South Korea announced plans to provide 14 trillion won ($10 billion) in low-interest loans next year to support its chip sector amid growing competition from China and uncertainty over US trade policies under President-elect Donald Trump. The funds, managed by state-run banks, will include 1.8 trillion won for infrastructure like power lines at a new high-tech chip complex in Yongin and Pyeongtaek, designed to attract advanced chipmakers.
The government highlighted challenges posed by rapid advancements in China’s semiconductor industry and potential changes to US policies like the Inflation Reduction Act and Chips Act, which could alter global trade incentives. Trump has also pledged new tariffs on goods from China, Mexico, and Canada, raising additional concerns for South Korean exporters.
While South Korea leads in memory chip manufacturing through giants like Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix, it faces setbacks in chip design and contract manufacturing, where rivals are gaining ground. The government vowed to use all available resources to help the industry overcome its current challenges and maintain global competitiveness.
Samsung Electronics made significant leadership changes on Wednesday, aiming to strengthen its position in the competitive AI chip market. Semiconductor chief Jun Young-hyun was named co-CEO, gaining direct control of the struggling memory chip business, while US chip head Han Jin-man was promoted to lead the foundry division. The moves reflect Samsung’s strategy to address declining profits and regain its edge against rivals SK Hynix and Taiwan’s TSMC.
The reshuffle comes amid growing investor concerns over Samsung’s lagging performance in AI chip supply, particularly to key client Nvidia. Samsung’s semiconductor profits dropped sharply in the third quarter, attributed to delays with a major customer. Despite some progress since, analysts remain sceptical about the leadership structure, with Chung Hyun-ho retaining his influential role in the Business Support Task Force.
Chairman Jay Y. Lee acknowledged public and investor concerns during a hearing this week, emphasising the need to navigate business uncertainty and intensifying competition, particularly from Chinese chipmakers. Samsung hopes the leadership overhaul will drive innovation and stabilise its chip business in a rapidly evolving market.
Qualcomm’s interest in acquiring Intel has reportedly cooled due to the complexities involved in such a massive deal, according to Bloomberg. While a full acquisition now appears unlikely, Qualcomm may consider pursuing specific parts of Intel’s business or revisiting the idea in the future. Neither company has commented publicly on the report.
Qualcomm initially approached Intel in September, sparking speculation about a potential acquisition. Any deal would face significant antitrust scrutiny as it would unite two of the semiconductor industry’s biggest players. Qualcomm had previously explored acquiring sections of Intel’s design business, but no formal offer materialised.
Intel, once a dominant chipmaking powerhouse, has struggled in recent years, losing market share to competitors like TSMC and missing key opportunities in generative AI. The company’s declining fortunes have been reflected in a 50% drop in its stock price this year and its recent removal from the Dow Jones Industrial Average.
Intel’s expected $8.5 billion subsidy for expanding its United States chip manufacturing facilities is likely to be reduced, sources revealed. The grants, part of a broader semiconductor funding initiative under the CHIPS and Science Act, will still represent a significant investment but may drop below $8 billion. The adjustment is reportedly linked to Intel’s separate $3 billion Pentagon contract funded through the same programme.
The US government aims to bolster domestic semiconductor production through the CHIPS Act, allocating $52.7 billion overall, including $39 billion in subsidies. Intel’s planned projects in Arizona include building two new chip factories and upgrading an existing facility. Despite these efforts, Intel faces industry challenges, with slumping share prices and restructuring moves under CEO Pat Gelsinger.
Other companies, such as TSMC and GlobalFoundries, have also benefited from preliminary CHIPS Act agreements. Intel’s revised funding agreement is expected soon, with the US Commerce Department declining to comment on the final subsidy figure.
Chinese big tech companies have emerged as some of the most influential players in the global technology landscape, driving innovation and shaping industries across the board. These companies are deeply entrenched in everyday life in China, offering a wide range of services and products that span e-commerce, social media, gaming, cloud computing, ΑΙ, and telecommunications. Their influence is not confined to China, they also play a significant role in global markets, often competing directly with US tech giants.
The rivalry between China and the US has become one of the defining geopolitical struggles of the 21st century. This competition oscillates between cooperation, fierce competition, and confrontation, influenced by regulatory policies, national security concerns, and shifting political priorities. The geopolitical pendulum of China-US tech firms, totally independent from the US election outcome, reflects the broader tensions between the two powers, with profound implications for global tech industries, innovation, and market dynamics.
The Golden Shield Project
In 2000, under Chairman Jiang Zemin’s leadership, China launched the Golden Shield Project to control media and information flow within the country. The initiative aimed to safeguard national security and restrict the influence of Western propaganda. As part of the Golden Shield, many American tech giants such as Google, Facebook, and Netflix were blocked by the Great Firewall for not complying with China’s data regulations, while companies like Microsoft and LinkedIn were allowed to operate.
At the same time, China’s internet user base grew dramatically, reaching 800 million netizens by 2018, with 98% using mobile devices. This rapid expansion provided a fertile ground for Chinese tech firms, which thrived without significant competition from foreign players. Among the earliest beneficiaries of this system were the BATX companies, which capitalised on China’s evolving internet landscape and rapidly established a dominant presence in the market.
The powerhouses of Chinese tech
The major Chinese tech companies, often referred to as the Big Tech of China, include Alibaba Group, Tencent, Baidu, ByteDance, Huawei, Xiaomi, JD.com, Meituan, Pinduoduo, and Didi Chuxing.
Alibaba Group is a global e-commerce and technology conglomerate, operating platforms such as Taobao and Tmall for e-commerce, AliExpress for international retail, and Alipay for digital payments. The company also has significant investments in cloud computing with Alibaba Cloud and logistics.
Tencent, a massive tech conglomerate, is known for its social media and entertainment services. It owns WeChat, a widely used messaging app that offers payment services, social media features, and more. Tencent also has investments in gaming, owning major stakes in Riot Games, Epic Games, and Activision Blizzard, as well as interests in financial services and cloud computing.
Baidu, often called China’s Google, is a leading search engine provider. In addition to its search services, Baidu has a strong presence in AI development, autonomous driving, and cloud computing, particularly focusing on natural language processing and autonomous vehicles.
ByteDance, the company behind TikTok, has made a name for itself in short-form video content and AI-driven platforms. It also operates Douyin, the Chinese version of TikTok, along with Toutiao, a popular news aggregation platform. ByteDance has expanded into gaming, e-commerce, and other AI technologies.
Huawei is a global leader in telecommunications equipment and consumer electronics, particularly smartphones and 5G infrastructure. The company is deeply involved in cloud computing and AI, despite facing significant geopolitical challenges.
Xiaomi is a leading smartphone manufacturer that also produces smart home devices, wearables, and a wide range of consumer electronics. The company is growing rapidly in the Internet of Things (IoT) space and AI-driven products.
JD.com, one of China’s largest e-commerce platforms, operates similarly to Alibaba, focusing on direct sales, logistics, and tech solutions. JD.com has also made significant strides in robotics, AI, and logistics technology.
Meituan is best known for its food delivery and local services platform, offering everything from restaurant reservations to hotel bookings. The company also operates in sectors like bike-sharing, travel, and ride-hailing.
Pinduoduo has rapidly grown in e-commerce by focusing on group buying and social commerce, particularly targeting lower-tier cities and rural markets in China. The platform offers discounted products to users who buy in groups.
Didi Chuxing is China’s dominant ride-hailing service, offering various transportation services such as ride-hailing, car rentals, and autonomous driving technology.
But what are the BATX companies we mentioned earlier?
BAXT
The term BATX refers to a group of the four dominant Chinese tech companies: Baidu, Alibaba, Tencent, and Xiaomi. These companies are central to China’s technology landscape and are often compared to the US “FAANG” group (Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Netflix, Google) because of their major influence across a range of industries, including e-commerce, search engines, social media, gaming, ΑΙ and telecommunications. Together, BATX companies are key players in shaping China’s tech ecosystem and have a significant impact on global markets.
China’s strategy for tech growth
China’s technology development strategy has proven effective in propelling the country to the forefront of several high-tech industries. This ambitious approach, which involves broad investments across both large state-owned enterprises and smaller private startups, has fostered significant innovation and created a competitive business environment. As a result, it has the potential to serve as a model for other countries looking to stimulate tech growth.
A key driver of China’s success is its diverse investment strategy, supported by government-led initiatives like the “Made in China 2025” and the “Thousand Talents Plan“. These programs offer financial backing and attract top talent from around the globe. This inclusive approach has helped China rapidly emerge as a global leader in fields like AI, robotics, and semiconductors. However, critics argue that the strategy may be overly aggressive, potentially stifling competition and innovation.
Some have raised concerns that China’s government support unfairly favours domestic companies, providing subsidies and other advantages that foreign competitors do not receive. Yet, this type of protectionist approach is not unique to China; other countries have implemented similar strategies to foster the growth of their own industries.
Another critique is that China’s broad investment model may encourage risky ventures and the subsidising of failures, potentially leading to a market that is oversaturated with unprofitable businesses. While this criticism holds merit in some cases, the overall success of China’s strategy in cultivating a dynamic and competitive tech landscape remains evident.
Looking ahead, China’s technology development strategy is likely to continue evolving. As the country strengthens its position on the global stage, it may become more selective in its investments, focusing on firms with the potential for global leadership.
In any case, China’s strategy has shown it can drive innovation and foster growth. Other nations hoping to advance their technological sectors should take note of this model and consider implementing similar policies to enhance their own competitive and innovative business environments.
But under what regulatory framework does Chinese tech policy ultimately operate? How does it affect the whole project? Are there some negative effects of the tight state grip?
China’s regulatory pyramid: Balancing control and consequences
China’s regulatory approach to its booming tech sector is defined by a precarious balance of authority, enforcement, and market response. Angela Zhang, author of High Wire: How China Regulates Big Tech and Governs Its Economy, proposes a “dynamic pyramid model” to explain the system’s intricate dynamics. This model highlights three key features: hierarchy, volatility, and fragility.
The top-down structure of China’s regulatory system is a hallmark of its hierarchy. Regulatory agencies act based on directives from centralised leadership, creating a paradox. In the absence of clear signals, agencies exhibit inaction, allowing industries to flourish unchecked. Conversely, when leadership calls for stricter oversight, regulators often overreach. A prime example of this is the drastic shift in 2020 when China moved from years of leniency toward its tech giants to implementing sweeping crackdowns on firms like Alibaba and Tencent.
This erratic enforcement underscores the volatility of the system. Chinese tech regulation is characterised by cycles of lax oversight followed by abrupt crackdowns, driven by shifts in political priorities. The 2020 – 2022 crackdown, which involved antitrust investigations and record-breaking fines, sent shockwaves through markets, wiping out billions in market value. While the government eased its stance in 2022, the uncertainty created by such pendulum swings has left investors wary, with many viewing the Chinese market as unpredictable and risky.
Despite its intentions to address pressing issues like antitrust violations and data security, China’s heavy-handed regulatory approach often results in fragility. Rapid interventions can undermine confidence, stifle innovation, and damage the very sectors the government seeks to strengthen. Years of lax oversight exacerbate challenges, leaving regulators with steep issues to address and markets vulnerable to overcorrection.
This model offers a lens into the broader governance dynamics in China. The system’s centralised control and reactive policies aim to maintain stability but often generate unintended economic consequences. As Chinese tech firms look to expand overseas amid domestic challenges, the long-term impact of these regulatory cycles remains uncertain, potentially influencing China’s ability to compete on the global stage.
The battle for tech supremacy between the USA and China
The incoming US President Donald Trump is expected to adopt a more aggressive, unilateral approach to counter China’s technological growth, drawing on his history of quick, broad measures such as tariffs. Under his leadership, the USA is likely to expand export controls and impose tougher sanctions on Chinese tech firms. Trump’s advisors predict a significant push to add more companies to the US Entity List, which restricts US firms from selling to blacklisted companies. His administration might focus on using tariffs (potentially up to 60% on Chinese imports) and export controls to pressure China, even if it strains relations with international allies.
The escalating tensions have been further complicated by China’s retaliatory actions. In response to US export controls, China has targeted American companies like Micron Technology and imposed its own restrictions on essential materials for chipmaking and electric vehicle production. These moves highlight the interconnectedness of both economies, with the US still reliant on China for critical resources such as rare earth elements, which are vital for both technology and defence.
This intensifying technological conflict reflects broader concerns over data security, military dominance, and leadership in AI and semiconductors. As both nations aim to protect their strategic interests, the tech war is set to continue evolving, with major consequences for global supply chains, innovation, and the international balance of power in technology.
Huawei has launched its Mate 70 smartphone series, signalling a major step in its comeback to premium devices while showcasing HarmonyOS NEXT, its Android-free operating system. Priced from 5,499 yuan ($758), the Mate 70 challenges Apple’s iPhone 16 in China, boasting features like satellite paging, an advanced processor, and a 40% performance boost over previous models.
HarmonyOS NEXT represents Huawei’s bid for software independence after US export restrictions cut off access to Google services. The company announced that all new devices starting in 2025 will run the new system, while current Mate 70 users can choose between HarmonyOS 4.3 (Android-compatible) and the new HarmonyOS NEXT 5.0. Despite this shift, Huawei has retained Android compatibility as a backup while growing its app ecosystem, which already includes 15,000 applications.
The Mate 70 also highlights China’s advancing chipmaking capabilities, reportedly featuring SMIC-produced Kirin 9100 processors in higher-end models. This achievement underscores Huawei’s resilience despite ongoing US export controls and the addition of Chinese firms to trade blacklists. Huawei’s rebound is reflected in its rising market share, now ranked as China’s second-largest smartphone vendor with over 10 million units shipped in recent quarters.
The launch of the Mate 70 marks Huawei’s increasing competition with Apple and other global players in the world’s largest smartphone market, fueled by patriotic support for its technological breakthroughs.
South Korea has become Taiwan’s largest source of trade deficit, surpassing Japan, with a record $18.1 billion deficit in the first 10 months of this year, according to Taiwan’s Ministry of Finance. Integrated circuits account for $12.9 billion, or 71.3%, of the total deficit, driven by South Korea’s dominance in memory chip production and its role in the AI supply chain.
South Korea’s SK hynix, the second-largest memory chip maker, has partnered with Taiwan’s TSMC to produce advanced HBM chips for AI leader NVIDIA, underscoring the countries’ intertwined roles in the tech industry. Taiwan relies on South Korea for DRAM, a key component in packaging and integrating AI technologies, further fueling the deficit.
Trade between the two nations remains robust, with South Korea ranking as Taiwan’s fifth-largest export market and fourth-largest import source. Both export-oriented economies share overlapping industrial structures, particularly in electronics, highlighting their competition and collaboration within global supply chains.
Wang Shouwen, China‘s vice commerce minister, held discussions with Jay Puri, Nvidia‘s executive vice president for worldwide field operations, in Beijing on Monday, according to China’s Ministry of Commerce.
Details of the meeting were not disclosed, but the talks underscore Nvidia’s growing significance in the global tech landscape and its potential role in China’s semiconductor sector.
The meeting comes amid heightened tensions over technology trade between China and the United States, where Nvidia is a leading player in advanced chip production. Both sides may seek to address mutual interests while navigating ongoing restrictions and competition in the semiconductor industry.
The US government is expected to reduce Intel Corp‘s preliminary $8.5 billion federal chips grant to less than $8 billion, according to a report by The New York Times. The decision reflects Intel’s recent $3 billion contract to produce chips for the Pentagon, unnamed sources said.
Earlier this year, the Biden administration announced nearly $20 billion in grants and loans for Intel to expand its semiconductor manufacturing capabilities. The funding, part of the 2022 CHIPS and Science Act, supports building two new factories in Arizona and modernising an existing one.
The CHIPS Act allocated $52.7 billion to bolster US semiconductor production, including $39 billion for subsidies and $11 billion for research and development, as part of a national push to strengthen domestic chip manufacturing and reduce reliance on foreign supply chains.
The Japanese government has announced plans to invest an additional 200 billion yen ($1.3 billion) in Rapidus Corp. in fiscal 2025, aiming to enhance the domestic semiconductor industry. This follows a 920 billion yen package already allocated to support the chipmaker, with the added funding expected to attract private-sector investment to strengthen Japan‘s supply chain for next-generation chips.
Rapidus, a venture formed in 2022 by major Japanese companies like Toyota and Sony, estimates it will require around 5 trillion yen to complete a cutting-edge manufacturing plant in Hokkaido. The plant aims to begin mass production of advanced semiconductors by 2027. The project has also secured technical collaboration with United States tech giant IBM, ensuring access to key expertise in chip development.
The government is set to approve a comprehensive financial package that includes the new funding and potential loan guarantees, highlighting its focus on revitalising the once-dominant semiconductor industry. The move aligns with Japan’s strategy to mitigate geopolitical risks and compete in the global chip market, which remains critical for technologies from AI to electric vehicles.
The additional funding underscores Japan’s commitment to regaining a leading position in the semiconductor supply chain amid growing global competition. By fostering public-private partnerships and strengthening technological capabilities, Japan aims to reduce reliance on foreign suppliers and secure its stake in an increasingly vital industry.
