Chipmakers got their $52 billion. It will now take years for American chipmaking to flourish.

After more than two years of Congressional debate, the chip industry is poised to receive $52 billion in manufacturing subsidies. There’s a long road ahead to generate a return on that investment.

US President Joe Biden reacts to a note given to him saying that the CHIPS-plus bill has passed the House during a meeting with CEOs about the economy in the South Court Auditorium of the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, next to the White House, in Washington, DC on July 28, 2022. - The $280 Billion Industrial Policy was passed in the Senate on Wednesday with rare bipartisan support and will boost domestic production of semiconductors, the in-demand microchips that power everything from smartphones to cars to weapons. (Photo by MANDEL NGAN / AFP) (Photo by MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images)

It will take years to understand if this was money well spent.

Photo: Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images

After more than two years of Congressional wrangling — and at least $100 million in lobbying expenditures — the chip industry is poised to receive tens of billions of dollars in federal tax breaks and subsidies to build more semiconductors inside the U.S. It will take years to understand if this was money well spent.

The $76 billion the industry will receive is aimed at jumpstarting domestic chip manufacturing in the name of national security, halting the chip shortage and returning the U.S. to its former leadership position. After the Senate approved the bill Wednesday, the legislation cleared the House on Thursday by a vote of 243-187, and is headed to President Biden, who is expected to sign it as early as next week. The funds were expected to be released from federal coffers this year.

The money is part of a total $280 billion package of legislation with far-flung objectives that range from directing federal research dollars toward AI and quantum computing to opening 20 regional tech hubs and a relatively small portion directed at developing an open wireless communications standard.

“We are in fierce competition with other countries,” Democratic House member Anna Eshoo, who worked on the legislation, told Protocol. “You can hardly point to a product that doesn't have chips in it, so we can win this global competition. Because American technology is the best in the world. But we have to have a plan for that. And that's what the legislation is.”

To much of the chip industry, Thursday’s vote represents a victory. Federal funding and tax breaks will ease the burden of building new factories, or fabs, that can cost more than $10 billion each. And even for fabless businesses such as AMD, Nvidia and Qualcomm that only design chips, it may create more advanced manufacturing options — where today there are arguably only three (TSMC, Samsung, Intel).

“By passing the CHIPS Act, Congress has risen to a defining challenge of our time, seized an historic opportunity to fortify American semiconductor manufacturing, design, and research, and delivered a big win for our country,” Semiconductor Industry Association President and CEO John Neuffer said in a statement.

Nearly $40 billion of the total $52 billion is marked for chip manufacturing incentives that will almost certainly benefit the likes of Intel, GlobalFoundries, Samsung and TSMC. Notably, $2 billion of the federal cash is set aside to specifically fund manufacturing and other aspects of chips made with older technology that are vital to automaters and various weapon systems and other military applications. A further $24 billion in tax breaks for factory construction rounds out the package.

“The U.S. doesn't want to see itself in a situation where it is hostage to Chinese control of such a critical industry and we've been delinquent and we've been remiss in letting our capacity and capability decline like that over the past couple of decades,” Harvard Business school professor Willy Shih said.

The subsidy money itself will largely be allocated by the Commerce Department, which has been working for more than a year to build up the personnel and other infrastructure necessary to do so, Undersecretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology Laurie Locascio said in a recent interview. “We have a very well-developed plan,” she said.

Chip manufacturers lobbied hard to get the bill passed into law. Chipmakers based outside the U.S. and their domestic counterparts steadily increased their lobbying expenditures as lawmakers debated the measure, and some foreign companies such as TSMC and MediaTek launched lobbying operations when they previously had none.

At one point when the bill appeared to teeter Intel — which potentially has the most to gain — claimed it would delay a groundbreaking ceremony for a multibillion-dollar investment in new factory construction in Ohio, but at the same time acknowledged that its construction plans would go ahead unhindered. But other chipmakers had threatened to move forthcoming construction to outposts in Europe or Asia if Congress didn’t agree to use U.S. taxpayer money to help finance their operations here.

“[Intel’s] lobbying activities around the legislation have run the gamut from lobbying to begging to blackmail to get it done,” Bernstein chip analyst Stacy Rasgon wrote in a report last week.

Rasgon vocalized an inconvenient truth about the legislative package at a recent San Francisco chipmaking conference: For an industry that expects gross profit of more than 50% and now routinely plans new fab complexes that could cost hundreds of billions of dollars, $52 billion isn’t a lot of cash.

“I don’t know if this is politically correct in this audience, but I’m going to say it anyway,” Rasgon said. “The kind of numbers that they are talking about for the Chips Act at $52 billion over five years. For the entire U.S. semiconductor industry this is a rounding error. Who cares?”

To some industry watchers, the focus on the legislation also misses some of the nuance and complex supply chain around chips. There are provisions included that ensure some of the subsidy money goes toward producing the raw materials and equipment needed for chip manufacturing.

But thousands of inputs are needed to make chips. For example, the tools required to make the most-advanced chips are exclusively produced in Holland; the chemicals and gases needed are made elsewhere in Europe or Ukraine; and other crucial components are made in Japan.

“There isn’t a lot of investment in packaging technology; we will build all these fabs in the U.S., but will still fly the chips over to Asia for testing and packaging for a lot of them,” Shih said. “This is a good down payment for rebuilding the sector in the U.S. But we shouldn’t be confused, there’s not going to be a magic bullet.”

Building new chip factories is a years-long process, and it's unlikely the U.S. will experience a meaningful boost in capacity until the new fabs begin to operate. Intel has said it doesn’t expect its Ohio fab to begin producing chips until 2025; TSMC signaled it would begin volume production in 2024.

But chipmaking tools are in short supply to begin with, and it's difficult and complicated for toolmakers to ramp up production to suit the breakneck expansion the manufacturers are on. Chipmakers must also secure enough people to run the new factories, even though the U.S. has struggled to attract such talent for years.

The legislation is not perfect. But to Congresswoman Eshoo, that’s not the point.

Simply put, in her view, too many chips are needed for too many things — important or otherwise — to let the issue fall by the wayside. It tackles the national security issues she views as pressing, and sends a signal to the industry that the U.S. intends to be competitive with Europe, China and elsewhere when it comes to chip manufacturing and technology.

There is one outcome that Eshoo is going to measure the law’s success by: “More chips,” she said. “I should add: more chips made in America.”


How GM plans to make its ambitious EV goals reality

The automaker's chief sustainability officer is optimistic that GM is well-positioned to rapidly scale up the EV side of its business.

"I think everything that’s been put in place to support the transition will be a real positive for the industry and for the country."

Photo: Eva Marie Uzcategui/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Automakers are on the cusp of an entirely new era.

The transition to electric vehicles is quickly becoming more than just theoretical: More models are coming onto the scene every day. This week, the Inflation Reduction Act was signed into law, enshrining a new structure for EV tax credits and offering a boost to domestic critical mineral mining. The transition isn’t coming a moment too soon, given that the transportation sector makes up the largest share of greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S.

Keep Reading Show less
Lisa Martine Jenkins

Lisa Martine Jenkins is a senior reporter at Protocol covering climate. Lisa previously wrote for Morning Consult, Chemical Watch and the Associated Press. Lisa is currently based in Brooklyn, and is originally from the Bay Area. Find her on Twitter ( @l_m_j_) or reach out via email (ljenkins@protocol.com).

As management teams at financial institutions look for best practices to make part of their regular toolkit, they are reaching most for the ones that increase the speed and reduce the risk of large-scale change.

That forward-thinking approach can lead financial institutions to leverage AI technology, which can help give decision-makers trusted tools to solve integral challenges vital to the health of the business. One of the leading providers of AI and machine-learning software, DataRobot continues to attract clients in financial services who want to de-risk their AI investments and rapidly scale AI to almost every part of their operations, resulting in improved productivity and higher customer satisfaction.

Keep Reading Show less
David Silverberg
David Silverberg is a Toronto-based freelance journalist, editor and writing coach. He writes for The Washington Post, BBC News, Business Insider, The Toronto Star, New Scientist, Fodor's, and several alumni magazines. He also writes for brands such as 23andme, Shopify and Bold Commerce. He has served as editor of B2B News Network, Canada's only B2B news magazine, and Digital Journal, a leading pioneer in citizen journalism. Find more about him at www.davidsilverberg.ca

How Embracer Group bought ‘Lord of the Rings’ rights for a bargain

The Swedish holding company, known best for its gaming acquisitions, bought the rights to “The Lord of the Rings.” But the deal is much more complicated than it seems.

Who really owns LOTR's rights?

Photo: New Line/WireImage

A new stakeholder has entered the complex licensing web of “The Lord of the Rings,” and the landmark deal has further complicated the already messy media empire surrounding author J.R.R. Tolkien’s fantasy epic.

The buyer, the acquisition-hungry Swedish gaming conglomerate known as Embracer Group, has purchased Middle-earth Enterprises, and with it the associated film, video game, board game, merchandise, theater production and theme park rights to the core LOTR book trilogy and “The Hobbit'' from its previous owner, The Saul Zaentz Company. Formerly Tolkien Enterprises, Zaentz’s holding group has held onto the rights since purchasing them from United Artists in 1976. (Tolkien initially sold them to UA in 1969, four years before his death.)

Keep Reading Show less
Nick Statt

Nick Statt is Protocol's video game reporter. Prior to joining Protocol, he was news editor at The Verge covering the gaming industry, mobile apps and antitrust out of San Francisco, in addition to managing coverage of Silicon Valley tech giants and startups. He now resides in Rochester, New York, home of the garbage plate and, completely coincidentally, the World Video Game Hall of Fame. He can be reached at nstatt@protocol.com.


Upstart has a new plan to sell Wall Street on its loans

The AI-powered lender will hold some loans on its balance sheet as it seeks partners for long-term capital.

Despite the current struggles, Upstart views the marketplace model as the best way to write to keep its loan business growing.

Photo: Upstart

After a revenue drop its CEO called “unacceptable,” the leadership at fintech lender Upstart is making a bet on the strength of its ability to underwrite loans with AI.

The San Mateo company is planning to leave some loans on its balance sheet that investors do not want to buy, as concerns about the economy shift Wall Street away from backing riskier consumer debt. Rather than pull back on its lending in response, the company said it will hold some loans as it seeks longer-term capital partners.

Keep Reading Show less
Ryan Deffenbaugh
Ryan Deffenbaugh is a reporter at Protocol focused on fintech. Before joining Protocol, he reported on New York's technology industry for Crain's New York Business. He is based in New York and can be reached at rdeffenbaugh@protocol.com.

Does your boss sound a little funny? It might be an audio deepfake

Voice deepfake attacks against enterprises, often aimed at tricking corporate employees into transferring money to the attackers, are on the rise. And at least in some cases, they’re succeeding.

Audio deepfakes are a new spin on the impersonation tactics that have long been used in social engineering and phishing attacks, but most people aren’t trained to disbelieve their ears.

Illustration: Christopher T. Fong/Protocol

As a cyberattack investigator, Nick Giacopuzzi’s work now includes responding to growing attacks against businesses that involve deepfaked voices — and has ultimately left him convinced that in today's world, "we need to question everything."

In particular, Giacopuzzi has investigated multiple incidents where an attacker deployed fabricated audio, created with the help of AI, that purported to be an executive or a manager at a company. You can guess how it went: The fake boss asked an employee to urgently transfer funds. And in some cases, it’s worked, he said.

Keep Reading Show less
Kyle Alspach

Kyle Alspach ( @KyleAlspach) is a senior reporter at Protocol, focused on cybersecurity. He has covered the tech industry since 2010 for outlets including VentureBeat, CRN and the Boston Globe. He lives in Portland, Oregon, and can be reached at kalspach@protocol.com.

Latest Stories