The Commerce Department should use the Entity List and potentially its anti-boycott regulations to respond to Beijning’s restrictions on U.S. chip company Micron (see 2305220053 and 2305240002), Reps. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, and Mike Gallagher, R-Wis., said in a June 1 letter to Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo. The lawmakers said it’s time for the U.S. and its partners to “firmly push back” on China’s “economic coercion, adding that it "can no longer sit on the sidelines as the [People’s Republic of China] selectively targets U.S. and allied entities with the goal of intimidating our businesses and harming our economic security.”
The Commerce Department should amend several portions of its proposed guardrails on recipients of Chips Act funding, including measures that could prevent the U.S. chip industry from participating in international standards bodies or inhibit “routine” business activities, trade groups and technology companies said in comments released this week. Some said Commerce should also limit which companies qualify as “foreign entities of concern” and revise the rule’s proposed definition for “legacy semiconductor” to more closely align with export controls.
The Senate will work over the next several months to build a bill Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., sees as a sequel to its China package -- also known as the Chips Act -- that could expand China-related export controls and investment restrictions.
The Commerce Department launched a paper this week detailing its strategy for a National Semiconductor Technology Center, a “key component” of the Chips Act designed to support and improve American leadership and competitiveness in semiconductor research, design, engineering and advanced manufacturing. The paper outlines how the NSTC will “accelerate America’s ability to develop the chips and technologies of the future,” the agency said, including by creating “affiliated technical centers around the country.”
The Biden administration could first release its outbound investment screening regime as a trial period and then expand the restrictions to cover broader investments after the initial year, said Anna Ashton, director of China corporate affairs at the Eurasia Group. Ashton, speaking during an April 21 event hosted by the University of Virginia's Miller Center, also said current U.S. chips subsidies will fall far short of making up for lost U.S semiconductor exports to China, while other experts said they fear U.S. chip export controls (see 2210070049) will continue to cause foreign companies to “design-out” American technology and software.
Export Compliance Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case you missed them. You can find any article by searching for the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
The Commerce Department’s National Institute of Standards and Technology is seeking public comments on several information collections related to its Chips Act incentive program. They include collections on an “Ask CHIPS web form,” program application, program pre-application, environmental questionnaire and “statement of interest.” Comments are due June 12.
The Commerce Department’s proposed guardrails for recipients of Chips Act funding could lead to compliance risks for semiconductor companies, especially as the agency bolsters its enforcement arm, law firms said. They also said companies should carefully review how the proposals intersect with chip export restrictions.
The U.S. should be preparing a strategy to make sure it leads in the next generation of advanced semiconductor technologies, said Romesh Wadhwani, founder of investment firm Symphony Technology Group. Wadhwani also said the funding included in the Chips Act is a good start, but likely won’t be enough to remain ahead of China and shield U.S. supply chains from geopolitical risks.
Export Compliance Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case you missed them. You can find any article by searching for the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.