r/technology • u/Franco1875 • 1d ago
Politics The Trump administration’s big Intel investment comes from already awarded grants
https://techcrunch.com/2025/08/23/the-trump-administrations-big-intel-investment-comes-from-already-awarded-grants/247
u/Franco1875 1d ago
While Intel says the government is making an “$8.9 billion investment in Intel common stock,” the administration does not appear to be committing new funds. Instead, it’s simply making good on what Intel described as “grants previously awarded, but not yet paid, to Intel.”
So if I'm correct here, the administration gets a 10% stake in the company, but by just actually releasing funds already committed to Intel? The 'art of the deal', I guess.
139
u/Fragrant_Equal_2577 23h ago
Trump couldn‘t accept that Biden‘s CHIP Act was a good thing for the US. Trump had to make it look like „his“.
Intel now received the funds as an investment from the USG without the strings attached to the CHIP Act state subsidy program. Intel is happy with the deal. They have been buying back a lot of company shares…
67
u/big-papito 23h ago
Ah, so no longer the CHIPS act but a C-suite enrichment program .
24
u/stonktraders 23h ago
It has never been. Intel keeps selling business and laying off staff despite the CHIPS act. It just got worse with the new CEO
2
-22
u/Fragrant_Equal_2577 21h ago
Trump and Lutnick see the opportunity to make quick profits with Intel. They got ~$10bn (~ subsidy) worth of Intel shares at a discounted share price.
INTC has the potential to rebound from today’s ~$25 per share to above $50 if they get their shit together.
Good opportunity to convert (in best case) the $10bn subsidy (wasted Biden money) into $20bn cash by Trump.
2
3
u/oojacoboo 16h ago
Making shit up, and blowing it out of your ass - the Reddit way I guess.
Stock buybacks haven’t been happening at Intel for years. And most all of this money will go to the completion of 14A.
But keep staying blind with your politics.
1
10
u/imaginary_num6er 23h ago
Good luck with that. Intel was already a poor investment since 2011 in terms of stock price and $8.9 billion is not nearly enough to dig itself from its hole
3
u/AffectionateKey7126 16h ago
The funds were already committed and now they get a 10% stake as opposed to nothing.
2
u/anonymousbopper767 5h ago
Which is a hilariously bad deal for intel, yet the stock price went up. They went from “here’s free money” to “we own you”. And boy is it the worst possible administration to have owning you. Gonna have some Fox News anchor in the White House telling you your fab needs to be painted gold.
1
-6
u/Bokbreath 23h ago
Getting equity 'for free' (already committed expenditure) is a fantastic deal.
23
u/kingmanic 23h ago
There is also the implication that they will now pick the winner by regulation or just decree; now they have a stake in Intel it might mean AMD, Apple, ARM, broadcom, qualcomm, etc... may have a harder time or have to make some nonsense deal.
-9
u/Bokbreath 22h ago
govt. took stakes in companies as part of TARP without that happening, so it would seem to be an unfounded fear.
32
u/international_swiss 23h ago
Only if you believe changing rules after making a deal is a good thing.
Government gives grant. Next government changes the deal. Welcome to new age America where policies last for 4 years.
-27
u/Bokbreath 22h ago
The purpose of govt. is to enact the will of the people, not blindly follow contracts. If you want my (taxpayers) money, be prepared to shoulder the risk. Otherwise feel free to seek private financing.
10
u/international_swiss 22h ago
Good to know. So your agree that will of people change every 4 years in US.
-14
u/Bokbreath 22h ago
It is put to the test every 2 years. It may or may not change.
11
u/international_swiss 22h ago
Ahh. Even 2 years. Even better. 2 year laws in US. Perfect for investments
-11
8
u/aletheia 22h ago
The presidency is not the locus of the will of the people under the US constitution. Congress changes law, not the president.
1
u/Bokbreath 12h ago
what law was changed ?
2
u/venom21685 12h ago
Effectively the CHIPS Act, as passed by Congress, by withholding the funds appropriated by Congress and imposing new and arbitrary terms on that funding. Of course, the judicial system is fucked in this country too so it's ultimately going to be a "Dear Leader can do whatever he wants" situation, but it would never have flown before in American history.
0
u/Bokbreath 11h ago
I understand - but the law was not changed. it may not have been followed as congress originally intended however for that to be challenged requires a plaintiff, in this case Intel. They are going along with the program so in terms of taxpayer value we are in front. I now effectively own about 1/35000000% of Intel.
Not seeing a downside here.2
u/venom21685 9h ago
I imagine some real Intel shareholders could also file suit as the C-suite just effectively gave away 10% of the company and devalued their shares.
Don't get me wrong I'm honestly not against taking equity in a company if they're getting grants/bailouts, but the requirements should be in the actual bill and the company's decision to weigh fairly. If anything this seizure should actually discourage investment in a company because what if the administration decides 10% isn't enough?
1
u/Bokbreath 8h ago
not sure it can be characterized as seizure. It was more give us equity or we don't give you taxpayers money. The option to decline the funds was always available.
And yes, a shareholder could easily file for mismanagement. It will be interesting to watch and see if this happens.→ More replies (0)8
u/joeyb908 21h ago
For free here releases Intel of the requirements they were facing in order to receive these grants.
Who is making the better deal here? Intel who was getting the money but now doesn’t have to utilize the money to actually improve the company in any meaningful way, or the US in getting 10% stake of a company that’s in a death spiral?
0
u/GoldenMegaStaff 18h ago
How quickly the GOP become the Socialist party and the Democrats become the Corporate Welfare party.
20
u/NinjaTabby 21h ago
Setting the stage for the eventual blame on Biden while in fact this is a hostile takeover.
9
u/RatInaMaze 17h ago edited 17h ago
Remember folks. It’s not the fact they invested in america, it’s the fact that now one company has an unfair advantage over any competitor. This is a government sponsored monopoly of a company that has publicly traded equity. This does nothing to lower prices for normal people. The most likely motivation here was for some administration people or their families to insider trade ahead of this. That means more money taken out of the pockets of democrats and republicans alike to go into the pockets of corrupt politicians and their staff.
3
u/bala_means_bullet 17h ago
You don't really think Trump is doing this for the American ppl, RIGHT??????? This is all for him, he has no interest in making the US any money. His only interest is to fleece us before he dies.
3
u/Mountain-Detail-8213 14h ago
Isn’t it kind of ironic how Republicans were claiming Biden did something wrong by passing the chips act that helped Intel out? I’ll never forget Cramer coming on CNBC and claiming the Biden administration should’ve never invested in Intel. Then after Trump wants to invest in Intel Cramer comes out and says what a great job. I only mention Cramer because most people know him. That said I heard the same thing out of a lot of Republicans mouths. it’s just like when Trump was convicted of mortgage fraud. It was no big deal. Even though it was hundreds of millions of dollars. Then a Democrat is just accused of possibly cheating on her mortgage application and they’re ready to convict her. Hopefully one day all of these treasonous Republicans will get what they deserve
6
u/aquarain 19h ago
These are strange numbers. $8.9B for 10% of a company with $100B in fab spending plans? The scale is off.
5
u/PainterRude1394 18h ago
Market cap and capex are different things
1
u/aquarain 18h ago
They are. And this ratio is upside down.
3
u/PainterRude1394 18h ago
You're so close to understanding that Intel is not in a great spot financially and that's why this is happening.
0
2
4
u/T1Pimp 21h ago
So, theft and the government taking a stake in the means of production. Are they commies now?
-13
u/PainterRude1394 18h ago
This is not theft. Highly recommend you understand the very basics before commenting.
10
u/T1Pimp 18h ago
They took $5.7 billion from the CHIPS and Science Act and $3.2 billion from the Secure Enclave program and converted it into equity and they did so at below market value making us one of the largest shareholders. The chips act doesn't allow for equity purchase.
The executive doesn't control spending, Congress does. CONGRESS can redirect and explicitly approve equity stakes. It did in the 2008 financial crisis with tarp. That's not what happened here.
You can argue over me colloquially using "steal" but you won't. You'll just stupidly go back to sucking Fox News anchor schlong. I highly recommend you just go do that instead of commenting and looking like a fucking tool.
-7
u/PainterRude1394 18h ago
Words have meaning, just because your feels hurt doesn't make it theft.
The government is giving Intel chips act funds in exchange for some ownership. Arguably extortion, but definitely not theft.
1
1
u/WhiteTigerAutistic 16h ago
I half expect this intel investment to be transfer to his “presidential library” after his term. Because it’ll be a presidential act
1
0
u/radio_cures 14h ago
This deal is one of the few actually good things Trump has done - we shouldn’t give these companies grants with nothing in return. If a different president had done it people would be praising this.
-9
u/ioncloud9 22h ago
I don’t hate this idea. Honestly the government should be buying equity when it gives companies grants, huge tax breaks, or subsidies instead of just free money or very favorable loans.
3
u/dotbat 22h ago
Yeah, I'm not sure I'm for giving out these grants in the first place, but, I'll concede sometimes there's a national / security interest in doing so.
If my money is going to be given out to a company, I guess we might as well be given something for it in return.
If Intel does well, the government can sell the shares / Intel can buy them back, resulting in a return for the American people. To me that's a lot better than just handing them money. It's also a decent precedent to set - no more free handouts to corporations, we at least need the opportunity to get our money back.
3
u/finalattack123 21h ago
Not sure what these grants entail. But there’s a possibility it’s about encouraging local growth - specific to starting up local production.
But I’ve not checked.
0
u/dotbat 20h ago
I haven't either, but that's a great example if nothing else. And despite my reservations about grants like this, we also have a vested interest in not being completely reliant on other countries. It's not inconceivable for us to lose access to most cpus if we got into a war with China.
-9
u/virtual_adam 21h ago
It’s funny seeing the Reddit crowd suddenly turn anti Bernie
You see the win, take the win.
3
u/Irish_Whiskey 19h ago
Reddit is pro-Bernie when it comes to money going to themselves, and legal weed. Actual socialism is not very popular on reddit.
Of course the more surprising part is that it's suddenly popular in the Republican Party. Or at least they won't say anything critical of Trump, no matter how it goes against their 'values'.
2
u/virtual_adam 18h ago
It’s corporate welfare, not socialism
1) if Trump would cancel the money (corporate welfare) people would be angry
2) if Trump - with Bernie’s open and public support - demands profit sharing for corporate welfare - people are angry
3) if Trump was the one pitching the CHIPS (corporate welfare) act - people would be angry
If you ask me - Bernie’s support is enough to understand this isn’t a Trump good Trump bad thing
0
u/PainterRude1394 18h ago
If this happened under Biden the Reddit hivemind would be for it, lol. I hate trump but the derangement is real.
0
u/Lazy-Background-7598 17h ago
How much did intel peeps donate to his campaign?
1
u/HackPhilosopher 14h ago
I’m sure they would rather just have the previously approved grants instead of 10% ownership ceded.
-10
u/realribsnotmcfibs 19h ago
I said it before on Reddit I’ll say it again.
The government SHOULD entirely nationalize Intel and shareholders should receive $0 in compensation.
It IS a critical industry for both economic and national security.
They have spent over 60% of their profit over the last 2 decades not on R&D and employees or saving for future development but on stock buy backs and shareholder dividends. To the tune of over 160 billion dollars if they had saved this money for a rainy day their company would have the reserves to keep on keeping on for the better part of the next decade.
They displayed monopoly behavior by attempting to bully integrators to only offer Intel in their system line ups at their peak rather than genuinely offer the best product at the best price in all price points.
They have now fallen so hard they are cutting tens of thousands of jobs and begging for government money openly announcing they no longer want to compete on the cutting edge because they can’t. It’s time to shut shareholders and highly compensated executives out of the company and build a US based company that will provide for its country.
Plunder and enrich < profit and improve
3
u/PainterRude1394 18h ago
They have spent over 60% of their profit over the last 2 decades not on R&D and employees or saving
So, profit means money after r&d and payroll. What you're saying is impossible and makes no sense. I don't think you understand even the basics of what you are saying.
2
u/realribsnotmcfibs 18h ago edited 18h ago
And yet a former recent CEO of Intel even admitted that stock buy backs harmed their future and that they could no longer focus on them.
160 billion dollars would offset 8 years of their most recent loss without even considering what they could have earned on that money. Instead they are begging for government money as they lay off tens of thousands of people.
It absolutely makes sense that they emptied their piggy bank to enrich shareholders while letting the company fail in the near future due to a lack of investment to overcome their difficulties in developing newer gens of their tech.
1
u/DanielPhermous 9h ago
The government SHOULD entirely nationalize Intel and shareholders should receive $0 in compensation.
So... theft?
1
u/realribsnotmcfibs 8h ago
It’s a company built off now 50 billion in tax payer subsidies and have admitted they no longer can compete in a sector that is actually important for the country.
So sure stealing.
-1
u/DanielPhermous 8h ago
It's worth 108 billion. You're advocating robbing people of a collective 58 billion, including many people's 401Ks. I'm not even sure what the legality would be for foreign investors. Is the US going to rob citizens of allied countries as well?
And let's just ignore the 5th and 14th Amendment while we're at it.
2
u/realribsnotmcfibs 8h ago
It only needs a government bailout because it’s admitting it can no longer compete. The only reason their stock isn’t lower is because the government hinted they would bail them out from the moment they started ringing the bell.
They just had a 19 billion dollar loss and are shedding tens of thousands of manufacturing employees.
“We face the prospect that it will not be economical to develop and manufacture Intel 14A and successor leading-edge nodes on a go-forward basis,” Intel wrote in a regulatory filing Thursday.
“Any decision to pause or discontinue our pursuit of Intel 14A and successor leading-edge process technologies,” it continued, “may be effectively irreversible.”
Does that sound like a 100 billion dollar company in a critical industry that took hundreds of billions of dollars and decades to get where it is today?
If the tax payer has to bail you out and feed you on down years after you spent all your cash at the casino…you don’t deserve the pretend market value built off said casino game.
0
u/DanielPhermous 7h ago
It only needs a government bailout because it’s-
Doesn't matter. We're not talking about Intel, not really. We're talking about the US Government taking 58 billion dollars from investors, many of which are ordinary people with 401Ks, in direct contravention of two Amendments of the Constitution and likely a few dozen international treaties.
You support that. I don't.
And we both know your tune would change if you, personally, held Intel stock.
I'm out. You're never going to admit anything.
402
u/ConsubstantialV 1d ago
“Republicans” and state owned corporations — Interesting.