TSMC Caught in the Crossfire as U.S. Officials Weigh Equity Stakes in CHIPS Act Beneficiaries

The Trump administration’s plans to reshape semiconductor subsidies under the CHIPS Act could put TSMC in a difficult position, as officials weigh the possibility of acquiring equity stakes in companies receiving government support.

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick recently confirmed that the U.S. government is considering a chip subsidy-for-equity model. Under this framework, firms benefiting from CHIPS Act grants would be required to hand over partial ownership stakes to the federal government.

One major example is Intel, which could see the U.S. acquire a 10% stake as part of the administration’s new deal. Following this precedent, other major players such as Samsung, Micron, and TSMC are also being scrutinized for potential inclusion in the equity model.

Why TSMC Faces the Biggest Challenge

Unlike U.S.-based Intel or South Korea’s Samsung, TSMC’s unique geopolitical and financial positioning makes the move far more complex. Taiwan’s largest semiconductor manufacturer has historically operated independently of political influences, focusing solely on technological leadership and global supply chain stability.

However, Taiwanese media sources warn that this equity measure could undermine TSMC’s autonomy, framing it as a form of “highway robbery” and suggesting it amounts to a subtle nationalization of Taiwan’s critical assets. United Daily News and UDN News have both raised concerns that Washington’s approach risks turning TSMC into a de facto U.S. foundry, despite U.S. assurances that any stake would not influence the company’s decision-making.

Political and Financial Uncertainty Ahead

For now, no official decision has been made regarding TSMC’s inclusion in the equity-for-subsidy scheme. Given TSMC’s massive ongoing investments in Arizona and its role as a global semiconductor leader, it is possible that the model will not be applied to the company. Still, the uncertainty casts a shadow over its U.S. operations and raises difficult questions about sovereignty, economics, and supply chain security.

As Washington seeks to balance national security with industrial competitiveness, TSMC’s role in the global semiconductor ecosystem ensures that any equity negotiations will be closely watched worldwide.

Do you think TSMC should accept U.S. equity involvement to secure its subsidies, or resist in order to protect its independence?