A proposed policy for China involves renting access to US-controlled chips (e.g., in Malaysian data centers) instead of selling them outright. This allows Chinese companies to benefit commercially while giving the US the ability to "turn off" the chips if they are misused for military purposes.

Related Insights

The pro-export argument for selling NVIDIA chips to China is strategic: flooding their market with good-enough, affordable chips makes it uneconomical for their domestic industry to compete. This fosters dependency on the U.S. ecosystem and can slow their independent technological progress.

The decision to allow NVIDIA to sell powerful AI chips to China has a counterintuitive goal. The administration believes that by supplying China, it can "take the air out" of the country's own efforts to build a self-sufficient AI chip ecosystem, thereby hindering domestic firms like Huawei.

The US has reversed its strict chip controls on China. Instead of a complete ban, it now allows NVIDIA to sell advanced H200 chips but with a 25% tax, effectively turning a geopolitical restriction into a significant revenue stream for the US Treasury, estimated at $5 billion annually.

The US government revived the name "Operation Gatekeeper," once used for a 90s border project, for a new mission: cracking down on illegal AI chip smuggling to China. This demonstrates how semiconductors have become a national security priority on par with physical border control.

China's refusal to buy NVIDIA's export-compliant H20 chips is a strategic decision, not just a reaction to lower quality. It stems from concerns about embedded backdoors (like remote shutdown) and growing confidence in domestic options like Huawei's Ascend chips, signaling a decisive push for a self-reliant tech stack.

The US government's reversal on Nvidia H200 chip sales to China, now with a 25% tax, indicates a strategic shift. The policy is no longer a complete blockade but aims to keep China one generation of chips behind while generating significant tax revenue for the US.

Contrary to their intent, U.S. export controls on AI chips have backfired. Instead of crippling China's AI development, the restrictions provided the necessary incentive for China to aggressively invest in and accelerate its own semiconductor industry, potentially eroding the U.S.'s long-term competitive advantage.

Contrary to advocating for a full embargo, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang argues that selling advanced chips to China is strategically advantageous for the US. His thesis is that creating technological dependency on American hardware is a more powerful long-term lever than allowing China to become self-sufficient with domestic champions.

A complete ban on selling chips to China is counterproductive. The ideal policy allows NVIDIA to sell chips that are one or two generations behind state-of-the-art. This strategy keeps Chinese firms dependent on the NVIDIA ecosystem, funds U.S. R&D with sales revenue, and hinders domestic competitors like Huawei from flourishing.

U.S. export controls on advanced semiconductors, intended to slow China, have instead galvanized its domestic industry. The restrictions accelerated China's existing push for self-sufficiency, forcing local companies to innovate with less advanced chips and develop their own GPU and manufacturing capabilities, diminishing the policy's long-term effectiveness.