Tag:

Intel

Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan
Gaming Gear

New Intel executive reshuffle sees products chief Holthaus leave after 30 years

by admin



  • Intel’s Michelle Johnston Holthaus leaves the company after 30+ years
  • Further leadership roles appointed, including a new hire
  • CEO Lip-Bu Tan wants to flatten company leadership

Senior Intel exec Michelle Johnston Holthaus will be departing the company after more than three decades, including a short stint as interim co-CEO with David Zinsner after ex-CEO Pat Gelsinger’s departure.

Holthaus’ most recent role as Chief Exec of Products comes to a close after 10 months, and the company will not be rehiring for this role.

Acknowledging Holthaus’ transformational impacts, new CEO Lip-Bu Tan noted: “She has made a lasting impact on our company and inspired so many of us with her leadership.”


You may like

Intel announces major leadership shakeups

The company also announced the appointment of Kevork Kechichian as EVP & GM of Data Center Group, bringing more than 30 years’ chip industry experience from Arm, NXP Semiconductor, Qualcomm and more.

Jim Johnson becomes SVP & GM of Client Computing Group after around four decades at Intel, Srinivasan Iyengar becomes the head of a new Central Engineering Group, and Naga Chandrasekaran steps up at EVP & CTO of Intel Foundry to oversee development, manufacturing and go-to-market.

The changes come amid Intel’s ongoing efforts to flatten its hierarchical structure, resulting in more leaders reporting directly to Tan. By streamlining operations, cutting jobs and rebuilding its engineering culture, Tan hopes Intel can reposition itself to succeed going forward.

The news comes a couple of weeks after Intel reached an agreement with President Trump, whereby the US Government would invest $8.9 billion in Intel to help strengthen its position and bolster domestic American manufacturing.

A move that has drawn its fair share of public scrutiny, including remarks made by Intel itself about the potential implications of having such political backing.

Intel shares are up 21% this year to date, but the company’s market cap ($113.87 billion) falls far behind that of Nvidia ($4.097 trillion), now ranked as the world’s most valuable company.

You might also like



Source link

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Intel
Product Reviews

Intel could sell up to 49% of its foundry business to external investors, but a full IPO or spin-off is unlikely

by admin



In recent months, we heard numerous rumors about Intel’s alleged plans to spin off its Intel Foundry manufacturing arm and then sell a significant stake to potential customers, or the U.S. government’s supposed intention to force Intel to spin off Intel Foundry and then make TSMC buy a 49% stake in Intel’s U.S. manufacturing operations. None of this has materialized, and it’s possible that it never will. However, at a recent industry event, Intel’s Chief Financial Officer said that the company could theoretically sell up to a 49% stake in Intel Foundry without running into issues with the U.S. government. However, given that Intel does not own 100% of Intel Foundry’s assets, would it make financial sense to spin off or IPO Intel Foundry?

“The structure of the government financing is that they also got warrants associated with Intel stock, it triggers off [if we sell] below or selling more than 50% of the business,” said David Zinsner, the CFO of Intel, at Citi’s 2025 Global TMT Conference. “I think, as long as we hold 51% essentially it does not trigger, and it is a five-year warrant. […] Our motivation will probably be not to sell below 51% because that would dilute investors significantly. Unless it made economic sense for investors for us to do that. So, the likelihood is, if we are selling stakes in Foundry, it would be something less than 49% that would be sold off.”

Keeping Intel Foundry an American foundry

According to Intel’s contract agreement with the U.S. government, under which Intel converted its grants into cash in exchange for equity, the company must control at least 51% of Intel Foundry over the next five years or risk triggering punitive clauses (a 5% warrant at $20/share). The same terms applied to Intel’s grants under the CHIPS and Science Act, so the company was obliged to maintain a majority ownership stake in its Intel Foundry for some time.


You may like

From the U.S. government’s point of view, by holding the majority, Intel keeps the foundry business aligned with U.S. national security and reshoring goals and ensures domestic fab capacity remains under the control of a U.S. company, which is particularly important given geopolitical risks (i.e., China–Taiwan tensions).

However, requiring Intel to retain majority ownership (over 51%) of its Intel Foundry unit significantly disrupts the possibility of a full spin-off — at least in the next five years. A true spin-off would typically mean Intel divests its foundry operations into a separate, independent company with its own ownership and governance (as AMD did with GlobalFoundries in 2009). But a 51% requirement constrains this, capping how much capital Intel can raise from outside investors, which may be needed to stay competitive with TSMC, Samsung, or emerging Chinese foundries.

Semiconductor Co-Investment Program (SCIP)

While for now Intel controls and operates all of its semiconductor production capacities in the U.S., Ireland, and Israel, as well as packaging facilities in the U.S., Puerto Rico, Malaysia, and China, it should be noted that Intel does not completely own all of its fabs.

Back in 2022, Intel kicked off its Semiconductor Co-Investment Program (SCIP) arrangement, under which it attracted investors (and essentially raised $26 billion) without violating the CHIPS Act requirement or the U.S. government’s 51% ownership clause tied to a potential Intel Foundry spin-off.

However, this means that Intel lost 100% control of its advanced fabs. As a result, Intel’s leading-edge Fab 52 and Fab 62, located in the Ocotillo campus in Arizona, are co-owned by Intel (51%) and Brookfield Infrastructure (49%). The company’s Fab 34 in Ireland is also owned by Intel (51%) and Apollo Global Management (49%).

These arrangements under the SCIP program are not a spin-off, but asset-level co-financing structures, so the foundry unit stays inside Intel. Intel still owns and operates the fabs, but splits the capital investment with partners like Brookfield Infrastructure and Apollo Global Management. In each case, Intel retains exactly 51% equity and operational control, meaning it does not breach the U.S. government’s ownership clause for CHIPS funding or equity conversion.

In theory, if Intel decides to start building out its Silicon Heartland site in Ohio in the coming years (not sometime in the 2030s), then it can use the same SCIP program to raise the necessary capital and build new capacity without requiring a spin-off or IPO and without violating the contract with the U.S. government.

IPO is still a possibility

Potentially, Intel’s SCIP initiative does not stop a hypothetical IPO as there is a difference between corporate equity of Intel Foundry and project-level asset ownership (e.g., Fab 52, Fab 62, Fab 34). From an IPO perspective, selling 49% of Intel Foundry means selling a stake in the overall earnings and cash flow of the foundry business, not in each fab’s underlying real estate or assets.

The Intel Foundry division includes the full foundry business — such as process technologies that cost billions, design services, customer contracts, and global capacity — even if some fabs (like Fab 52/62 in Arizona and Fab 34 in Ireland) are only 51%-owned via joint ventures with Brookfield and Apollo. Intel still retains operational control of these fabs and consolidates their revenue, so they remain part of the foundry offering.

However, the partial fab ownership introduces minority interest adjustments in financial reporting, so investors would still value Intel Foundry based on its total capacity, customer pipeline, and roadmap, with appropriate discounts or disclosures for asset-level co-investments.

As a consequence, partial ownership of key fabs by third parties means Intel would likely raise less money in an Intel Foundry IPO, as investors will discount the valuation to reflect the fact that Intel does not retain 100% of the cash flow from those facilities. While Intel still controls Intel Foundry as a corporate entity and consolidates fab revenues, its share of profits from co-owned fabs is limited to 51%. Investors will factor in these minority interests and payout obligations when pricing shares. The added complexity also introduces risk, which may further reduce the valuation, which means that it may make no financial sense for Intel to IPO or spin off Intel Foundry.

Follow Tom’s Hardware on Google News, or add us as a preferred source, to get our up-to-date news, analysis, and reviews in your feeds. Make sure to click the Follow button!



Source link

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Intel
Product Reviews

Intel warns shareholders that the US government’s 10% stake could hurt company’s international sales

by admin



The U.S. government’s acquisition of a 10% stake in Intel highlights strategic importance of the company and indicates how important it is to the U.S. government. But the government’s new 10% ownership stake could cause problems for shareholders, employees, business partners, and the company’s international sales, according to Intel’s filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). 

One of Intel’s biggest concerns is its dependence on foreign markets: In fiscal 2024, the company earned 76% of its $53.1 billion revenue outside the United States, a slight decline from the previous year, but still the lion’s share. Sales to entities in China contributed 29% of Intel’s total revenue, followed by the U.S. with 24.5%, Singapore with 19.2%, and Taiwan with 14.7%. Now that the U.S. government is Intel’s largest shareholder, the chipmaker is directly linked to Trump’s unpredictable trade and tariff policies, which could unsettle overseas customers and governments. 

“Having the U.S. Government as a significant stockholder of the Company could subject the Company to additional regulations, obligations or restrictions, such as foreign subsidy laws or otherwise, in other countries,” a statement by Intel reads. 


You may like

“Among other things, there could be adverse reactions, immediately or over time, from investors, employees, customers, suppliers, other business or commercial partners, foreign governments or competitors,” the statement says. 

Intel acknowledged it had not finished evaluating the full financial, tax, and accounting effects of the deal, so further issues may arise. 

The agreement between Intel and the U.S. government, signed on August 22, 2025, includes two funding steps. The first is roughly $5.7 billion, which represents accelerated payments from Intel’s earlier arrangement with the Commerce Department under the CHIPS Act. The second is about $3.2 billion, which is linked to the CHIPS Act ‘Secure Enclave’ initiative for critical chips for aerospace and defense, and will be provided as conditions are met. Together, this funding package gives Intel immediate cash ($5.7 billion) and aligns future payments with government programs. 

But while Intel warns that the deal with the government may cause problems for Intel and its shareholders, U.S. President Donald Trump seems to be happy about the deal.

“I PAID ZERO FOR INTEL, IT IS WORTH APPROXIMATELY 11 BILLION DOLLARS. All goes to the USA,” Donald Trump wrote in a social media post. “Why are “stupid” people unhappy with that? I will make deals like that for our Country all day long. I will also help those companies that make such lucrative deals with the United States States. I love seeing their stock price go up, making the USA RICHER, AND RICHER. More jobs for America!!! Who would not want to make deals like that?”



Source link

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
US government takes 10 percent stake in Intel in exchange for money it was already on the hook for
Gaming Gear

US government takes 10 percent stake in Intel in exchange for money it was already on the hook for

by admin


The US is investing $8.9 billion into Intel, but most of the funds come from money that the government was supposed to pay the embattled chipmaker anyway. In an announcement on Friday, Intel said the federal government will fund its investment using the remaining $5.7 billion in grants it hasn’t yet received under the Biden administration’s CHIPS Act, in addition to the $3.2 billion received as part of the Secure Enclave program.

President Donald Trump confirmed the investment during a press briefing before the formal announcement, saying Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan agreed to give the government a 10 percent stake. Earlier this month, Trump called on Tan to resign over his ties to China, and today he positioned the deal as a way for the executive to “keep his job.”

Trump told reporters that he floated the offer during negotiations with Tan. “I said, ‘I think it would be good having the United States as your partner,’” Trump said. “They’ve agreed to do it, and I think it’s a great deal for them.” Intel has already received $2.2 billion under the CHIPS Act.

The government’s investment in Intel “will be a passive ownership, with no Board representation or other governance or information rights,” according to Intel. “We are grateful for the confidence the President and the Administration have placed in Intel, and we look forward to working to advance U.S. technology and manufacturing leadership,” Tan says in the press release.

The confirmation of the deal comes just days after SoftBank announced plans to invest $2 billion into Intel to “further expand” chipmaking in the US.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent hinted at the government’s potential investment this week, saying during an interview with CNBC that it “would be a conversion of grants” meant to “stabilize the company for chip production here in the US.”

It doesn’t seem like this is the end for Trump’s approach to deal-making, as he said during the briefing that “he’ll do more of them” in the future.

Update, August 22nd: Added information from Intel.



Source link

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
U.S. Government Now 'Controls' 10% of Intel, Trump Says
Product Reviews

U.S. Government Now ‘Controls’ 10% of Intel, Trump Says

by admin


President Donald Trump announced Friday that the U.S. government would be taking a 10% stake in Intel, the struggling U.S.-based chip manufacturer. But the president’s choice of words will definitely raise more than a few eyebrows, especially since the Trump regime has previously said the federal government will have no corporate governance role at the tech company.

“It is my Great Honor to report that the United States of America now fully owns and controls 10% of INTEL, a Great American Company that has an even more incredible future,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

The government taking a 10% ownership stake in Intel shouldn’t be surprising, as rumors about the deal leaked last week. But what might surprise people is Trump’s use of the word “control.” Nobody seems to know what that means yet.

“I negotiated this Deal with Lip-Bu Tan, the Highly Respected Chief Executive Officer of the Company. The United States paid nothing for these Shares, and the Shares are now valued at approximately $11 Billion Dollars,” Trump continued.

“This is a great Deal for America and, also, a great Deal for INTEL. Building leading edge Semiconductors and Chips, which is what INTEL does, is fundamental to the future of our Nation,” according to Trump. The president ended his post with the now-customary, “MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!” and “Thank you for your attention to this matter.”

Lutnick’s denials on Tuesday

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick was asked about the plans for a government stake in Intel during an interview with CNBC on Tuesday. Lutnick was specifically quizzed whether the government would get a governance role at Intel, something the Commerce Secretary insisted would not happen.

“Do you get governance here?” CNBC host David Faber asked.

“No, no, no, no, no…” Lutnick said over and over to the question, suggesting the entire idea was absurd. “Come on, stop that stuff. It’s not governance, right, we’re just what was a grant under Biden into equity for the Trump administration, for the American people.”

Faber pointed out that any other entity owning 10% would expect to have a say in how that company was run. “Why wouldn’t you want some…” Faber started to say before Lutnick drowned him out by repeatedly saying “non-voting, non-voting.”

Faber noted that the U.S. government got a so-called “golden share” when Japan-based Nippon Steel tried to buy U.S. Steel, meaning that Trump can potentially veto corporate decisions he doesn’t like. It’s unclear at this point what kind of influence Trump can have at Intel with this new 10% stake, which likely involves converting $10.86 billion in grants for Intel from the Biden-era CHIPS ACT into equity, according to reporting Tuesday the New York Times.

Who actually negotiated the deal?

Lutnick was the first to break the news on social media in a tweet shortly before Trump, though the Commerce Secretary’s announcement obviously carries less weight in an increasingly authoritarian country like the U.S. It’s not real until Dear Leader says it’s real.

“BIG NEWS: The United States of America now owns 10% of Intel, one of our great American technology companies. This historic agreement strengthens U.S. leadership in semiconductors, which will both grow our economy and help secure America’s technological edge,” Lutnick wrote.

BIG NEWS: The United States of America now owns 10% of Intel, one of our great American technology companies.

This historic agreement strengthens U.S. leadership in semiconductors, which will both grow our economy and help secure America’s technological edge.

Thanks to Intel… pic.twitter.com/AYMuX14Rgi

— Howard Lutnick (@howardlutnick) August 22, 2025

Lutnick’s tweet was sent at 4:10 p.m. ET and included a photo of him with Intel CEO Lip Bu-Tan. That presumably irked Trump, who sent his own post on Truth Social almost an hour later, at 5:04 p.m. ET, and included the claim “I negotiated this Deal with Lip-Bu Tan” in the second sentence.

Trump reportedly met with Tan last week after the president called for the Intel CEO’s resignation over alleged links to China. Trump insisted there was “no other solution to this problem” but changed his tune after the meeting.

What do the Dems say?

Folks on the left have been divided on whether Trump’s plan for Intel is a good one for America. Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont who caucuses with the Democrats, said earlier this week that he supports the plan for the U.S. government to take an equity stake.

“If microchip companies make a profit from the generous grants they receive from the federal government, the taxpayers of America have a right to a reasonable return on that investment,” Sanders told Reuters.

But Sen. Mark Warner, a Democrat from Virginia, wouldn’t commit so emphatically one way or another. In an email to Gizmodo, Warner said taking an equity stake “may or may not be the right approach,” while emphasizing that cutting-edge chips should not “flow to China without restraint” if that undercuts investments made in the U.S.

“We need a strategy that protects American innovation, strengthens our workforce, and keeps the technologies of the future firmly in American hands,” Warner said. “Additionally, given the administration’s recent approach to other high-profile technology transactions, Congress must apply thorough scrutiny for potential conflicts of interest or undue interference in private-sector decisions unrelated to national security.”

Intel is a drop in the ocean

Warner is absolutely right that Congress needs to look into any conflicts of interest or “undue interference” on private companies. But given the current trajectory of the U.S.—where we’ve got armed troops on the streets of D.C. and harassment campaigns against the president’s opponents—it seems unlikely that Congress will be deploying any checks or balances soon.





Source link

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
DAAPrivacyRightIcon
Product Reviews

Abxylute will sell an absurd 3D handheld from Intel and Tencent Games for “under $1,700”

by admin


As the handheld PC boom has taken off, companies have tried to push the boundaries of the Steam Deck form factor Valve helped popularize. Lenovo tried detachable controllers. Acer is trying an 11-inch screen. And Abxylute is apparently combining them both (and then some) into the Abxylute 3D One, which The Verge reports features an 11-inch, glasses-free 3D display and detachable controllers, all for “under $1,700.”

The Abxylute 3D One is based on a hardware prototype co-developed by Intel and Tencent that the companies demoed at CES 2025. The prototype, dubbed the “Sunday Dragon 3D One,” featured a display that used eye-tracking to achieve its 3D effect. The version Abxylute is selling seems to be offering more or less the same features, with an Intel Lunar Lake chip, 32GB of LPDDR5X RAM, an 120Hz display and a built-in kickstand.

The Abxylute 3D One’s controllers can detach like Joy-Cons, which leaves it looking like a chunky Surface Pro.

(Abxylute)

“Abxylute claims the product’s specifically optimized to deliver 3D for 50 of the top Steam games,” The Verge writes, though it can also be used for more than gaming if you’re desperate. The Abxylute 3D One will include software for converting 2D photos and video to 3D, and a detachable keyboard accessory complete with a trackpad.

No part of what Abxylute is offering here seems particularly practical, but if you like 3D and are into the company’s maximalist approach, you could be getting a deal. Acer’s 11-inch handheld, the Acer Nitro Blaze 11, starts at $1,100. A 3D laptop like the ASUS ProArt Studiobook 16 starts at $2,000. The Abxylute 3D One could approximate the features of both for a fairly reasonable price in the middle.

That might not make up for the fact that it seems too heavy to hold for more than 30 minutes at a time, but you can put that to the test yourself when the Abxylute 3D One goes on sale in “late September or early October.”



Source link

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
DAAPrivacyRightIcon
Gaming Gear

The US government is taking an $8.9 billion stake in Intel

by admin


President Donald Trump says the US government is taking a 10 percent stake in chip maker Intel. Trump shared the news during a press conference on Friday, though an official announcement is still forthcoming, Reuters reports. News of a plan to convert Intel’s previously promised CHIPS Act funding into equity in the company was first reported earlier in August.

A meeting between Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan and Trump following the President’s call for Tan to resign seems to be the source of the deal. “He walked in wanting to keep his job and he ended up giving us 10 billion dollars for the United States. So we picked up 10 billion,” Trump shared during the press conference.

Intel later announced more details on the investment. The company said in a press release that the government will “make an $8.9 billion investment in Intel common stock.” It adds that the equity stake will be funded by $5.7 billion previously earmarked for Intel as part of the CHIPS act, and $3.2 billion awarded as part of the Secure Enclave program. Intel had previously recieved $2.2 billion in CHIPS grants, bringing the government’s total spend on the chipmaker to $11.1 billion. The government paid $20.47 per share, so the $8.9 billion investment is equivalent to a 9.9 percent stake in the company.

It’s important to note that the government investing in Intel is not the same thing as receiving free money, it’s the exact opposite. Despite earlier comments from US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick suggesting the stake would be non-voting, common stock does come with voting rights. Intel does note that the investment will be passive, with no board representation, and that the government has agreed to vote with its board of directors “on matters requiring shareholder approval, with limited exceptions.”

Intel was supposed to receive up to $10.86 billion in federal funding to expand its chip manufacturing business in the US as part of the CHIPS Act. By agreeing to this deal, Tan is likely trying to make sure that funding still goes through, one of several drastic moves to keep Intel afloat. Tan assumed the title of CEO following Pat Gelsinger’s sudden retirement in 2024. Since taking over, he’s already committed to cutting Intel’s workforce by 20 percent. Even with lower costs and guaranteed investment, the company’s future is still uncertain: Intel is reportedly struggling to make its next-gen Panther Lake chips at scale.

The Trump administration says it won’t seek similar equity deals with other recipients of CHIPS act funding. That hasn’t stopped them from making other equally unprecedented financial arrangements. NVIDIA and AMD reportedly struck a deal with the US government that gives the companies the ability to export products to China in exchange for 15 percent of their profits.

Update, August 22, 6:20PM ET: This story was updated after publish with more information on the deal from Intel, and the headline was changed to the dollar figure, rather than the previously stated “10 percent” amount. A section quoting US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick saying that the stake was non-voting was also ammended to reflect the final details of the deal.



Source link

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Trump Is Betting Big on Intel. Will the Chips Fall His Way?
Product Reviews

Trump Is Betting Big on Intel. Will the Chips Fall His Way?

by admin


The US government is aiming to take an equity stake in Intel in exchange for grants the company was already committed to receive under the Biden era CHIPS Act, according to comments US commerce secretary Howard Lutnick made in an interview with CNBC. The move is part of the government’s efforts to boost US chip manufacturing.

“We should get an equity stake for our money, so we’ll deliver the money which was already committed under the Biden administration,” Lutnick said. “We’ll get equity in return for it.” Previously, the government was discussing taking a 10 percent stake in Intel, according to the New York Times.

The deal could help the venerable chipmaker fund its US-based semiconductor fabrication plants, or fabs, which have required billions of dollars to construct and maintain, even as demand for Intel chips has waned in recent years. Some chip industry experts and members of the Trump administration say that keeping Intel afloat is essential to US national security, because it lessens the country’s reliance on chipmakers overseas.

But analysts and one notable economist say a potential tie-up between Intel and the US government could present a conflict of interest and may not result in the kind of domestic chipmaking industry the administration is angling for.

“It’s not the right policy to have the US government own things, to have privatization in reverse,” says Stephen Moore, a visiting fellow at The Heritage Foundation and a former senior economic adviser to Trump’s 2016 campaign. “That’s similar to Europe’s industrial model, and we haven’t done that often here in the US, because a lot of it ends up failing.”

Government Intervention

The US government has some history of investing in the private sector. Moore cites a 1980s program called the Synthetic Fuels Corporation, a federally directed multibillion-dollar investment in companies producing liquid fuels from coal, oil shale, and tar sands. It was hailed by President Jimmy Carter as “the cornerstone of our energy policy” and had fallen apart by 1986.

Then, in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, the US government stepped in with multibillion-dollar bailouts to stop US automakers and some banks from going under. Those funds were issued either through the Troubled Asset Relief Program, in which the US Treasury Department bought up or guaranteed toxic assets, or in the form of bridge loans. Many were eventually repaid.

More recently, the Department of Defense agreed to fund a US-based rare-earth magnet company, MP Materials, via equity and loans, in order to expand production and decrease the country’s reliance on China. The deal would in theory give MP Materials the capital to increase its manufacturing capacity from 3,000 to 10,000 metric tons.

Moore says the ideal scenario is that these arrangements between the government and private industry have an end point. “It should be an agreement to own a short-term stake and then divest,” he says.

But the current Trump administration has been taking some of these public-private business dealings a step further: In June, the administration approved a partnership between Japanese steel company Nippon Steel and Pittsburgh-based US Steel, dependent on a national security agreement and a so-called golden share provision. The government insisted that it have a say in US Steel’s company decisions, including board appointees and future relocation plans. (This deal was also designed to help the US compete with China on steel production.)



Source link

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Intel
Gaming Gear

Trump eyes up Intel: What the White House’s reported 10% stake could mean for the struggling manufacturer

by admin



In a surprising turn of events on Monday, it was reported that the U.S. government was considering buying a 10% stake in Intel using CHIPS and Science Act in a bid to provide the struggling chipmaker much-needed cash. Coincidentally, SoftBank agreed to acquire Intel stock worth $2 billion, offering Intel another boost. But can an approximately $12.9 billion injection in liquid cash help Intel turn its fortunes?

Grants to equity

That amount would equal about $10.5 billion at Intel’s current market capitalization of around $103 billion, which is below the value of the company’s real estate and fabrication facilities. However, this decision has yet to officially happen, but there are strong signs pointing toward it.


You may like

Under the CHIPS and Science Act, Intel was awarded a package of $7.86 billion in grants and access to up to $11 billion in loans. The latest figure from the Bloomberg report suggests that a potential purchase of equity in Intel would exceed the previously agreed grant, from $7.86 billion, to a reported $10.9 billion, which is $3.3 billion more than previously agreed upon.

The subsidies were structured as reimbursements tied to the buildout of new fabs and construction milestones, so the funds were to be released in tranches over several years. Intel had already received $2.2 billion of those funds in late January 2025, according to Techcrunch.

The new thing about the Trump administration’s plan is not more money, but a different form of support. Instead of gradually paying the grants, Washington would convert part (or all) of Intel’s $10.9 billion package into equity and Intel in a lump sum, becoming the largest shareholder in the company, with a 10% stake.

As a result, Intel would not get any additional funds from the U.S. government. Intel would receive the funds sooner, and in a lump sum, while the U.S. government would move from a grantor to a shareholder.

The strategic importance of Intel

(Image credit: Intel)

Intel is a strategically important company for the United States both in terms of economic and national security.

Processors made using leading-edge process technologies are crucially important for American companies, such as Apple, AMD, Dell, HP, Nvidia, Qualcomm, and dozens of others. Without advanced silicon, these companies will quickly lose competitive positions to Asian rivals, which might result in trillions in losses to the U.S. economy.

Intel directly employs tens of thousands in high-skilled engineering and factory jobs, though the company enacted significant layoffs in June 2025.

There’s a ripple effect across suppliers, construction, and local economies, with the large number of people Intel employs. Additionally, large projects — such as the Ohio campus, known as the Silicon Heartland — are drivers of national and local economies, and are political symbols of American industrial strength and job creation.

The advantages of having a homegrown manufacturer

Advanced military and intelligence systems increasingly depend on advanced processors, many of which are now produced by TSMC in Taiwan or Samsung in South Korea. However, a domestic supplier ensures that chips intended for defense and aerospace programs are securely sourced and not exposed to supply chain disruptions or espionage risks.

Also, having a strong U.S. chipmaker improves America’s position in negotiations with allies (Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and the E.U.) that are also investing in semiconductors, and adversaries like China.

Intel is the only U.S.-based company with ambitions to make chips using leading-edge process technologies on American soil. While both TSMC and Samsung Foundry intend to build chips for U.S. companies in Arizona and Texas using advanced production nodes, they will not be their latest nodes.

In that sense, it is crucial for the U.S. government not only to keep Intel alive but also to ensure that it prospers. Losing Intel as a major player in the semiconductor industry would erode the U.S.’s foothold in one of the most important industries for the 21st-century economy, and make the country vulnerable to supply chain interruptions or foreign espionage initiatives.

Is $12.9 billion enough to save Intel?

Intel’s fab projects in Arizona and Ohio are part of the U.S. push to re-shore advanced manufacturing, so the country is not entirely dependent on foreign foundries. While Intel is about to begin high-volume manufacturing (HVM) at its Fab 52 and Fab 62 facilities in Arizona, HVM in Ohio has been pushed away from late 2025, to before 2030. But the importance of the Silicon Heartland in Ohio is hard to overestimate.

(Image credit: Intel)

Intel’s Silicon Heartland project in Ohio — the company’s first greenfield manufacturing site in decades — has heavily relied on government funding under the CHIPS Act, is instrumental to Intel’s foundry ambitions.

The planned Ohio site will span about 1,000 acres (4 km²), with room for as many as eight chip fabs along with facilities for suppliers and partner firms. Intel projected that a complete build-out could cost roughly $100 billion, while the initial phase was budgeted at about $28 billion for two fabs and support facilities.

If Intel had four new fabs capable of producing chips on its latest process technologies, 20A and 18A, by late 2025 or early 2026, it would have capacity for its own products and foundry customers.

However, as the semiconductor market shrank in 2022 – 2023 and Intel failed to get commitments from big customers, it delayed multiple projects and scaled down its capital expenditures in 2023 – 2024.

As a result, while the Arizona fabs are enough to serve Intel’s own needs and some foundry customers, it is unknown whether Intel can accommodate a large foundry client, such as Apple, Nvidia, or Qualcomm.

Intel needs to prepare for clients

(Image credit: Intel)

If Intel plans to land a major foundry customer, it needs additional production capacity that is specifically tailored for contract chipmaking (i.e., a high-mix/low-volume fab). Since Intel is preparing to build in Ohio, the best way for the company to build additional capacity likely is to construct at least one fab in Ohio to produce chips using its 18A-P or 14A process technologies. It’s also possible that Intel could build an additional fab at its Arizona site, which has all support facilities in place and a supply chain around it.

But, no matter where the new fab is — which will have both current-generation Low-Numerical Aperture (NA) and next-generation High-NA lithography tools installed — it will cost between $20 billion and $30 billion. This would be a lot of money for Intel, which bleeds billions every quarter. To add to the issue, Intel needs to begin construction as soon as possible to have the available capacity for prospective foundry partners in the years ahead.

According to Intel’s latest financial reports, the company has $21.04 billion in cash and cash equivalents. So, an influx of $12 billion could be instrumental in stabilizing the company and accelerating the Ohio site buildout, or starting a new fab phase in Arizona. However, a lot depends on timing.

Since support facilities and supply chains already exist in Arizona, it could be cheaper and faster to add a new fab module in Arizona, rather than accelerating the greenfield site in Ohio.

The political and financial importance of Intel

The combined infusion of $10.9 billion from the U.S. government and $2 billion from SoftBank carries weight well beyond the balance sheet, serving as both a financial lifeline and a symbolic endorsement of Intel, following a rocky patch.

For the U.S. government, converting CHIPS Act support into equity transforms subsidies into direct political ownership, which signals to both the industry and allies that America is serious about rebuilding advanced chipmaking capabilities, particularly through the high-profile Ohio project. Also, SoftBank’s $2 billion bet highlights Masayoshi Son’s belief in Intel’s design and production potential and its relevance amid the ongoing AI revolution.

Together, these moves represent a dual vote of confidence — one stemming from national strategy, the other from commercial opportunity and the strategic importance of Intel. This could reassure markets and strengthen Intel’s credibility at a moment when doubts over its competitiveness are quite high.

However, Intel needs to invest money in capacity for its future major foundry customers sooner, rather than later.

Follow Tom’s Hardware on Google News to get our up-to-date news, analysis, and reviews in your feeds. Make sure to click the Follow button.



Source link

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
DAAPrivacyRightIcon
Product Reviews

Trump’s administration may look to buy a stake in Intel

by admin


Intel has had some recent struggles in delivering results for its shareholders, but the company could soon be answering to an additional boss. The current administration is reportedly in talks to have the US government acquire a stake in the chipmaker. Bloomberg first reported the news without specifics about the size or value of the potential share the government wants to buy. According to a newer report by Bloomberg and The New York Times, the Trump administration is looking to take a 10 percent stake in Intel as part of its efforts to give domestic chip manufacturing a boost.

The administration is reportedly considering converting the $10.86 billion in federal grants Intel is getting from the US Chips and Science Act into equity instead. It’s still early days, and the White House is still deciding on the exact size of the stake. Intel initially shared plans to construct a semiconductor facility in Ohio in 2022 while Pat Gelsinger was still at the helm of the company. Since then, the project has faced delays, and at its latest quarterly earnings report, execs said Intel would “slow the pace” on the Ohio construction, as well as scrapping other international building plans and making workforce cuts.

The potential for government ownership of Intel is the latest swing of the administration’s attitude toward the company. A few days after calling for his resignation over connections to China, President Donald Trump met with CEO Lip-Bu Tan and seemed to now hold a more positive outlook on the company leader.

A representative from Intel told Bloomberg in a statement that the company is “deeply committed to supporting President Trump’s efforts to strengthen US technology and manufacturing leadership. We look forward to continuing our work with the Trump administration to advance these shared priorities, but we are not going to comment on rumors or speculation.”

Update, August 18 2025, 10:31AM ET: This story has been updated to include new reports that the Trump administration is looking to take a 10 percent stake in Intel.



Source link

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Close