Chip stocks plummet as markets vote negative on U.S. 'chip bill'

　　■ Observer

　　The chip bill in the guise of "science" reveals a Cold War mentality.

　　On August 9, local time, U.S. President Biden signed the "Chip and Science Act", which attempts to enhance U.S. semiconductor manufacturing and scientific research through large-scale capital investment and boost U.S. technological competitiveness.

　　This law, disguised as "scientific", is essentially a brutal intervention in the development of science and the market economy, and has a strong Cold War flavor.

　　On the day the bill was signed, the three major U.S. stock indexes closed down collectively, with the semiconductor sector leading the decline, especially Nvidia and Micron Technology, which fell more than 3%.

This is the market's most direct and clear response to anti-globalization behavior.

　　As a law involving authorizations of up to $280 billion, the "Chip and Science Act" is a typical anti-globalization law, including more than $50 billion in subsidies for the production and research and development of the US chip manufacturing industry.

　　In terms of data, the U.S. share of global semiconductor manufacturing has steadily declined from 37% in 1990 to around 12% now.

This is the natural result of the comparative advantage of the market, and it is also a normal phenomenon of the world's interdependence and cooperative progress.

　　The "Chip and Science Act", on the other hand, intervenes in industrial development through direct government intervention, and does not hesitate to violate the laws of the market. It aims to maintain the unilateral technological hegemony of the United States.

However, the market did not buy it.

　　The most shocking thing is that the bill has clear provisions prohibiting companies that receive subsidies from the US federal funds from increasing the production of advanced process chips in China.

This clear exclusivity policy has a clear purpose - to promote the decoupling of the chip industry between China and the United States.

TSMC, Samsung, Intel, Micron, etc., these "chip giants" with semiconductor production and R&D factories in China and the United States at the same time, will face enormous pressure to choose sides between the Chinese and American markets.

　　The "Chip and Science Act" will not only directly cause huge financial losses to these companies, but also further hit the chip consumer market, which is currently suffering from insufficient supply.

　　The "Chip Act", which was supposed to promote domestic chip manufacturing in the United States, could not prevent the collective decline of semiconductor stocks, which is too embarrassing.

On the 9th, the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index fell by more than 170 points or 5.7%, falling below the two integers of 3000 and 2900 points, and closed down 4.6%. It has fallen for three consecutive days, reaching a new low since July 26, which is enough to explain question.

　　The large-scale investment by the US government in the field of science and technology is related to the brand of strategic competition with the Soviet Union in the context of the Cold War.

The "Chip and Science Act" is to strengthen the US's strength in the field of chip manufacturing at any cost, while curbing and restricting the investment and cooperation of Western technology companies in China.

　　However, this practice of requiring companies to choose sides between China and the United States is not purely out of technological competition, but implies the purpose of a new Cold War against China, which is essentially an anti-market behavior.

For domestic chip companies in the United States, the road to globalization has been forcibly interrupted, and the slump in the market has explained the problem.

　　How effective the "Chip and Science Act" can be in practice may still take time to test, but the Cold War mentality revealed behind it deserves vigilance.

The focus of this kind of thinking is not only on enhancing the strength of the United States itself, but also on directly suppressing competitors.

　　The Sino-US technology competition is not terrible - in fact, this competition will promote the healthy development of the technology field, but what is worrying is the "technology decoupling" between the two countries and the reshaping of the strategic relationship between the two countries. .

　　The regional globalization of different technological paths will unfold separately along the lines of geopolitical division.

This will not only greatly increase the cost of scientific and technological progress and economic development and reduce efficiency, but also passively change the industrial structure and bring unpredictable challenges to the global economy.

The slump in the market is only the most direct response, and the subsequent adverse effects will gradually appear.

　　The competition around chip R&D and production is no longer a purely industrial and technological battle, but a part of geopolitical competition.

　　It is foreseeable that while restricting others, the "Chip and Science Act" will also block its own development path. It will not truly benefit domestic chip companies in the United States. At the same time, it will only further stimulate China's determination and confidence to strengthen its independent innovation capabilities in science and technology. .

　　□Liang Yabin, Kong Zhiguo (International Strategy Research Institute of the Party School of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China)