TSMC: American pawn or counterattacker?The U.S. crackdown on China's chip industry has led TSMC to become a pawn of the U.S., stopping OEM with Huawei and being bound by a chip ban. At the same time, the United States has also forced TSMC to build factories in the United States, becoming one of the key forces in the rise of its chip manufacturing industry. TSMC's founder, Zhang Zhongmou, made disparaging remarks about China's technology industry, criticizing Chinese companies for holding high the banner of self-developed chips. Recently, however, he has changed his tune and fought back against the United States. Is there more calculation behind this change?And does the U.S. chip bill have an impact on TSMC?Recently, TSMC founder Zhang Zhongmou gave a significant response to the issue of the United States achieving semiconductor independence, indicating that it is impossible to achieve semiconductor independence in the short term.
He emphasized that the essence of things cannot be concretely judged by superficial phenomena alone. Does this counterattack mean that TSMC is no longer a pawn of the United States?Does Zhang Zhongmou's remarks on the United States mean that TSMC is no longer unilaterally dependent on the United States?The reason why TSMC is willing to build a factory in the United States is also to obtain certain financial support. However, the United States has not kept its promise, and after TSMC invested about $40 billion to build a factory, it asked it to provide core data and technology in order to receive subsidies. This move was unacceptable to TSMC and led to a delay in the start of production at the U.S. factory. Considering these incidents, the reason why TSMC has repeatedly criticized and warned the United States is probably because the promised subsidies have not been fulfilled, and this kind of "empty check" behavior is really an insult to people.
However, it should be emphasized that in addition to TSMC, global chip giants such as Samsung and SK hynix have not received any subsidies, and the actions of the United States are not aimed at TSMC, but by nature. Does TSMC's counterattack mean that the U.S. chip bill has dealt a substantial blow to it?Will the development of TSMC and other global chip giants be affected as a result?TSMC has invested tens of billions of dollars, and if it is stopped now, the losses will be considerable, and perhaps TSMC can only move forward bravely and not be afraid of difficulties. However, Zhang Zhongmou's decision to build a factory in the United States also had other purposes. Most of TSMC's major customers are from the United States, and in order to develop more new customers, TSMC must go to the international market, and opening the European market on the "springboard" of the United States is TSMC's main goal.
Does TSMC's counterattack mean that it will seek a new path of development and reduce its dependence on the US market?In the future, how will TSMC respond to the strategic adjustment of the United States and the competitive landscape of the global chip industry?The United States and TSMC have their own plans and calculations, and the future direction of development is uncertain. Chinese technology companies need to stay sober, not have too many expectations of TSMC, and stick to independent research and development. In my opinion, independent research and development is an important path for the development of China's science and technology industry, and only by continuously improving its own strength and technical level can it gain a foothold and develop on the global science and technology stage. Will TSMC's counterattack trigger a change in the pattern of the global chip industry?How will TSMC's future development direction affect the competitive landscape of the global chip industry?
We look forward to readers speaking freely and in-depth on this issue.