Tech titans clash: Inside the US-China battle for chip market dominance

Competition between the USA and China in chip trade and production is growing on a daily basis to the extent that it is considered a chip war between these two superpowers.

In this analysis, we will review all the facts and steps that Beijing and Washington have taken so far to position themselves better in the chip market. This will help us see the whole picture better and allow us to predict what will come next more easily.

China

China’s first significant step in strengthening its position in the semiconductor technology market happened in 2014 when a broader national security strategy was introduced. The main task of the strategy, active to this day, is to position China as the world’s leading science and technology superpower, which is part of its goal to establish itself as a global superpower. Chinese leaders realised that semiconductor microchips are crucial to emerging civilian and military technologies and for achieving their long-term geopolitical goals and potentially surpassing the USA as the dominant superpower.

China has made significant progress in technological advancements that have outpaced the forecasts from Western intelligence and industry analyses. For example, the military-civil fusion programme aims to integrate civilian technologies with military capabilities and to blur the lines between civilian and military applications.

Part of the broader national security strategy is a tendency to reduce dependence on Western technologies and to reach the point where they can rely on themselves in critical sectors like semiconductors. That’s precisely why Xi Jinping, the Chinese president, called for increased technological autonomy to counter Western influence and strengthen China’s global position. They have also invested heavily in its semiconductor industry while setting ambitious targets to increase chip self-reliance. But, some targets are proving to be somewhat challenging, such as reaching 70% self-reliance by 2025.

However, those efforts have been bolstered even more by the constant pressure of the USA in the form of increasing trade restrictions and policies that limit Chinese technological investments and exports. Semiconductor microchips are a focal point in Beijing’s economic security strategies. As expected, the conflict over microchips with the USA did not go without countermeasures. For example, China accelerated its efforts to remove foreign-manufactured chips, especially those made in the USA, and set a deadline for domestic telecommunications companies to do so by 2027. That move could particularly hit American chipmakers such as Intel and AMD and inflict significant financial damage to the US economy.

China also found a way to bypass Washington’s prohibition of Nvidia’s high-end AI processor sales to China. Instead of buying directly from Nvidia, Chinese universities and research institutions acquired the processors through resellers. There was no lack of open criticism either, as officials in Beijing criticised the USA for tightening trade rules. They emphasised that this move raises barriers and introduces uncertainty to the global chip sector. China is showing clear signs that they will not give up the fight, but it all depends on the speed of their technological progress.

US

As for the USA, when President Biden took office in 2021, concerns about China’s accelerating technological progress were already very much present. Those concerns were mainly focused on the field of AI. Many feared that China could overtake the US in semiconductor technology, which would also threaten the dominance of the West over the East in technology.

This is precisely why the EU and the USA began emphasising economic security in the foreground, thus making a turn from past policies when they promoted globalisation and trade liberalisation. This was also triggered by alleged reports that claimed China acquired Western technologies through joint ventures and projects and caused disruptions in supply chains for crucial materials and equipment.

However, the most significant turning point in American politics regarding semiconductor microchip manufacturing was the introduction of the CHIPS Act in August 2022. The primary purpose of the CHIPS Act was to boost the domestic semiconductor manufacturing process and protect it from potential sabotage. It also included the tendency to reduce US dependency on imports, especially from China.

Furthermore, Washington implemented a series of sanctions and export controls to protect its intellectual property and national security interests. The sanctions included restrictions on exporting the equipment required to produce advanced chips to China, emphasising chips lower than 16/14 nm.

The next step the USA took was to strengthen some of its alliances. They did this primarily with the Netherlands and Japan, which enhanced export controls on high-performance semiconductor manufacturing equipment. Also, to further isolate China, the White House proposed the Chip 4 Alliance with Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan, aiming to bolster the resilience of East Asia’s semiconductor supply chain.

Taiwan plays a vital role in this US-China conflict because it produces a significant share of the world’s most advanced chips. Its technological leadership, supplier diversity, and resilience made it a cornerstone in efforts to strengthen the semiconductor supply chain. Both Beijing and Washington want to increase their influence in Taiwan to better take advantage of the breadth of Taiwan’s chip production.

What can we expect?

The rivalry between China and the USA in this field started during Donald Trump’s presidency and has continued under President Joe Biden. It reflects a rare bipartisan consensus in the US Congress to challenge China’s technological ambition. On the other hand, for China, the position of a global leader is a matter of national pride, which is omnipresent in President Xi Jinping’s leadership.

The expanded tech war manifests in various arenas, with the most notable ones being chipmaking and green technology. Chipmaking is crucial for information processing, while green technology is becoming increasingly important for the global economy. Both China and the USA are vying for dominance in these sectors.

The Economist stated in its article titled ‘The tech wars are about to enter a fiery new phase’ that regardless of the outcome of future elections in the USA, the next president is likely to continue challenging China’s technological advancements. This echoes the joint effort in Washington to confront China’s growing influence in advanced technologies.

The Economist added that heightened tensions and a more aggressive US approach under a future administration are also possible. This could involve expanding export controls and sanctions beyond companies like Huawei to other Chinese tech firms. Such actions might provoke retaliatory measures from China, further escalating the conflict.

The Taiwanese chipmaker TSMC, which has significant investments in China, could be pressured by the US government to limit its operations there. That could also happen with other foreign companies that do business in China and get caught in the crossfire of this conflict.

Despite winning over some allies, the USA might need help with other partners, particularly in Europe and Asia. Washington’s approach to technology and China could affect its relationship with some allies since there is a difference in priorities, which could strain alliances and potentially complicate efforts to form a united front against China’s technological ambition.

This clash between the two great powers will undoubtedly leave its mark on the world economy. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) estimates that the elimination of high-tech trade between the two countries could cost as much as $1 trillion annually, equivalent to 1.2% of the global GDP. It is in the general interest to resolve this conflict as soon as possible, although everything indicates that it will not happen very soon.

TikTok sues US government over law mandating ban or divestment

TikTok has filed a lawsuit against the US government, challenging a new law that requires the app to sever ties with its Chinese parent company, ByteDance, or face a ban in the US. The company argues that the law is unconstitutional and deems it impossible to sell the app from ByteDance, stating that it would instead result in a shutdown by 19 January 2025.

Namely, the law, signed by President Joe Biden last month, grants ByteDance nine months to divest TikTok or cease its operations in the US, citing national security concerns. However, TikTok’s complaint argues that the government has not presented sufficient evidence of the Chinese government misusing the app. Concerns expressed by individual members of Congress and a congressional committee report are speculative about the potential misuse of TikTok in the future without citing specific instances of misconduct. However, TikTok asserts that it has operated prominently in the US since its launch in 2017.

The app contends that a ban in the US would be unfeasible due to the complex task of transferring millions of lines of software code from ByteDance to a new owner. Additionally, restrictions imposed by the Chinese government would prevent the sale of TikTok along with its algorithm. TikTok argues that such a ban would effectively isolate American users and undermine its business, mentioning also its previous efforts to address US government concerns.

During the Trump administration, discussions were held regarding partnerships with American companies such as Walmart, Microsoft, and Oracle to separate TikTok’s US operations. However, these potential deals have yet to materialise. TikTok also attempted to appease the government by storing US user data in Oracle’s servers, although a recent report suggests that this action was primarily cosmetic.

TikTok seeks a court judgement to declare the Biden administration’s legislation unconstitutional in response to the new law. The company also requests an order to prevent the attorney general from enforcing the law.

US Senate passes bill mandating TikTok sale or US ban

The Senate has passed a foreign aid package that includes a bill mandating China-based company ByteDance to sell TikTok within a year or face a US ban on the platform. Having cleared both chambers of Congress, the legislation is now headed to President Joe Biden, who has committed to signing it into law. ByteDance will have an initial nine months to finalise a sale, with a possible three-month extension based on progress, though legal challenges could delay enforcement.

The bill’s successful passage through the Senate was achieved through strategic manoeuvring in the House, where it was included in a high-priority foreign aid package. This move compelled the Senate to address the TikTok issue earlier than anticipated. By extending the divestment timeline, more support was garnered in the Senate, resulting in a vote of 79-18 in favour of the bill.

Lawmakers and intelligence officials have voiced concerns over TikTok’s ownership by a China-based company. They cite potential data security risks due to China’s national security law and fear that the Chinese government’s influence could impact US user experiences.

Senate Commerce Committee Chair Maria Cantwell stressed that the legislation aims to prevent foreign adversaries from conducting espionage and harming vulnerable Americans, not to punish specific companies.

Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Mark Warner highlighted worries about Chinese companies owing allegiance to the Chinese government and potential covert manipulation of social media platforms. He dismissed TikTok’s proposed data governance solution, Project Texas, as inadequate. Despite concerns among TikTok users, Warner assured that the legislation is not about silencing voices but addressing critical national security issues.

President Biden has expressed intent to promptly sign the bill into law to facilitate aid to Ukraine, while TikTok has signalled readiness to challenge the law in court if passed.

Intel develops reduced-capability AI chips for China amid US export controls

Intel is set to launch two specialised AI chips, HL-328 and HL-388, tailored specifically for the Chinese market in June and September, respectively. These chips are developed in compliance with US export controls and sanctions. The announcement, detailed in a white paper on Intel’s website dated 12 April, comes in response to tightened regulations limiting the capabilities of AI chips exported to China. Nvidia, a competitor in the AI chip market, also has plans for China-specific chips following similar export control restrictions.

Intel’s upcoming China-specific AI chips are part of the Gaudi 3 product line, which was unveiled on 9 April. Despite featuring advanced hardware components like on-chip memory and high-bandwidth memory, these chips will undergo performance reductions to meet export control requirements. The aim is to adhere to US regulations while continuing to engage in the Chinese market.

Nvidia, like Intel, is navigating export control challenges by developing specific AI chips for China. One of Nvidia’s chips, the H20, is anticipated to enter the market in limited quantities in the first quarter of 2024, with larger volumes expected in the subsequent quarter. These developments highlight efforts by major semiconductor companies to adapt to evolving export regulations without completely withdrawing from the Chinese market, aiming to balance compliance with strategic business interests.

Why does it matter?

Both Intel and Nvidia’s initiatives reflect the broader impact of geopolitical tensions on the semiconductor industry. As governments implement stricter export controls, companies are innovating to meet regulatory requirements while continuing to serve global markets. The launch of China-specific AI chips represents a strategic response to these challenges, enabling technology firms to navigate complex trade dynamics while sustaining business operations.

US rights groups push for limits on facial recognition tech

Rights groups are intensifying their calls for restrictions on using facial recognition technology (FRT) by the US government. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has submitted comments to the US Commission on Civil Rights, asserting that FRT lacks reliability for making decisions that impact constitutional rights or social benefits and it poses risks to marginalised communities and privacy. EFF advocates for a ban on government use of FRT and strict limits on private sector use to safeguard against the perceived threats posed by this technology.

Joining EFF, the immigrant advocacy organisation United We Dream and over 30 civil rights partners have also submitted comments to the commission. They highlight concerns that a legal loophole has enabled agencies like ICE and CBP to use facial recognition for extensive surveillance of immigrants and people of colour. The alliance argues that FRT’s algorithmic biases often lead to incorrect identifications, unjust arrests, detentions, and deportations within immigrant communities.

The US Commission on Civil Rights has been conducting hearings with various stakeholders presenting their perspectives on FRT. While rights groups and advocates have raised concerns, government, enforcement agencies, vendors, and institutions, like NIST, have defended the technology. The Department of Justice emphasised its interim facial recognition policy prioritising First Amendment rights, while HUD submitted written testimony in recent weeks.

Why does it matter?

Official data from 2021 reveals that 18 out of 24 federal agencies surveyed were employing facial recognition technology, predominantly for law enforcement and digital access purposes. This ongoing debate underscores the growing scrutiny and debate surrounding using FRT in government operations and its impact on civil liberties and marginalised communities.

US House of Representatives votes to reauthorize surveillance program

The House of Representatives has approved the reauthorisation of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), allowing US intelligence agencies to conduct foreign communications surveillance without a warrant. The bill passed by a vote of 273–147, extending Section 702 beyond its April 19th expiration. The debate over amendments to the bill revealed unexpected alliances, with bipartisan efforts to impose a warrant requirement for surveillance of Americans narrowly defeated.

Speaker Mike Johnson faced challenges securing enough votes for reauthorisation, with former President Trump weighing in against FISA on social media. After earlier failures to advance the bill, a revised version shortened the extension to two years to gain support from reluctant Republicans. The amendment requiring a warrant for accessing Americans’ data did not pass, with concerns raised about privacy and national security implications.

The reauthorisation underscores ongoing debates over privacy rights and national security measures in the United States. Senator Ron Wyden strongly criticised the House bill, expressing concerns about increased government surveillance authority and the lack of oversight in accessing Americans’ communications data.

While some lawmakers argued that the bill expanded surveillance powers, supporters emphasised its role in disrupting activities like fentanyl trafficking. However, the Senate must still vote on the reauthorisation before the 19 April deadline.

US grants Samsung $6.4 billion for Texas chip production

The Biden administration has announced a significant investment of up to $6.4 billion in grants for Samsung to expand chip production in central Texas as part of efforts to strengthen domestic semiconductor manufacturing. This funding, allocated under the 2022 Chips and Science Act, aims to boost chip production for critical sectors like aerospace, defence, and automotive industries, enhancing national security, according to administration officials. The move reflects a strategic push to bring cutting-edge chip manufacturing back to the United States, marking a pivotal development in the semiconductor industry, as White House National Economic Adviser Lael Brainard emphasised.

Samsung’s receipt of these grants positions it as the third largest recipient under the Chips Act program, following Intel and TSMC. The overarching goal of the Chips Act is to decrease reliance on semiconductor manufacturing in China and Taiwan, given the declining US global market share in this sector over the years. Lawmakers have raised concerns about over-dependence on Taiwan-based TSMC, considering geopolitical tensions with China over Taiwan’s status.

The subsidy will support the establishment of two chip production facilities, a research centre, and a packaging facility in Texas, providing critical infrastructure for Samsung’s expansion plans. Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo confirmed that these investments will facilitate the growth of Samsung’s semiconductor facility in Austin, Texas, aligning with broader ambitions to lead in semiconductor manufacturing, advanced packaging, research and development.

By the end of the decade, Samsung intends to invest approximately $45 billion in building and expanding its Texas facilities, showcasing a significant commitment to bolstering US semiconductor capabilities.

US lawmakers consider extending TikTok divestiture deadline

Lawmakers in the US Senate Commerce Committee are considering extending the deadline for TikTok’s parent company, ByteDance, to divest the popular short video app used by millions of Americans. The US House of Representatives previously voted overwhelmingly to give ByteDance approximately six months to sell TikTok’s US assets or face a ban. Senate Commerce Committee chair Maria Cantwell has expressed support for extending the deadline to one year, suggesting it could enhance the likelihood of a successful divestiture.

Discussions about the possibility of a one-year deadline extension come amid ongoing deliberations among congressional leaders. Cantwell indicated plans to strategise with Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer and Senate Intelligence Committee chair Mark Warner. Despite the House’s decisive vote, Cantwell emphasised the Senate’s intent to refine the legislation for firmer legal grounding, considering previous unsuccessful attempts to ban TikTok under the Trump administration and at the state level.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell has joined the call for divestiture, citing national security concerns and labelling TikTok as a significant strategic threat. However, TikTok has vigorously defended itself, asserting that a ban would infringe upon the First Amendment rights of its 170 million American users. While concerns persist regarding potential data sharing with China, TikTok maintains its commitment to safeguarding US data, having invested over $1.5 billion in data protection measures and storage infrastructure within the country.

US and EU advance cooperation on digital ID standards

Following a recent Trade and Technology Council (TTC) meeting, the US and the EU have announced significant progress in aligning technical standards for digital identity. A joint statement released after the meeting outlines plans to identify use cases for transatlantic interoperability and cooperation, paving the way for cross-border digital identity and wallet usage.

This collaboration, which aims to harmonize technology and trade policies, has already yielded tangible results, such as the Digital Identity Mapping Exercise Report, which covers standards for electronic identification and trust services for electronic transactions.

Despite some differences, notably in trust services, both sides are committed to continued information exchange through mechanisms like the Strategic Standardisation Information (SSI).

Why does it matter?

The EU and US share the world’s most integrated economic relationship, with the US remaining the EU’s largest trading partner. While the Digital Identity Mapping Report aims for shared terminology, it’s important to note that the EU member countries aren’t bound by US NIST guidance, and vice versa; harmonizing frameworks between them could streamline cross-border trade and promote secure transatlantic online access.

US law proposes integration of AI into border control

A bipartisan proposal in the US aims to bolster border control by integrating cutting-edge technologies such as AI, machine learning, biometrics, and nanotechnology. Spearheaded by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the legislation mandates developing a comprehensive plan within 180 days to incorporate these technologies into border security operations. The move follows the release of an AI Roadmap for DHS and an executive order emphasising trustworthy AI for American benefit.

Representative Lou Correa highlighted the importance of investing in security-enhancing technologies to aid Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers in swiftly responding to threats like human trafficking and hazardous migrant crossings. The proposed plan includes metrics, performance indicators, and privacy/security assessments to ensure effective implementation.

As cartels and foreign adversaries increase in sophistication amid the ongoing border crisis, the necessity to deploy advanced technologies becomes apparent. The legislation seeks to leverage commercially available technologies while empowering CBP Innovation Teams to adapt and integrate them into border security operations efficiently.

The bill also mandates that the CBP clarify operational procedures and roles regarding new technologies. Research areas outlined in the legislation encompass mobile surveillance vehicles, lighter-than-air ground surveillance equipment, tunnel detection, and other pertinent areas determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security. Through bipartisan efforts, the proposal aims to equip officers with the tools necessary to safeguard the border effectively.