Virtually Unprecedented! U.S. Government’s Revenue Take from China-Bound Chip Exports Sparks Outcry, Multiple Policies Suspected as Revenue-Generation Measures

Global Times correspondent Ni Hao reports that on August 11, the Financial Times cited insiders revealing an extraordinary arrangement between the U.S. government and NVIDIA Corporation and Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. (AMD). To secure export licenses for semiconductors sold into the Chinese market, both chipmakers have agreed to remit 15 percent of their China‐market revenues to Washington. Observers describe this requirement as unprecedented.

Song Guoyou, Deputy Director of the Center for American Studies at Fudan University, told Global Times that the move signals deep government intervention in corporate affairs under the current U.S. administration. He warned that such practices threaten the principles of a free‐market economy, undermine established trading norms, and inject fresh uncertainty into the business environment for foreign firms, while also driving up operating costs.

Sources including a U.S. official explained that this revenue‐sharing condition was imposed as part of the export‐license approvals granted last week. NVIDIA will transfer 15 percent of its H20 AI-accelerator sales in China, and AMD will do likewise for its MI308 chips. Insiders note that the Trump administration has yet to determine how it will allocate these funds.

Both the H20 and MI308 chips were blocked from export to China in April. The Financial Times reported that NVIDIA’s founder and CEO Jensen Huang met again with former President Trump last week, after which the U.S. Department of Commerce began issuing H20 licenses on August 8. The same anonymous official confirmed that AMD has also started receiving export authorizations.
Export-control experts tell The Financial Times that no U.S. company has previously consented to share revenue in exchange for export rights. However, they say the deal aligns with the administration’s broader strategy of leveraging corporate contributions—through domestic investment or other means—to offset tariffs while reportedly boosting U.S. employment and government income.

According to The New York Times, Bernstein analysts project that NVIDIA’s China sales of the H20 chip will exceed $15 billion by year-end, and AMD’s MI308 sales will reach about $800 million, together potentially generating over $2 billion for U.S. coffers.

AMD declined to comment, while NVIDIA issued a statement affirming its compliance with U.S. export rules and expressing the hope that licensing will allow American firms to compete effectively in China and globally, despite a recent suspension of H20 shipments.

The New York Times notes that conditioning export licenses on revenue sharing is virtually without precedent. Yet it reflects a trend of heightened government intervention in corporate operations—illustrated earlier this year when the administration imposed a “golden share” requirement on Nippon Steel’s acquisition of U.S. Steel, permitting the government to influence company decisions through equity holdings. Tariffs have likewise been used to encourage reshoring of manufacturing.

Reuters reports that Phillips-Robbins, a former Commerce Department adviser under President Biden, criticized the revenue-sharing deal as trading national security assurances for fiscal gain. The Wall Street Journal adds that, following President Trump’s call for Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger’s resignation over ties with Chinese firms, Gelsinger was expected at the White House on August 11 to reaffirm his commitment to U.S. manufacturing as a matter of national security.

The New York Times questioned whether these measures—tariffs, golden shares, revenue takes—are aimed at trade rebalancing or simply raising government revenues. President Trump himself described reciprocal tariffs as both tools for fairness and sources of revenue when announcing them on social media.

Song Guoyou argues that reciprocal tariffs and similar policies represent unilateral disruption of WTO rules, harming legitimate rights of member states and destabilizing global supply chains. Such actions undermine the interests of businesses and consumers worldwide and inject substantial uncertainty into the global economic recovery.

When asked about the chipmakers’ agreement to surrender 15 percent of their China sales, Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Lin Jian reiterated China’s opposition to politicizing, instrumentalizing, or weaponizing technology and trade. He affirmed that China has consistently opposed malicious containment and suppression, warning that such practices disrupt global supply chains and serve no party’s long-term interests.