankles with Delhi but also because Trump has made it clear that until it's resolved there'll be no trade negotiations. In fact, Bessent has threatened further penalties. The truth is the Biden Administration encouraged India to buy Russian oil. In May 2024, this is what Eric Garcetti, the American ambassador in Delhi, said: 'Actually, they (India) bought Russian oil because we (the US) wanted somebody to buy Russian oil at a price cap … because as a commodity we didn't want oil prices going up and they fulfilled that.' Today Trump is deliberately ignoring his predecessor's policy and blaming India instead. Secondly, Trump is also being hypocritical. America continues to import palladium, uranium hexafluoride, fertilisers and chemicals from Russia and reports indicate that in the last six months the amount imported has increased substantially compared to last year. So, if America can import from Russia, why can't India? Thirdly — and this hints at Trump's real intentions — there's another double standard. He has not threatened China and Turkey, the largest and third largest importers of Russian oil. Nor Hungary and Slovakia, two European and Nato countries that import Russian oil. And he's ignored the fact that Japan has started to do so from June this year. In fact, he's just extended the trade truce with China for another 90 days. Clearly his wrath is single-mindedly directed at Delhi. There is, however, another equally worrying aspect of the problem. Does Trump's attitude and behaviour suggest Quad has lost its utility in his eyes? If it has, where does America's Indo-Pacific strategy stand? It brought great comfort to India vis-à-vis our problems with China. If Trump is no longer committed to it, that will create worrying concerns for us. Whether Trump reaches an economic deal with China is hard to predict but probably likely because he's already talking of a summit with Xi Jinping. The question is, will the deal also presage a better political understanding of China? More space for Beijing's regional ambitions? In that event, will India continue to have US support over our border dispute with China? The biggest problem is what can we do about this? The truthful answer is very little. There's nothing we export to America that America can't do without. China has rare earth minerals and metals. We don't. Our leverage is very limited. Our only hope is a Putin-Trump deal on Ukraine which could lead to the secondary sanctions being lifted. Scott Bessent's comments suggest the White House has India in its sights if they aren't. Hell, it seems, hath no fury like a Trump scorned! Karan Thapar is the author of Devil's Advocate: The Untold Story. The views expressed are personal.
