Chinese semiconductor industry

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mrandolph

New Member
Registered Member
european_guy said:
Yes, the novelty I see in this law is that US has, for the first time (please correct me if I'm wrong) bounded a grant to support investment in US to the prohibition to invest in an unrelated third country.

I guess this has no legal base under any international trade law.

It is very bad and very dangerous what happened. I agree it means business in China ends up being subject to approval by the US government on a case by case basis.

I am quite appealed at how Taiwan and SK firms apparently accepted it without a glitch. I have the impression this is just a kind of legal/contractual framework to actually have a (totally fabricated) base for approving / rejecting investment in China of a non-US company.

I am not sure on the practical impact of such a rule, probably not a lot because new investment in China by big foreign semiconductor firms is already difficult today and not foreseen in the future (apart from TSMC in Nanjing fab), but from the point of view of the expanding of US long-arm jurisdiction, this is a big news and an important precedent.

A win for US, a loss for the rest of the world.
Click to expand...
I am not a lawyer but I would not be surprised if this clause was un-enforceable / void because of international agreements that had forrank before it. However the effect would still be there making it less likely that companies like TSMC, Intel etc. would make further investments in China.

And I agree that it marks a low-point in US legislation but I am also sure that we will surpass that low-point to the downside in a short time.

Over all I don't think that it is a long-term winner for the US; the EU has similar subsidies without this constraint and most chips ends up in China anyways.
 
X

xypher

Senior Member
Registered Member
gadgetcool5 said:
I guessed right that people here would find a reason to discount that time. In other words, that this is a waste of time. I've said what I have to say, and I reiterate my prediction that nothing further will change anyone's mind on this topic. If someone is really curious to hear my views in more detail and actually has an open mind and wants to discuss in good faith (and receive the same in return), my PM's are open, or post in this thread saying so, but people who can only offer snarky stuff or put up goalposts that keep moving, are not contributing to a serious or substantive discussion.


No you didn't. Do you really want to know why? And if I tell you why, would you really approach the topic in good faith?
Click to expand...
Why are you crying about "arguing in good faith", when you have never done that yourself?
 
T

tokenanalyst

Brigadier
Registered Member
gadgetcool5 said:
Well that's insider trading. If that's the issue, the officials will be punished individually, but the companies didn't do anything wrong. I would have no problem with that, as long as it doesn't interfere with investment in R &D and production. But if the recent past is an indicator, there is going to be policies that crack down hard on funding, companies, innovation, etc. and of course research is going to suffer.
Click to expand...
What you are even talking about?
Insider trading by politicians is a problem in whatever country occur, it could affect policy, whatever is Nancy Pelosy or others. 5 years in the future I can bet with YOU AND ANYONE that most of the money of the chipsact will go to stock buybacks and execute compensation.
In China more than half of the funding or subsidies for R&D is coming from the goverment itself who wants a semi industry and the fuel for companies to act is the fear of sanctions. Why they gonna crackdown on something that 1-is nowhere near a monopoly, like the monopolies that you see in the US (google, microsoft, apple, blocking the progress of everyone else), 2- Is necessary for the country national security and survival AND 3- THE R&D IS MOSTLY FUNDED BY THEMSELVES? Is not like Crypto were people are pilling money over money.
Different from the past when was difficult to make semiconductor companies work together, this is a lifetime opportunity for them. What I am seeing is an increasingly better oversight after few past incidents, like you can read in the annual reports from the companies were they have to account the money was spend in R&D and not executive compensation or stocks buybacks. That accounting methodology was probably what allow them to catch that guy.​
 
T

tokenanalyst

Brigadier
Registered Member
escobar said:
TSMC's Former General Counsel Richard Thurston on the CHIPSAct : use it as the opportunity to get more involved in the US.
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1553072444851687425
Click to expand...
To be fair lets be real here.

Intel: For now their main business is selling chips, as long they are allow to sell their products in the Chinese market they don't care were their are fabricated.
Micron: The same as Intel.
TI: most of their products are made in mature process node, so they will be allow to built fabs in China.
Microchip: The same deal as TI.
Analog Devices: The same as Microchip.

Global Foundries: They haven't reached 7nm yet and they are not big in China.

Samsung: Their fabs are at the border of China, as long they are allowed to lure Chinese costumers to fab in Korea with their advance process nodes and they are allowed to sell their processors in China they won't care as much.

TSMC: Is a bigger deal than rest because their main competitor and their enemy in China is SMIC, so if SMIC manage to mass produce 7nm chips, lot of clients of TSMC inside China could shift to SMIC more advanced node. They will have to convince both Taipei and DC to be allowed to expand to 7nm in China in the case that SMIC mass produce 7nm.
 
FairAndUnbiased

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier
Registered Member
tokenanalyst said:
To be fair lets be real here.

Intel: For now their main business is selling chips, as long they are allow to sell their products in the Chinese market they don't care were their are fabricated.
Micron: The same as Intel.
TI: most of their products are made in mature process node, so they will be allow to built fabs in China.
Microchip: The same deal as TI.
Analog Devices: The same as Microchip.

Global Foundries: They haven't reached 7nm yet and they are not big in China.

Samsung: Their fabs are at the border of China, as long they are allowed to lure Chinese costumers to fab in Korea with their advance process nodes and they are allowed to sell their processors in China they won't care as much.

TSMC: Is a bigger deal than rest because their main competitor and their enemy in China is SMIC, so if SMIC manage to mass produce 7nm chips, lot of clients of TSMC inside China could shift to SMIC more advanced node. They will have to convince both Taipei and DC to be allowed to expand to 7nm in China in the case that SMIC mass produce 7nm.
Click to expand...
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, they will never stop cooperating with China.
 
G

gadgetcool5

Senior Member
Registered Member
tokenanalyst said:
What you are even talking about?
Insider trading by politicians is a problem in whatever country occur, it could affect policy, whatever is Nancy Pelosy or others. 5 years in the future I can bet with YOU AND ANYONE that most of the money of the chipsact will go to stock buybacks and execute compensation.
In China more than half of the funding or subsidies for R&D is coming from the goverment itself who wants a semi industry and the fuel for companies to act is the fear of sanctions. Why they gonna crackdown on something that 1-is nowhere near a monopoly, like the monopolies that you see in the US (google, microsoft, apple, blocking the progress of everyone else), 2- Is necessary for the country national security and survival​
Click to expand...
Well I agree with you that there is no rational reason for the crackdown. But recently China has been cracking down on any sector of the economy that starts to become successful with little or no reason at all. Regardless of monopolies, and including those that are important for national security and survival, etc. Which is why China's GDP growth has now slowed down massively. By the way, monopolies like google, microsoft and apple all operate in China too yet because they are US tech, China has not cracked down on them. They only crackdown on successful Chinese companies, not US ones. The same is true for the US govt. Which is why I say both governments are in a pact to suppress Chinese success in tech.

tokenanalyst said:
AND 3- THE R&D IS MOSTLY FUNDED BY THEMSELVES?
​
Click to expand...
The R&D is funded by the State Council, which is stacked with comrades from the Communist Youth League, the opposing faction of Xi Jinping. Similarly the MIIT guy was from the State Council before. So this is Xi putting the hammer down against Li Keqiang's faction. The more that faction loses power (which may be complete after Li steps down) the more Xi will have a free hand to ban Chinese tech.
 
V

visitor123

New Member
Registered Member
gadgetcool5 said:
The R&D is funded by the State Council, which is stacked with comrades from the Communist Youth League, the opposing faction of Xi Jinping. Similarly the MIIT guy was from the State Council before. So this is Xi putting the hammer down against Li Keqiang's faction. The more that faction loses power (which may be complete after Li steps down) the more Xi will have a free hand to ban Chinese tech.
Click to expand...
fyi, schizophrenia is a treatable disease.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top