Mirror Review
August 19, 2025
Is the U.S. entering a new era where the government directly invests in its most important industries?
That’s the question now that Washington is negotiating to take a 10% US Government Intel Stake.
This would turn part of the company’s $10.9 billion CHIPS Act grant into equity, making the U.S. government Intel’s biggest shareholder.
This is more than a simple subsidy. It represents a direct partnership to strengthen the U.S. chip supply chain and regain leadership in critical technology.
A New Chapter for the Semiconductor Industry
The proposed 10% stake is a big change in how the government works with companies. The CHIPS and Science Act of 2022 initially offered $39 billion in grants and loans to encourage chip manufacturing in the U.S.
But progress has been slow:
- Samsung: Its $44 billion Texas plant has been delayed because of low customer demand and the need to upgrade from 4nm to 2nm technology, even with a $6.4 billion CHIPS grant.
- TSMC: Its Arizona project also faced early delays due to labor and tech issues, though production is now ramping up.
- Intel: Once a clear leader, Intel has struggled to keep pace with TSMC. New CEO Lip-Bu Tan has scaled back some construction plans, taking a cautious, demand-driven approach that clashes with the government’s push for rapid expansion.
By taking an equity stake, the government ensures its investment directly supports U.S. strategic goals, like national security and domestic production.
The Logic Behind the Direct Investment
So, why not just provide the grant money as originally planned? The conversion of a grant into an equity stake serves several key purposes:
1. Direct Oversight:
As a major shareholder, the US government gains direct influence over strategic decisions, ensuring that Intel’s business roadmap aligns with U.S. national interests.
This could mean prioritizing the production of military-grade chips or accelerating the development of leading-edge process nodes like Intel’s 18A technology.
2. Risk Mitigation:
Investing in a struggling company is a risk. By converting the grant into equity, the government hedges its bets.
If Intel succeeds in its turnaround, the government’s stake appreciates in value, providing a return on investment.
If the company falters, the government still holds a tangible asset rather than having simply given away billions in non-recoverable funds.
3. Future-Proofing the CHIPS Act:
This move could set a precedent for future government-industry partnerships. It transforms the CHIPS Act from a simple subsidy program into a long-term strategic investment vehicle.
This model could be applied to other critical sectors, from AI to clean energy, where the U.S. is competing for global dominance.
This approach is about more than just money; it’s about a “golden share” concept, as seen in the United States Steel Corp. deal.
It’s a strategic maneuver to regain control of a vital supply chain that has largely shifted to Asia.
With this stake, the U.S. government is not just a customer or a benefactor; it is a full-fledged partner in Intel’s mission to revive American chipmaking.
End Note
The 10% US government Intel stake is a bold bet.
It could provide Intel with the financial stability and strategic alignment needed to compete with TSMC and Samsung.
At the same time, it could be the most effective way for the U.S. to rebuild a strong, innovative domestic semiconductor industry.
The next few months will show if this new strategy can turn into a real win for American industry.
