"The rationale for subsidizing domestic semiconductor fabrication was never to address chip shortages ("The Bill for CHIPS Subsidies Comes Due," Review & Outlook, Feb. 14). It was to reduce dependency on Taiwan and potentially China. Yes, U.S. semiconductor companies would have made tens of billions of dollars' worth of capital expenditures over the next decade anyway. But the question is how much they would have invested in the U.S. if not for the subsidies in the CHIPS Act.
Building a "fab" is 40% to 70% more expensive here than it is overseas, and the incentives that foreign governments provide account for as much as half that gap. If the U.S. wants to reverse its 40-year slide in semiconductor production -- as it must for economic and national security reasons -- then subsidies are the only answer.
It makes no sense to prohibit companies from buying back stock if they receive subsidies, as Democrats in Congress now want, because there are other ways they can return money to shareholders, such as increasing dividends. Moreover, if a chip company receives $3 billion from the Commerce Department to help offset fab costs, it will need every cent to pay for the higher operating and capital expenditures it will face in America. There will be nothing left for shareholders.
It's time to realize that America is no longer a "seller" that can afford high corporate taxes, heavy regulation and no investment incentives. America is now a buyer -- and, in the case of chips, a desperate one. If we want fabs here, government will have to help pay for them." [1]
1. What It Takes to Compete in Semiconductors
Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y. [New York, N.Y]. 21 Feb 2023: A.16.
Komentarų nėra:
Rašyti komentarą