Trump administration will back CHIPS and Science Act hints outgoing Commerce Secretary

Intel silicon spin qubit progress
(Image credit: Intel)

Donald Trump and his backers were hardly fans of the Biden administration's CHIPS and Science Act during the election campaign, yet the next U.S. government does not plan to reverse it. At least, that's the impression the next U.S. Commerce Secretary, Howard Lutnick, gave to outgoing Secretary Gina Raimondo, Bloomberg reports.

Before the election, Trump criticized the CHIPS Act, labeling it highly flawed and proposing tariffs as an alternative. But Lutnick, his chosen appointee for the position who will inherit program management from Raimondo, has indicated that he plans to continue with its implementation.

In a recent meeting with Raimondo, Lutnick expressed his commitment to the CHIPS and Science initiative, according to remarks Raimondo shared during a staff gathering last week, published by Bloomberg. Neither the Commerce Department nor Trump's transition team, responded when asked for clarification.

The $52 billion CHIPS and Science Act, launched under President Joe Biden to revitalize U.S. semiconductor manufacturing, is now transitioning to Donald Trump's administration. With $39 billion in grants already allocated and over $450 billion in private investments spurred, the program does not seem like a failure. Indeed, its progress is evident: Intel, GlobalFoundries, TSMC, Texas Instruments, and Samsung Foundry are building massive fabs in the U.S. While both Intel and Samsung faced some setbacks, both are committed to invest in America.

But while the new Commerce Secretary reportedly plans to continue the CHIPS and Science program, other people in Trump's team are not very fond of the initiative.

Vivek Ramaswamy, who is going to co-lead Donald Trump's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) presidential advisory commission with Elon Musk next year, criticized the Biden administration's approach to distributing multi-billion grants to semiconductor manufacturers weeks before Biden's tenancy is over, reports Politico. He called the action 'inappropriate' ahead of the power transition and threatened DOGE review of the funding contracts as well as other initiatives of the current administration.

"Wasteful subsidies under the IRA and CHIPS Act are being rapidly pushed out before January 20," Ramaswamy wrote in an X post a couple of months ago. "DOGE will review every one of these 11th-hour gambits and recommend that Inspectors General scrutinize these last-minute contracts. Political appointees who go on to work for beneficiaries of this midnight spending spree should be exposed unsparingly."

In the weeks following the election, over $16 billion in funding contracts were awarded to five semiconductor companies, including BAE Systems, GlobalFoundries, Intel, Rocket Lab, and TSMC as chipmakers raced to ink their deals with the U.S. government and get their funding under the CHIPS Act. Before the election, the administration had awarded just one major contract, totaling $123 million, to Polar Semiconductor in Minnesota.

Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo has defended the timeline, asserting it was part of the original plan under the CHIPS and Science Act. Moreover, she has denied that the timeline has been influenced by any potential policy reversals under the next administration.

TOPICS
Anton Shilov
Contributing Writer

Anton Shilov is a contributing writer at Tom’s Hardware. Over the past couple of decades, he has covered everything from CPUs and GPUs to supercomputers and from modern process technologies and latest fab tools to high-tech industry trends.

  • OldAnalogWorld
    Earlier, the forum moderator deleted part of my reasoning in another news about TSMC under the pretext - no politics on the forum according to the forum rules. The question is - why then publish news about politics here? If it is impossible to express an opinion on the essence of the issue, which is what I did earlier?
    Reply
  • COLGeek
    OldAnalogWorld said:
    Earlier, the forum moderator deleted part of my reasoning in another news about TSMC under the pretext - no politics on the forum according to the forum rules. The question is - why then publish news about politics here? If it is impossible to express an opinion on the essence of the issue, which is what I did earlier?
    No, it isn't impossible to comment. Focus on the tech aspects of the topic and not the politics. One can do one without the other.
    Reply
  • OldAnalogWorld
    It is impossible to focus on technical issues - because this news is pure politics and a violation of the principles of a market economy. Which I have covered in great detail in another thread in comparison with China. Otherwise, what is the point of this news? That some supposedly market company is being given subsidies? And why? In a market economy? The inexorable hand of the market will fix everything itself, won't it? Subsidies are the path to a non-market economy, socialism, and then a totalitarian state machine. There are no other options.

    Technically, Intel is bankrupt - a key recipient of IT subsidies in the US. And it should disappear from the market, like a zombie company. That's its fate in a market economy. No big deal - there will be those who will pick up the flag if the economy is still a market economy. Otherwise, it turns out that the small economy of Taiwan is stronger than the US economy in all the aspects I outlined earlier?
    Reply
  • COLGeek
    OldAnalogWorld said:
    It is impossible to focus on technical issues - because this news is pure politics and a violation of the principles of a market economy. Which I have covered in great detail in another thread in comparison with China. Otherwise, what is the point of this news? That some supposedly market company is being given subsidies? And why? In a market economy? The inexorable hand of the market will fix everything itself, won't it? Subsidies are the path to a non-market economy, socialism, and then a totalitarian state machine. There are no other options.
    Nonsense. Members choose the aspect to focus on.

    In this case, continuity of programs ensures a path to more flexible supply chains and increased competition, so that we don't have to (should it ever happen again) deal with the COVID induced supply chain issues from a couple years ago. There should also be improved competition, improving prices for consumers and increased innovation.

    All can be addressed without going down the political rabbit hole.

    Political commentary is the equivalent of troll food. Feeding trolls never ends well and often leads to unfortunate outcomes.

    Hope this clarifies our policies.
    Reply
  • rluker5
    Wouldn't paying out the awarded funds be considered continuing the CHIPS act?
    Reply