Factories and Manufacturing

More stories

  • 125 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    Biden’s Semiconductor Plan Flexes the Power of the Federal Government

    by

    In return for vast subsidies, the Biden administration is asking the chip industry to make promises about its workers and finances.WASHINGTON — Semiconductor manufacturers seeking a slice of nearly $40 billion in new federal subsidies will need to ensure affordable child care for their workers, limit stock buybacks and share certain excess profits with the government, the Biden administration will announce on Tuesday.The new requirements represent an aggressive attempt by the federal government to bend the behavior of corporate America to accomplish its economic and national security objectives. As the Biden administration makes the nation’s first big foray into industrial policy in decades, officials are also using the opportunity to advance policies championed by liberals that seek to empower workers.While the moves would advance some of the left-behind portions of the president’s agenda, they could also set a fraught precedent for attaching policy strings to federal funding.Last year, a bipartisan group of lawmakers passed the CHIPS Act, which devoted $52 billion to expanding U.S. semiconductor manufacturing and research, in hopes of making the nation less reliant on foreign suppliers for critical chips that power computers, household appliances, cars and more. The prospect of accessing those funds has already enticed domestic and foreign-owned chip makers to announce plans for or begin construction on new projects in Arizona, Texas, Ohio, New York and other states.On Tuesday, the Commerce Department will release its application for manufacturers seeking funds under the law. It will include a variety of requirements that go far beyond simply encouraging semiconductor production.For example, the department will tell companies seeking awards of $150 million or more to guarantee affordable, high-quality child care for workers who build or operate a plant.Those projects will also be required to share a portion of any unanticipated profits with the federal government. Companies applying for awards will be required to submit detailed financial projections, with the federal government entitled to share in any “upside” profits. The Commerce Department depicted that requirement as a way to encourage companies to make their projections as accurate as possible, and not exaggerate any losses to try to secure more funding.Preference will also be given to applicants that promise to refrain from stock buybacks, which tend to enrich shareholders and corporate executives by increasing a company’s share price. The law already prohibits companies from directly using federal money to finance stock buybacks or pay dividends.Gina Raimondo, the Commerce secretary, said in an interview that the financial rules would encourage companies to ask only for funding they really need and prevent them from diverting taxpayer dollars to pad the pockets of their shareholders.“We don’t want to spend a dollar more than necessary to make these projects happen,” she said.The requirements will join a growing list of administration efforts to expand the reach of President Biden’s economic policies beyond their primary intent. For instance, administration officials have attached stringent labor standards and “Buy American” provisions to money from a bipartisan infrastructure law.The Global Race for Computer ChipsA Ramp-Up in Spending: Amid a tech cold war with China, U.S. companies have pledged nearly $200 billion for chip manufacturing projects since early 2020. But the investments have limits.Crackdown on China: The United States has been aiming to prevent China from becoming an advanced power in chips, issuing sweeping restrictions on the country’s access to advanced technology.Arizona Factory: Internal doubts are mounting at Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, the world’s biggest maker of advanced chips, over its investment in a new factory in Phoenix.CHIPS Act: Semiconductor companies, which united to get the sprawling $280 billion bill approved last year, have set off a lobbying frenzy as they argue for more cash than their competitors.Companies that receive chip subsidies to build new plants will be able to use some of the funding to meet the new child care requirement. That could include building company child care centers near construction sites or new plants, paying local child care providers to add capacity at an affordable cost for workers, directly subsidizing workers’ care costs or other, similar steps that would ensure workers have access to care for their children.Other provisions of the program will encourage companies, universities and other parties to offer more training for American workers, in advanced sciences but also in fields like welding. The program will encourage colleges and universities to triple their graduation of new engineers over the next decade, Ms. Raimondo said in a speech last week, while also offering high-paying jobs to tens of thousands of American workers without four-year college degrees.Ms. Raimondo outlined an ambitious vision for investing in the United States to build “a self-propelling engine of innovation and production.” The goal of the program, she said, was to create at least two manufacturing clusters for the most cutting-edge chips, as well as factories for older chips. The ultimate aim would be to spur a vibrant semiconductor ecosystem in which every leading global chip company would feel the need to have both research and manufacturing in the United States, she said.In interviews, Ms. Raimondo said the CHIPS requirements would help companies attract women to fill open jobs at a moment when many companies are struggling with a labor shortage.Chip makers, Ms. Raimondo said, “will not be successful unless you find a way to attract, train, put to work and retain women, and you won’t do that without child care.”.css-1v2n82w{max-width:600px;width:calc(100% – 40px);margin-top:20px;margin-bottom:25px;height:auto;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;font-family:nyt-franklin;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1v2n82w{margin-left:20px;margin-right:20px;}}@media only screen and (min-width:1024px){.css-1v2n82w{width:600px;}}.css-161d8zr{width:40px;margin-bottom:18px;text-align:left;margin-left:0;color:var(–color-content-primary,#121212);border:1px solid var(–color-content-primary,#121212);}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-161d8zr{width:30px;margin-bottom:15px;}}.css-tjtq43{line-height:25px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-tjtq43{line-height:24px;}}.css-x1k33h{font-family:nyt-cheltenham;font-size:19px;font-weight:700;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve{font-size:17px;font-weight:300;line-height:25px;}.css-1hvpcve em{font-style:italic;}.css-1hvpcve strong{font-weight:bold;}.css-1hvpcve a{font-weight:500;color:var(–color-content-secondary,#363636);}.css-1c013uz{margin-top:18px;margin-bottom:22px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz{font-size:14px;margin-top:15px;margin-bottom:20px;}}.css-1c013uz a{color:var(–color-signal-editorial,#326891);-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;font-weight:500;font-size:16px;}@media only screen and (max-width:480px){.css-1c013uz a{font-size:13px;}}.css-1c013uz a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}How Times reporters cover politics. We rely on our journalists to be independent observers. So while Times staff members may vote, they are not allowed to endorse or campaign for candidates or political causes. This includes participating in marches or rallies in support of a movement or giving money to, or raising money for, any political candidate or election cause.Learn more about our process.The rules for chip makers come on top of other requirements written into the law, including a ban on certain new investments in China. Under that restriction, chip manufacturers that take U.S. funding cannot make new, high-tech investments in China or other “countries of concern” for at least a decade, a prohibition designed to ensure that U.S. taxpayer money does not go toward building operations in China.But analysts have argued that some of these restrictions may be difficult to uphold, given that money is fungible and can pass from one part of a company to another outside of public sight. Some Republican and Democratic lawmakers have also questioned the wisdom of giving any taxpayer money to the chip industry, which is generally profitable. Executives have countered that the high cost of operating in the United States — and subsidies offered by foreign governments — make it cheaper for semiconductor companies to manufacture their products offshore.The next few months will provide the first test of how the Commerce Department balances those concerns. Ms. Raimondo said companies would have to open their books to her team, and that the goal would be to try to “crowd in” private investment, rather than canceling it out.According to the funding application, companies that have secured other sources of private capital will receive “strong preference” for government aid, and applicants will need to have secured some kind of incentive from a state or local government to be eligible for the funding.Commerce officials will prioritize projects linked to state and local incentive programs that create “spillover benefits” for communities, like investments in work force, education or infrastructure, rather than policies like direct tax abatements that benefit lone companies, it said.The rules also seek to address rising concerns among American employers, including manufacturers, that a lack of access to affordable child care is blocking millions of Americans from looking for work, particularly women.Mr. Biden pushed Congress to address those concerns over the past two years, proposing hundreds of billions of dollars for new child care programs, but he was unable to corral support from even a majority of Senate Democrats.But Mr. Biden did persuade lawmakers to approve an assortment of new spending programs seeking to bolster American manufacturing. Now, the Commerce Department is trying to utilize a centerpiece of those efforts, which aims to expand American semiconductor manufacturing, to make at least a small dent in his large goals for the so-called care economy.When it became clear last year that sweeping plans to expand and subsidize child care would not make it into the climate, health and tax bill, the culmination of Mr. Biden’s economic efforts in Congress, Ms. Raimondo gathered aides around a conference table. She told them, she said, that “if Congress wasn’t going to do what they should have done, we’re going to do it in implementation” of the bills that did pass.America’s child care industry has not fully rebounded from the pandemic recession. It is still about 58,000 workers, or five percentage points, short of its prepandemic peak, according to an analysis of Labor Department data by the Center for the Study of Child Care Employment at the University of California, Berkeley.Shortly before the pandemic, the Bipartisan Policy Center in Washington surveyed 35 states and found more than 11 million children had a potential need for child care — yet fewer than eight million slots were available.That shortage is particularly acute in some of the areas where manufacturers are set to begin building new chip plants spurred by the new legislation. Commerce Department officials calculate that in the Syracuse, N.Y., area, where Micron announced a $100 billion chip making investment last year after Mr. Biden signed the new law, the need for slots in child care facilities is nearly three times the size of the actual care capacity in the region.In Phoenix, where semiconductor manufacturing is booming, child care costs consume about 18 percent of a typical construction or manufacturing worker’s salary. That share is higher than the national average.Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo, center, with Gov. Kathy Hochul of New York, said that the child care requirements should help companies hire mothers, easing a labor shortage.Sarah Silbiger for The New York TimesIn a speech last week, Ms. Raimondo called efforts to attract more women to the work force “a simple question of math” for industries complaining of labor shortages. “We need chip manufacturers, construction companies and unions to work with us toward the national goal of hiring and training another million women in construction over the next decade to meet the demand not just in chips, but other industries and infrastructure projects as well,” she said.Only about three in 10 U.S. manufacturing workers are women. Ms. Raimondo said the CHIPS Act would fail if the administration did not help companies change those numbers, by bringing in women who have children.Some American manufacturers have already turned to on-site care facilities to help meet workers’ needs. The automaker Toyota has provided 24-hour care at a factory in Kentucky since 1993 and one in Indiana since 2004.Chad Moutray, the director of the Center for Manufacturing Research at the Manufacturing Institute, which is affiliated with the National Association of Manufacturers, wrote in a report late last year that child care availability is part of the reason women do not seek more jobs in manufacturing.“Women represent a sizable talent pool that manufacturers cannot ignore,” he wrote. More

  • 150 Shares139 Views

    in Economy

    To Tap Federal Funds, Chip Makers Will Need to Provide Child Care

    by

    The move seeks to help more women join the work force as industry leaders complain of labor shortages.WASHINGTON — The Biden administration plans to leverage the federal government’s expansive investment in the semiconductor industry to make progress on another goal: affordable child care.On Tuesday, the Commerce Department will announce that any semiconductor manufacturer seeking a slice of nearly $40 billion in new federal subsidies will need to essentially guarantee affordable, high-quality child care for workers who build or operate a plant.Last year, a bipartisan group of lawmakers passed the CHIPS Act, which devoted $39 billion to directly boost U.S. semiconductor factories as part of $52 billion in subsidies for the industry, in hopes of making the nation less reliant on foreign suppliers for critical chips that power computers, video games, cars and more.Companies that receive the subsidies to build new plants will be able to use some of the government money to meet the new child care requirement. They could do that in a number of ways, in consultation with Commerce officials, who will set basic guidelines but not dictate how companies ensure workers have access to care they can afford.That could include building company child-care centers near construction sites or new plants, paying local child-care providers to add capacity at an affordable cost for workers, directly subsidizing workers’ care costs or other, similar steps that would ensure workers have access to care for their children.American employers, including manufacturers, are increasingly raising concerns that a lack of access to affordable child care is blocking millions of Americans from looking for work, particularly women. President Biden pushed Congress to address those concerns over the last two years, proposing hundreds of billions of dollars for new child care programs, but he was unable to corral support from even a majority of Senate Democrats.But Mr. Biden did convince lawmakers to approve a range of new spending programs seeking to boost American manufacturing. Now, Commerce is trying to utilize a centerpiece of those efforts, which aims to expand American semiconductor manufacturing, to make at least a small dent in his large goals for the so-called care economy.The Global Race for Computer ChipsA Ramp-Up in Spending: Amid a tech cold war with China, U.S. companies have pledged nearly $200 billion for chip manufacturing projects since early 2020. But the investments have limits.Crackdown on China: The United States has been aiming to prevent China from becoming an advanced power in chips, issuing sweeping restrictions on the country’s access to advanced technology.Arizona Factory: Internal doubts are mounting at Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, the world’s biggest maker of advanced chips, over its investment in a new factory in Phoenix.CHIPS Act: Semiconductor companies, which united to get the sprawling $280 billion bill approved last year, have set off a lobbying frenzy as they argue for more cash than their competitors.It joins a growing list of administration efforts to expand the reach of Mr. Biden’s economic policies beyond their primary intent. For instance, administration officials have attached stringent labor standards and “Buy America” provisions to money from a bipartisan infrastructure law. The child care requirement will be flexible for chip makers, but it will almost certainly divert some subsidy dollars that are meant to expand factory capacity and create jobs.The Commerce Department is expected to release its application on Tuesday, allowing companies to begin making a case for federal subsidies that the industry lobbied hard to secure from Congress.The prospect of accessing those funds has already enticed domestic and foreign-owned chip makers to announce billions of dollars in plans for new investments in Arizona, central New York and elsewhere.But even as they ramp up investments, companies are complaining of difficulties in finding workers to build and operate manufacturing facilities.America’s child care industry has not fully rebounded from the pandemic recession. It is still about 58,000 workers, or 5 percentage points, short of its prepandemic peak, according to an analysis of Labor Department data by the Center for the Study of Childcare Employment at the University of California-Berkeley.Shortly before the pandemic, the Bipartisan Policy Center in Washington surveyed 35 states and found more than 11 million children had a potential need for child care — yet fewer than 8 million slots were available.That shortage is particularly acute in some of the areas where manufacturers are set to begin building new chip plants spurred by the new legislation. Commerce Department officials calculate that in the Syracuse area, where Micron announced a $100 billion chip making investment last year after Mr. Biden signed the new law, the need for slots in child care facilities is nearly three times the size of the actual care capacity in the region.In Phoenix, where semiconductor manufacturing is booming, child care costs consume about 18 percent of a typical construction or manufacturing worker’s salary. That share is higher than the national average.Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo, center, with Gov. Kathy Hochul of New York, said that the child care requirements should help companies hire mothers, easing a labor shortage.Sarah Silbiger for The New York TimesGina Raimondo, the Commerce secretary, said in an interview that the child-care requirements should help companies cope with a tight labor market by making it easier for them to attract and retain caregivers who have been kept from working by difficulties finding care for their children.In a speech last week, Ms. Raimondo called efforts to attract more women to the work force “a simple question of math” for industries complaining of labor shortages. “We need chip manufacturers, construction companies and unions to work with us toward the national goal of hiring and training another million women in construction over the next decade to meet the demand not just in chips, but other industries and infrastructure projects as well,” she said.Only about 3 in 10 U.S. manufacturing workers are women. Ms. Raimondo said the CHIPS Act would fail if the administration did not help companies change those numbers, by bringing in women who have children.“You will not be successful unless you find a way to attract, train, put to work and retain women, and you won’t do that without child care,” Ms. Raimondo said in an interview.The Commerce requirement would represent a relatively small step toward Mr. Biden’s much larger, and as-yet unfulfilled, child care ambitions.Mr. Biden unveiled a $4 trillion economic agenda in the months after he took office. It was split into two parts. One focused on physical investments: repairing bridges and water pipes, laying broadband cable, spurring a shift to low-emission sources of energy and catalyzing new manufacturing capacity to compete on a global stage. It was a source of repeated legislative success for the president, who signed a bipartisan infrastructure bill, the CHIPS bill and a climate, health and tax bill that passed with only Democratic votes.But Mr. Biden failed to persuade centrist holdouts in his party, like Senators Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona and Joe Manchin III of West Virginia, to back most of the provisions in the second half of his agenda. Those were largely the president’s plans to invest in people: federally guaranteed paid leave; subsidized care for children, the disabled and older Americans; universal prekindergarten; free community college for all, and more.The lopsided nature of Mr. Biden’s success threatens to exacerbate existing gender disparities in the economy. Some economists warn they could hinder future economic growth. Many of Mr. Biden’s people-focused programs were deliberately aimed at boosting female participation in the work force.It could be years before Democrats have another opportunity to pass those programs. Republicans won control of the House of Representatives last fall and roundly oppose Mr. Biden on new spending proposals and the tax increases on corporations and high earners that he has called for to cover that spending. Progressive groups and liberal lawmakers largely concede there is little chance of a child care bill making its way to Mr. Biden’s desk before the 2024 election.When it became clear last year that sweeping plans to expand and subsidize child care would not make it into the climate, health and tax bill that marked the culmination of Mr. Biden’s economic efforts in Congress, Ms. Raimondo gathered aides around a conference table. She told them, she said, that “if Congress wasn’t going to do what they should have done, we’re going to do it in implementation” of the bills that did pass.Some American manufacturers have already turned to on-site care facilities to help meet workers needs. The automaker Toyota has provided 24-hour care at a factory in Kentucky since 1993 and one in Indiana since 2004.Chad Moutray, director of the Center for Manufacturing Research at the Manufacturing Institute, which is affiliated with the National Association of Manufacturers, wrote in a report late last year that child care availability is part of the reason women do not seek more jobs in manufacturing.“Women represent a sizable talent pool that manufacturers cannot ignore,” he wrote. More

  • 150 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    How One Ukrainian Company Survived, and Thrived, Through a Year of War

    by

    It was exactly a year ago, and the Ukrainian pet food maker Kormotech had concluded its annual meeting. The mood was buoyant. Business was booming, the factory was running 24/7, and sales were projected to grow by double digits. “We had a beautiful budget,” Rostyslav Vovk, the company’s chief executive and founder, recalled almost dreamily.The next morning, air sirens sounded.Russia had invaded. Mr. Vovk called his top managers to meet at a nearby hotel, avoiding the company’s windowed seventh-floor headquarters in Lviv. They had a plan for what had been considered a very unlikely risk — Russian aggression — but it soon proved wholly inadequate.“We were not ready,” Mr. Vovk said. He closed the plant. Raw materials couldn’t get into the country, and deliveries headed abroad couldn’t get out. Staff from the besieged eastern part of the country needed to be evacuated. Employees were joining the military. And the company’s biggest export market, Belarus, was a close ally of Vladimir V. Putin, the Russian president.“We would make decisions,” Mr. Vovk said of that first week after the invasion, “and then the next morning, we would change all the information.”Like leaders at tens of thousands of companies throughout Ukraine, Mr. Vovk and his team were suddenly confronted with a new and bewildering responsibility: keeping a business going through the chaos and danger of war.For many, the task has proved impossible. Before the war, Ukraine’s private sector, including its huge steel and agricultural industries, accounted for 70 percent of the country’s gross domestic product, said Elena Voloshina, head of the International Finance Corporation in Ukraine. Eighty-three percent of businesses experienced losses related to the war, she said. Forty percent suffered direct damage, like a factory or store decimated by a missile, while 25 percent were in what is now occupied territory.Kormotech employs 1,300 people, some of whom had to be evacuated from the eastern part of Ukraine.Maciek Nabrdalik for The New York TimesLast year, Ukraine’s overall output plunged by nearly a third, wrecking the country’s economy and hampering its ability to battle Russian forces.Kormotech, a family-owned business with 1,300 employees worldwide, does not produce weapons or drones. It isn’t involved in supplying critically needed electricity, transport or fresh water to ravaged cities. But it employs people, produces income, earns foreign currency from exports, and contributes tax revenue that the government in Kyiv desperately needs to pay soldiers, repair power lines and buy medical equipment.A year later, Mr. Vovk and his management team have found reason to again celebrate. Mr. Vovk was back in his offices getting ready for the latest annual meeting with his staff — and some of their dogs, which are fixtures around the office and often serve as product taste testers. Despite the odds, business grew more than expected.The State of the WarBiden’s Kyiv Visit: President Biden traveled covertly to the besieged Ukrainian capital, hoping to demonstrate American resolve and boost shellshocked Ukrainians. But the trip was also the first of several direct challenges to President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.Contrasting Narratives: In sharply opposed speeches, Mr. Biden said Mr. Putin bore sole responsibility for the war, while Mr. Putin said Russia had invaded in self-defense. But they agreed the war would not end soon.Nuclear Treaty: Mr. Putin announced that Russia would suspend its participation in the New START nuclear arms control treaty — the last major such agreement remaining with the United States.In the North: A different sort of war game is playing out in northern Ukraine, where Russian shelling is tying up thousands of Ukrainian troops that might otherwise defend against attacks farther south.Kormotech had a few things going for it. The company’s plant was outside Lviv in the westernmost part of the country, near the Polish border, one of the safest parts of Ukraine. The two factories in Prylbychi were able to reopen less than two weeks after the war began.An earlier decision to start an additional factory in Lithuania, which opened in 2020 and was operating around the clock, turned out to be a boon. It could continue smoothly producing and delivering tons of Kormotech’s Club 4 Paws, Optimeal, Miau and Gav brands.After a helter-skelter start, Mr. Vovk and his top managers reorganized. The company, which sells its products in 35 countries including the United States and Europe, had a little wiggle room because they had avoided just-in-time practices that eliminated backup inventory — a cost-cutting approach that had stymied so many companies worldwide during the pandemic. Kormotech routinely kept stock in its warehouses — at least a month and a half’s worth in Ukraine, two months in other countries in Europe and two and a half in the United States.Kormotech was able to recover from supply chain turmoil in part because it had routinely stocked its warehouses with up to two months of ingredients for its pet food.Maciek Nabrdalik for The New York TimesStill, Kormotech’s supply chain was disrupted. Before the war, roughly half its raw materials, like meat and chicken meal, came from abroad. Now border crossing delays and rising import prices had prompted a search for domestic producers. It found two that had never produced pet meal before and taught them what to do.Kateryna Kovaliuk, Kormotech’s chief reputation officer, emphasized that pet food standards could often be more exacting than food produced for people. During a recent tour of the Lviv plant, she picked up a few kibble-size bits chopped up from long ropelike strands of cat food fresh off the production line.“Try it,” she urged, before popping a couple of pieces in her mouth and smiling. “It’s good. It tastes like meat without salt.”As it turned out, the local producers, less than 40 miles from the plant, were not only cheaper but also didn’t have to be paid in precious foreign currency. Instead of buying 500 tons of meal from abroad, the company now buys 100 tons.Kormotech stepped up its purchase of Ukrainian grains and corn as well. The war and Russian blockade caused a drastic drop in grain exports, spiraling food prices and a global hunger crisis. But it also meant that domestic businesses like Kormotech could buy at a discount.Manufacturing the product was one hurdle; getting it delivered abroad was another. At a time when Ukraine has barred men under 60 from leaving the country, the trade ministry provided exemptions for delivery drivers.“We would make decisions, and then the next morning, we would change all the information,” Rostyslav Vovk, the chief executive of Kormotech, said of the first week after the invasion.Maciek Nabrdalik for The New York TimesBut the wait at the borders could extend from a few days to a few weeks. And with seaports mostly blocked, exporting remained an expensive and tricky problem.“No one knew where to go or how,” Mr. Vovk said. The first truck sent to Azerbaijan, he said, cost more than $8,000 — before the war, it was roughly $2,000.Domestic demand for its products stayed steady, but finding new export markets was another challenge. Belarus, which has allowed Russia to stage attacks from inside its border, represented 25 percent of Kormotech’s export market. The management team decided to pull out but needed to replace those customers.Supermarket chains, particularly in the Baltic countries and Poland, were eager to step in and replace Russian-made goods with Ukrainian ones.“For the first time in my life, ‘Made in Ukraine’ was a premium,” Mr. Vovk said. Previously, when the company appeared at international pet supply exhibitions, he said with a laugh, people were so unfamiliar with the country’s products, they would ask if the letters “u” and “k” referred to “the U.K.,” for the United Kingdom.Even so, good will extended only so far. Buyers wanted assurances that Kormotech’s products would keep flowing. So the company provided guarantees, setting up a warehouse in Poland with backup stocks of its 650 different products, outsourcing some production to facilities in Germany and Poland, and drawing up last-resort plans to move production out of Ukraine.The enormous growth in both the European and American markets means that the company’s sales are expected to increase to $155 million this year from $124 million. The main obstacle to expanding even more is capacity.Its growth in Europe and the United States is expected to propel Kormotech to a big revenue increase in 2023, an unlikely development after a year of war.Maciek Nabrdalik for The New York TimesKormotech scrapped plans for a new 92 million-euro factory because of uncertainty and the difficulty in getting financing. But it invested €5 million ($5.34 million) in the Prylbychi plant and €7 million ($7.5 million) in Lithuania.Of course, many businesses have not been as successful as Kormotech, either because their facilities were damaged or demand for their products was eviscerated when people fled the country, as well as by ravenous inflation and shrunken incomes. Mr. Vovk said the exodus of millions of mothers and children had left a friend’s diaper manufacturing business in tatters.A new report from the American Chamber of Commerce in Ukraine and McKinsey & Company found that only 15 percent of companies grew last year, while nearly half saw a decline in sales.Others have adapted by relocating to places like Lviv, or changing their output to fill new wartime demands, like the lingerie seamstresses who have switched to sewing cloth vests to fit body armor plates. Ukraine’s large and mobile information technology sector has also remained strong.Businesses are still struggling to adapt. Russian attacks on Ukraine’s power grids compelled Kormotech to buy two generators at €150,000 apiece, supersize versions of the small colorful units that noisily hum outside nearly every shop and cafe on Lviv’s streets.Now, the Russians are stepping up missile strikes. On a recent weekday, air raid alerts caused 200 plant workers to spend more than half of their 12-hour shift in a tunnel-like storage area about three paces wide that doubles as a bomb shelter.Vira Protsyk, who normally would be packing boxes, sat on one of the wooden benches that lined the 100-foot-long wall. “It’s a bit boring,” she said of the forced breaks. This was the second alert of the day. “I didn’t want to go to the shelter. I’d rather work.”Russia has stepped up its missile strikes, and on a recent weekday, plant workers had to seek safety in a storage area.Maciek Nabrdalik for The New York TimesYurii Shyvala contributed reporting. More

  • 138 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    Chip Makers Turn Cutthroat in Fight for Share of Federal Money

    by

    Semiconductor companies, which united to get the CHIPS Act approved, have set off a lobbying frenzy as they argue for more cash than their competitors.WASHINGTON — In early January, a New York public relations firm sent an email warning about what it characterized as a threat to the federal government’s program to revitalize the U.S. semiconductor industry.The message, received by The New York Times, accused Intel, the Silicon Valley chip titan, of angling to win subsidies under the CHIPS and Science Act for new factories in Ohio and Arizona that would sit empty. Intel had said in a recent earnings call that it would build out its facilities with the expensive machinery needed to make semiconductors when demand for its chips increased.The question, the email said, was whether officials would give funding to companies that outfitted their factories from the jump “or if they will give the majority of CHIPS funding to companies like Intel.”The firm declined to name its client. But it has done work in the past for Advanced Micro Devices, Intel’s longtime rival, which has raised similar concerns about whether federal funding should go to companies that plan to build empty shells. A spokesman for AMD said it had not reviewed the email or approved the public relations firm’s efforts to lobby for or against any specific company receiving funding.“We fully support the CHIPS and Science Act and the efforts of the Biden administration to boost domestic semiconductor research and manufacturing,” the spokesman said.Rival semiconductor suppliers and their customers pulled together last year as they lobbied Congress to help shore up U.S. chip manufacturing and reduce vulnerabilities in the crucial supply chain. The push led lawmakers to approve the CHIPS Act, including $52 billion in subsidies to companies and research institutions as well as $24 billion or more in tax credits — one of the biggest infusions into a single industry in decades.President Biden with Intel’s chief executive, Patrick Gelsinger, at an Intel semiconductor facility under construction in New Albany, Ohio, in September.Pete Marovich for The New York TimesBut that unity is beginning to crack. As the Biden administration prepares to begin handing out the money, chief executives, lobbyists and lawmakers have begun jostling to make their case for funding, in public and behind closed doors.In meetings with government officials and in a public filing, Intel has called into question how much taxpayer money should go to its competitors that have offshore headquarters, arguing that American innovations and other intellectual property could be funneled out of the country.“Our I.P. is here, and that’s not insignificant,” said Allen Thompson, Intel’s vice president of U.S. government relations. “We are the U.S. champion.”The Global Race for Computer ChipsA Ramp-Up in Spending: Amid a tech cold war with China, U.S. companies have pledged nearly $200 billion for chip manufacturing projects since early 2020. But the investments have limits.Crackdown on China: The United States has been aiming to prevent China from becoming an advanced power in chips, issuing sweeping restrictions on the country’s access to advanced technology.Arizona Factory: Internal doubts are mounting at Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, the world’s biggest maker of advanced chips, over its investment in a new factory in Phoenix.CHIPS Act: The sprawling $280 billion bill passed by U.S. lawmakers last year gives the federal government new sway over the chips industry.States, cities and universities have also gotten into the act, hoping to lure subsidies and jobs expected to be generated by manufacturing sites and new research and development.Purveyors of chips, their suppliers and the trade associations that represent them together spent $59 million on lobbying last year, according to tracking from OpenSecrets, up from $46 million in 2021 and $36 million in 2020, as they tried to ensure that Congress approved their funding.Some of those activities have now shifted to making sure companies snag the biggest portion.“Everybody wants their piece of the pie,” said Willy Shih, a management professor at Harvard Business School who follows semiconductor issues. He said it wasn’t surprising that companies would be raising tough questions about competitors, which could be helpful for the Commerce Department in setting policies.“We haven’t done something of this scale in the U.S. in a long time,” he said. “There is a lot at stake.”How the Biden administration distributes the funding in coming months could shape the future of an industry that is increasingly seen as a driver of both economic prosperity and national security. It may also influence how vulnerable the United States remains to foreign threats — particularly the possibility of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan, where more than 90 percent of the world’s advanced chips are made.Since American researchers invented the integrated circuit in the late 1950s, the U.S. manufacturing share has dwindled to around 12 percent. Most American chip companies, including AMD, focus on designing cutting-edge products while outsourcing the costly manufacturing to overseas foundries, most of which are in Asia.AMD’s chief executive, Lisa Su, at a technology trade show last month. AMD and Intel have been fierce competitors.David Becker/Getty ImagesTaiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company developed the foundry concept in the 1980s and dominates that market, followed by Samsung Electronics. Intel, which both designs and makes its own chips, fell behind TSMC and Samsung in manufacturing technology but has vowed to catch up and build its own foundry business to make chips for customers.The industry’s concentration has left it particularly vulnerable to supply chain disruptions. During the pandemic, shortages of lower-end “legacy” chips that are used in cars forced automakers to repeatedly close factories, sending prices soaring.The CHIPS Act aims to rectify some of these shortcomings by allocating $39 billion in grants for new or expanded U.S. factories. The Commerce Department has indicated that about two-thirds of the money will be steered toward makers of leading-edge semiconductors, a category that includes TSMC, Samsung and Intel. All three companies have already broken ground on major expansions of their U.S. facilities.The remaining third is expected to go toward legacy chips, which are heavily used in cars, appliances and military equipment.Another $11 billion of funding is expected to go toward building a handful of chip research centers around the country. Government and academic institutions in Texas, Arizona, Georgia, Indiana, Florida and Ohio have filed documents describing why they should be considered for funding. Even tiny Guam has raised its hand.One challenge for the Commerce Department will be to distribute the money widely enough across the nation to create several thriving “ecosystems” that can bring together raw materials, research and manufacturing capacity, but not undermine the effort by spreading it too thinly. With dozens of companies, universities and other players interested in snagging a share, the funding could go fast.Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo told reporters on Wednesday that the goal was to create “at least two” new clusters of manufacturing capacity for leading-edge chips, in addition to facilities producing other kinds of semiconductors. Each cluster would employ thousands of workers and support a web of businesses supplying the raw materials and services they need.“We have very clear national security goals, which we must achieve,” Ms. Raimondo said, noting that not every chip maker will get what it wants. “I suspect there will be many disappointed companies who feel that they should have a certain amount of money, and the reality is the return on our investment here is the achievement of our national security goal. Period.”The competition has intensified as the Biden administration prepares to release the ground rules for applications next week. The grants, which can range up to $3 billion or more per project, could start going out this spring.Executives say huge spending by governments in South Korea, Taiwan, China and elsewhere has helped shape the chip industry globally. And the current U.S. policy push could again alter the market, by giving some companies advantages that allow them to edge out competitors.Most chip companies, in publicly discussing the subsidies, have stressed the common goal of bolstering U.S. production. But clear differences among them have emerged. Many are outlined in the more than 200 filings that companies, organizations, universities and others submitted to the Commerce Department last March.Beyond extolling the merits of their own manufacturing plans, some applicants made the case that rival projects deserved less funding or should face strict limits on how they operated, though few companies mentioned their competitors by name.Intel, along with other U.S.-based firms like GlobalFoundries and SkyWater Technology, expressed concerns about foreign-owned companies, including whether their U.S. factories could continue operating in the event of a crisis in their home country.Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, which is building a factory site in Phoenix, has objected to “preferential treatment based on the location of a company’s headquarters.”Adriana Zehbrauskas for The New York TimesIntel has argued that foreign investment is welcome, but that its longtime concentration of chip design, research and manufacturing in the United States meant that it should get special consideration.But competitors argue that investing heavily in Intel could be a risky bet for the U.S. government, and some Biden administration officials have questioned whether Intel can follow through on its plans to catch up to its competitors technologically. The company has suffered from a severe drop in sales and announced on Wednesday that it would cut its stock dividend.U.S. officials have also stressed the need to support a U.S. expansion by TSMC, in part because it produces leading-edge chips crucial to the military.TSMC, which has broken ground on a $40 billion investment in two advanced factories in Arizona, countered in its filing that “preferential treatment based on the location of a company’s headquarters” would not be an effective or efficient use of U.S. money. AMD, one of TSMC’s largest customers, has advocated its U.S. expansion.AMD and Intel, both based in Santa Clara, Calif., have competed fiercely for the market for microprocessor chips.In its filing in March, AMD expressed concerns about whether certain unnamed competitors had proved that they could operate effectively as a foundry and make leading-edge chips. Intel has struggled on both counts. And AMD highlighted the risk that grant recipients would not immediately spend that money to outfit their factories with equipment.“Any facility receiving federal assistance must be operational upon completion of construction,” AMD wrote. “A facility that sits idle or is held in reserve for demand increases should immediately forfeit any federal funds.”Mr. Thompson of Intel declined to comment on the email. But he defended the “smart capital” strategy articulated by Patrick Gelsinger, Intel’s chief executive, which has stressed building factory shells and then investing to equip them in accordance with market demand.Intel is continuing to follow that strategy with construction projects in Arizona, New Mexico and Ohio, to ensure that its new facilities are built out “in alignment with the market,” Mr. Thompson said. But Intel has no intention of using the government money for “basically just building shells,” he said. “The goal is to ensure that we have the capacity to support our customers.”Ana Swanson reported from Washington, and Don Clark from San Francisco. More

  • 150 Shares169 Views

    in Economy

    How Arizona Is Positioning Itself for $52 Billion to the Chips Industry

    by

    The state has become a hub for chip makers including Intel and TSMC, as the government prepares to release a gusher of funds for the strategic industry.In recent weeks, Gina Raimondo, the commerce secretary, has talked with Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona, spent time with the president of Arizona State University and appeared at a conference with the mayor of Phoenix.Their discussions centered on one main topic: chips.Ms. Raimondo is in charge of handing out $52 billion for semiconductor manufacturing and research under the CHIPS Act, a funding package intended to expand domestic production of the foundational technology, which acts as the brains of computers. The legislation, which passed in August, is a prime piece of President Biden’s industrial policy and part of a push to ensure America’s economic and technology leadership over China.Arizona wants to make sure it is in position for a portion of that once-in-a-generation gusher of federal funding, for which the Commerce Department will begin taking applications after Thursday. As a result, Arizona officials have inundated Ms. Raimondo to promote the state’s growing chip industry and talked with the chief executives of giant chip companies such as Intel and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company.Arizona, which is vying for subsidies along with Texas, New York and Ohio, may have a head start on the action. The state has been home to semiconductor makers since the 1940s and has 115 chip-related companies, whereas there is one major manufacturer in Ohio.Arizona has also led the nation in chip investments since 2020, with the announcements of two new chip-making plants by TSMC and two additional factories from Intel that will cost a combined $60 billion. State leaders had helped persuade the companies to open the facilities by offering big tax breaks and water and other infrastructure grants. They also promised to expand technical and engineering education in the state.State officials and chip companies also acted as a lobbying bloc in Washington. They helped shape the CHIPS Act to include federal tax credits, subsidies, and research and work force grants. TSMC expanded its lobbying staff to 19 people from two in two years, and Intel spent more than $7 million in lobbying efforts last year, the most it had spent in two decades. Arizona State University spent $502,000 on lobbying last year, also the most in two decades.“It has been an intentional and an all-hands-on-deck effort,” said Sandra Watson, president of the Arizona Commerce Authority, a nonprofit economic development organization that has helped lead state efforts to attract chip companies and push for the CHIPS Act.Sandra Watson, president of the Arizona Commerce Authority, hosted more than 20 chief executives of chip companies at the Super Bowl this month.Caitlin O’Hara for The New York TimesThe Commerce Department is expected to soon begin handing out $39 billion in subsidies to semiconductor makers, later opening the process to companies, universities and others to apply for $13.2 billion in research and work force development subsidies. The CHIPS Act also provides an investment tax credit for up to 25 percent of a manufacturer’s capital expenditure costs.Ms. Raimondo has described the process as a “race” among states. “Every governor, every state legislature, every president of public universities in every state ought to be now putting their plan of attack together,” she said in August during a visit to Arizona State University’s tech research and development center. “This is going to be a competitive process.”The Commerce Department declined to comment.Arizona’s history with chip manufacturing stretches back to 1949, when the telecom hardware and services provider Motorola opened a lab in Phoenix that later developed transistors. In 1980, Intel built a semiconductor plant in Chandler, a suburb southeast of Phoenix, drawn by the state’s low property taxes, relative proximity to its Silicon Valley headquarters and stable geology. (Earthquakes are rare in Arizona.)During President Donald J. Trump’s administration, he pushed an “America First” policy agenda. That opened an opportunity for Doug Ducey, a Republican who was then Arizona’s governor, and other state officials to transform their economy into a tech hub.Arizona’s governor at the time, Doug Ducey, and Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo while touring the TSMC construction site in December.T.J. Kirkpatrick for The New York TimesIn 2017, Mr. Ducey and other Arizona officials traveled to Taiwan to meet with executives of TSMC, the world’s biggest maker of leading-edge chips. They promoted the state’s low taxes, its business-friendly regulatory environment and Arizona State University’s engineering school of more than 30,000 students.Mr. Ducey, who was close to Mr. Trump, also had calls with Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, Defense Secretary Mark Esper and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on financial incentives to expand domestic production of chips.“My job is to sell Arizona,” Mr. Ducey said. “In this case, it was to sell Arizona to TSMC but also to the administration.”In 2019, Mr. Ducey helped set up calls between the cabinet secretaries and TSMC’s executives to lock in a deal to open manufacturing plants in Arizona. The state promised tax credits and other financial incentives to help offset costs for the company to move production to the United States from Taiwan.In May 2020, TSMC announced plans to build a $12 billion factory in Phoenix. Later that year, the city provided TSMC with $200 million in infrastructure incentives, including water lines, sewage and roads. One traffic light would cost the city $500,000.“TSMC appreciates the support from our dedicated partners on the state, local and federal levels,” said Rick Cassidy, the chief executive of TSMC Arizona, adding that the CHIPS Act funds will enable the company and its suppliers to expand “for years to come.”The CHIPS Act is a prime piece of President Biden’s industrial policy. He toured TSMC’s Arizona plant in December.T.J. Kirkpatrick for The New York TimesIn early 2021, Pat Gelsinger, Intel’s chief executive, announced a sweeping strategy to increase U.S. production of chips. States began soliciting the company. Arizona officials highlighted their long relationship with Intel and perks, such as the state’s low property and business taxes.Intel soon announced a $20 billion expansion in Chandler, with two additional factories that would bring 3,000 new jobs to the state. Chandler also approved $30 million in water and road improvements for the new plants.“The Arizona government has been a great collaborator,” said Bruce Andrews, Intel’s chief government affairs officer. “By investing in semiconductors early, they created an ecosystem that has had a jobs multiplier effect and massive economic benefits.”But some of the tax breaks have rankled Arizona residents, who say the moves have hurt funding for public schools. The state ranks 47th in per-student spending.“We need to bring business to our state, but we need to look at balance,” said Beth Lewis, the executive director of Save Our Schools in Arizona. “Corporations are choosing not to settle in Arizona because of our devastated public education system.”Arizona pressed ahead with pushing Congress to create legislation for chip subsidies. In March 2021, Senator Kelly joined Senators John Cornyn, Republican of Texas, and Mark Warner, Democrat of Virginia, the authors of legislation that would become the CHIPS Act, in a call with the new Biden administration to push for the White House’s support of funding.Mr. Kelly, an early sponsor of the CHIPS Act, became a chief negotiator on the legislation in Congress. He negotiated the inclusion of a four-year 25 percent investment tax credit in the bill, including a provision that ensured Intel and TSMC would get the tax credits even though their Arizona factory projects were announced before the bill would go into effect.Mr. Kelly also helped the president of Arizona State University, Michael Crow, lobby for the inclusion of more than $13 billion in grants for research and development and work force training. And Mr. Kelly and state leaders hosted administration officials at events to showcase the state’s semiconductor efforts as part of the White House’s manufacturing strategy.Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona at TSMC’s factory in December.Adriana Zehbrauskas for The New York Times“We have the potential to lead the nation in microchip production,” Mr. Kelly said in a statement. “I was honored to lead this effort, and now I’m working to maximize it for Arizona”Mr. Ducey, who left office when his term ended in January, pushed for more tech-friendly policies, including an income-tax cut. He also said he would use $100 million that the state had received from federal Covid grants to attract more chip companies and help them apply for funds provided by the CHIPS Act.In December, TSMC announced a second factory that would bring its total investment in Arizona to $40 billion. Mr. Biden and Ms. Raimondo traveled to Phoenix to speak at the announcement, with Mr. Kelly accompanying them on Air Force One.Arizona officials continue to pitch semiconductor companies to open factories in the state.This month, Ms. Watson hosted more than 20 chief executives of chip companies at the Super Bowl in Glendale. Katie Hobbs, Arizona’s new governor and a Democrat, and Mr. Kelly heralded how the state could benefit from the CHIPS Act.“There’s a robust pipeline,” Ms. Watson said. More

  • 113 Shares119 Views

    in Economy

    U.S. Courts India as Technology Partner to Counter China

    by

    American and Indian officials are working toward new partnerships in defense technology, advanced telecom and semiconductors.Officials from the United States and India agreed on Tuesday to expand cooperation on advanced weaponry, supercomputing, semiconductors and other high-tech fields, as the Biden administration looks to strengthen its connections with Asian allies and offset China’s dominance of cutting-edge technologies.The agreements followed two days of high-level meetings in Washington between government officials and executives from dozens of companies, the first under a new dialogue about critical and emerging technologies that President Biden and India’s prime minister, Narendra Modi, announced in Tokyo in May.Jake Sullivan, the U.S. national security adviser, told reporters on Tuesday that the goal was for technological partnerships to be “the next big milestone” in the U.S.-Indian relationship after a 2016 agreement on nuclear power cooperation. He described the effort as a “big foundational piece of an overall strategy to put the entire democratic world in the Indo-Pacific in a position of strength.”The agreements will be a test of whether the Biden administration can realize its proposal for “friendshoring” by shifting the manufacturing of certain critical components to friendly countries. Biden officials have expressed concerns about the United States’ continued heavy reliance on China for semiconductors, telecommunications parts and other important goods. In recent months they have clamped down on the sale of advanced semiconductor technology to China, in an effort to stymie an industry that the White House says could give China a military advantage.Many companies have found it difficult to obtain the factory space and skilled workers they would need to move their supply chains out of China. India has a highly skilled work force and a government that wants to attract more international investment, but multinational companies seeking to operate there continue to complain of onerous regulations, inadequate infrastructure and other barriers.Our Coverage of the Investment WorldThe decline of the stock and bond markets this year has been painful, and it remains difficult to predict what is in store for the future.2023 Predictions: There are plenty of forecasts coming for where the S&P 500 will be at the end of the year. Should you be paying attention to them?May I Speak to a Human?: Younger investors who are navigating market volatility and trying to save for retirement are finding that digital investment platforms lack the personal touch.Tips for Investors: When you invest and where matters for taxes. But a few rules of thumb can stave off some nasty surprises.Both Mr. Biden and Mr. Modi are also propelling closer U.S.-Indian cooperation in efforts to build out the industrial and innovation bases of their countries, Mr. Sullivan said.The partnerships announced on Tuesday include an agreement between the U.S. and Indian national science agencies to cooperate on artificial intelligence and advanced wireless technology, as well as in other areas.The countries also pledged to speed up their efforts to jointly produce and develop certain defense technologies, including jet engines, artillery systems and armored infantry vehicles. The United States said it would look to quickly review a new proposal by General Electric to produce a jet engine with India.Officials also said they would work together to facilitate the build-out of an advanced mobile network in India and look for new cooperation in semiconductor production, including efforts to help India bolster chip research and production that would complement major investments in the industry in the United States.The new dialogue would include efforts to work through regulatory barriers, as well as visa restrictions that have prevented talented Indians from working in the United States, the countries said.But experts said India would need to continue to reform its permitting and tax system to lure more foreign manufacturing companies. And the United States would need to reform restrictions on transferring defense-related technology outside the country, they said, if it hopes to work with India to produce jet engines and other advanced weapons.Analysts also noted that many of the technology partnerships would hinge on new connections between the countries’ private sectors, meaning that the agreements could go only so far.India’s frequent purchases of Russian military equipment and close ties with Russia also present another wrinkle to the planned partnership. But Biden officials said they believed that the cooperation could accelerate India’s move away from Russia, to the benefit of its relationship with the United States.On Monday, Mr. Sullivan, Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo and India’s national security adviser, Ajit Doval, met with more than 40 company executives, university presidents and others, including executives from Lockheed Martin, Tata, Adani Defense and Aerospace, and Micron Technology.A semiconductor event last year in Bengaluru, India. A technology partnership “has the potential to take U.S.-India ties to the next level,” Tanvi Madan of the Brookings Institution said.Munsif VengattilReuters“It has the potential to take U.S.-India ties to the next level,” Tanvi Madan, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, said of the initiative. The trick, she added, will be “getting from potential and promises to outcomes.”“Many of the decisions to collaborate or not will be made in the private sector, and companies will be assessing the business case as much as, if not more than, the strategic case,” Ms. Madan said.India has traditionally been known as a difficult partner for the United States in trade negotiations. In the talks that the Biden administration is currently carrying out in Asia, known as the Indo-Pacific Economic Forum, India bowed out of the trade portion of the deal, though it has continued to negotiate in areas like clean energy, supply chains and labor standards.But analysts said the Indian government was far more motivated on national security matters, and particularly tempted by the prospects of working with the United States to cultivate cutting-edge tech industries.“We both have a common purpose here, which is the fear that China is going to eat our lunch in all the sectors unless we find areas to cooperate and collaborate,” said Richard M. Rossow, a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. More

  • 175 Shares159 Views

    in Economy

    Netherlands and Japan Said to Join U.S. in Curbing China’s Access to Chip Tech

    by

    A new agreement is expected to expand the reach of U.S. technology restrictions on China issued last year.WASHINGTON — The Netherlands and Japan, both makers of some of the world’s most advanced equipment for manufacturing semiconductors, agreed on Friday to join with the United States in barring some shipments of their most high-tech machinery to China, people familiar with the agreement said.The agreement, which followed high-level meetings with U.S. national security officials in Washington, will help expand the reach of sweeping restrictions issued unilaterally by the Biden administration in October on the kinds of semiconductor technology that can be shared with China.The countries did not publicly announce the agreement, because of its sensitivity, and details remain unclear. But the deal seems likely to put technology industries in the countries on a more even footing, preventing companies in Japan and the Netherlands from rushing in to claim market share in China that has been abandoned by U.S. firms. American companies have said that possibility would put them at a disadvantage.More on JapanMissing a Successor: An owner’s struggle to find someone to take over his thriving business illuminates the potentially devastating economic effects of an aging society.Tech Workers: Japanese companies are trying to lure highly educated Indians to fill a shortage of IT engineers. Can they make their country appealing to them?Hiroyuki Nishimura: This celebrity entrepreneur and author has become a voice for disenchanted young Japanese. What he talks about much less is his ownership of 4chan.A Policy Change: Japan’s central bank unexpectedly announced in December that it was adjusting its stance on bond purchases. This is why that matters.The White House and the Dutch government declined to comment. The Japanese government did not immediately respond to a request for comment.The United States imposed strict controls in October on the sale to China of both semiconductors and the machines used to make them, arguing that Beijing could use the technology for military purposes, like breaking American codes or guiding hypersonic missiles. But well before those restrictions were issued, the United States had been pressing the Netherlands and Japan to further limit the advanced technology they export to China.The October rules also clamped down on certain shipments to China from countries outside the United States. Using a novel regulation called the foreign direct product rule, the Biden administration barred companies that use American technology, software or inputs from selling certain advanced semiconductors to China. But these measures applied only to chips, not the machinery used to make them.Instead, the White House continued to press allies to pass restrictions limiting the sales of semiconductor manufacturing equipment by firms like the Dutch company ASML or Tokyo Electron in Japan. The White House argued that the sale of this advanced machinery to China created the danger that Beijing could one day make its own versions of the advanced products it could no longer buy from the United States.The negotiations, which are likely to continue, have had to overcome both commercial and logistical concerns. Like the Americans, the Dutch and Japanese were concerned that if they pulled out of the Chinese market, foreign competitors would take their place, said Emily Benson, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Relations, a Washington think tank. Over time, that “could impact their ability to maintain a technological edge over competitors,” she said.The Dutch government has already forbidden sales of its most advanced semiconductor machinery, called extreme ultraviolet lithography systems, to China. But the United States has encouraged the Dutch to also limit a slightly less advanced system, called deep ultraviolet lithography. The deal reached Friday includes at least some restrictions on that equipment, according to one person familiar with its terms.Governments have also faced questions about whether they possess the legal authority to issue restrictions like the United States, as well as extensive technical discussions about which technologies to restrict. Japan and the Netherlands will still likely require some time to make changes to their laws and regulations to put new restrictions in place, Ms. Benson added, and it could take months or years for restrictions in the three countries to mirror one another. More

  • 175 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    Climate Change May Bring New Era of Trade Wars, as E.U. and U.S. Spar

    by

    Countries are pursuing new solutions to try to mitigate climate change. More trade fights are likely to come hand in hand.WASHINGTON — Efforts to mitigate climate change are prompting countries across the world to embrace dramatically different policies toward industry and trade, bringing governments into conflict.These new clashes over climate policy are straining international alliances and the global trading system, hinting at a future in which policies aimed at staving off environmental catastrophe could also result in more frequent cross-border trade wars.In recent months, the United States and Europe have proposed or introduced subsidies, tariffs and other policies aimed at speeding the green energy transition. Proponents of the measures say governments must move aggressively to expand sources of cleaner energy and penalize the biggest emitters of planet-warming gases if they hope to avert a global climate disaster.But critics say these policies often put foreign countries and companies at a disadvantage, as governments subsidize their own industries or charge new tariffs on foreign products. The policies depart from a decades-long status quo in trade, in which the United States and Europe often joined forces through the World Trade Organization to try to knock down trade barriers and encourage countries to treat one another’s products more equally to boost global commerce.Now, new policies are pitting close allies against one another and widening fractures in an already fragile system of global trade governance, as countries try to contend with the existential challenge of climate change.“The climate crisis requires economic transformation at a scale and speed humanity has never attempted in our 5,000 years of written history,” said Todd N. Tucker, the director of industrial policy and trade at the Roosevelt Institute, who is an advocate for some of the measures. “Unsurprisingly, a task of this magnitude will require a new policy tool kit.”The current system of global trade funnels tens of millions of shipping containers stuffed with couches, clothing and car parts from foreign factories to the United States each year, often at astonishingly low prices. But the prices that consumers pay for these goods do not take into account the environmental harm generated by the far-off factories that make them, or by the container ships and cargo planes that carry them across the ocean.A factory in Chengde, China. U.S. officials believe they must lessen a dangerous dependence on goods from China.Fred Dufour/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesAmerican and European officials argue that more needs to be done to discourage trade in products made with more pollution or carbon emissions. And U.S. officials believe they must lessen a dangerous dependence on China in particular for the materials needed to power the green energy transition, like solar panels and electric vehicle batteries.The Biden administration is putting in place generous subsidies to encourage the production of clean energy technology in the United States, such as tax credits for consumers who buy American-made clean cars and companies building new plants for solar and wind power equipment. Both the United States and Europe are introducing taxes and tariffs aimed at encouraging less environmentally harmful ways of producing goods.Biden administration officials have expressed hopes that the climate transition could be a new opportunity for cooperation with allies. But so far, their initiatives seem to have mainly stirred controversy when the United States is already under attack for its response to recent trade rulings.The administration has publicly flouted several decisions of World Trade Organization panels that ruled against the United States in trade disputes involving national security issues. In two separate announcements in December, the Office of the United States Trade Representative said it would not change its policies to abide by W.T.O. decisions.But the biggest source of contention has been new tax credits for clean energy equipment and vehicles made in North America that were part of a sweeping climate and health policy bill that President Biden signed into law last year. European officials have called the measure a “job killer” and expressed fears they will lose out to the United States on new investments in batteries, green hydrogen, steel and other industries. In response, European Union officials began outlining their own plan this month to subsidize green energy industries — a move that critics fear will plunge the world into a costly and inefficient “subsidy war.”The United States and European Union have been searching for changes that could be made to mollify both sides before the U.S. tax-credit rules are settled in March. But the Biden administration appears to have only limited ability to change some of the law’s provisions. Members of Congress say they intentionally worded the law to benefit American manufacturing.Biden administration is putting in place subsidies to encourage the production of clean energy technology in the United States, such as tax credits for consumers who buy American-made clean cars.Brittany Greeson for The New York TimesEuropean officials have suggested that they could bring a trade case at the World Trade Organization that might be a prelude to imposing tariffs on American products in retaliation.Valdis Dombrovskis, the European commissioner for trade, said that the European Union was committed to finding solutions but that negotiations needed to make progress or the European Union would face “even stronger calls” to respond.“We need to follow the same rules of the game,” he said.Anne Krueger, a former official at the International Monetary Fund and World Bank, said the potential pain of American subsidies on Japan, South Korea and allies in Europe was “enormous.”“When you discriminate in favor of American companies and against the rest of the world, you’re hurting yourself and hurting others at the same time,” said Ms. Krueger, now a senior fellow at the School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University.But in a letter last week, a collection of prominent labor unions and environmental groups urged Mr. Biden to move forward with the plans without delays, saying outdated trade rules should not be used to undermine support for a new clean energy economy.“It’s time to end this circular firing squad where countries threaten and, if successful, weaken or repeal one another’s climate measures through trade and investment agreements,” said Melinda St. Louis, the director of the Global Trade Watch for Public Citizen, one of the groups behind the letter.Valdis Dombrovskis, the European commissioner for trade, has pressed the United States to negotiate more on its climate-related subsidies for American manufacturing.Stephanie Lecocq/EPA, via ShutterstockOther recent climate policies have also spurred controversy. In mid-December, the European Union took a major step toward a new climate-focused trade policy as it reached a preliminary agreement to impose a new carbon tariff on certain imports. The so-called carbon border adjustment mechanism would apply to products from all countries that failed to take strict actions to cut their greenhouse gas emissions.The move is aimed at ensuring that European companies that must follow strict environmental regulations are not put at a disadvantage to competitors in countries where laxer environmental rules allow companies to produce and sell goods more cheaply. While European officials argue that their policy complies with global trade rules in a way that U.S. clean energy subsidies do not, it has still rankled countries like China and Turkey.The Biden administration has also been trying to create an international group that would impose tariffs on steel and aluminum from countries with laxer environmental policies. In December, it sent the European Union a brief initial proposal for such a trade arrangement.The idea still has a long way to go to be realized. But even as it would break new ground in addressing climate change, the approach may also end up aggravating allies like Canada, Mexico, Brazil and South Korea, which together provided more than half of America’s foreign steel last year.Under the initial proposal, these countries would theoretically have to produce steel as cleanly as the United States and Europe, or face tariffs on their products.A steel plant in Belgium. Under the initial proposal, countries would theoretically have to produce steel as cleanly as the United States and Europe, or face tariffs.Kevin Faingnaert for The New York TimesProponents of new climate-focused trade measures say discriminating against foreign products, and goods made with greater carbon emissions, is exactly what governments need to build up clean energy industries and address climate change.“You really do need to rethink some of the fundamentals of the system,” said Ilana Solomon, an independent trade consultant who previously worked with the Sierra Club.Ms. Solomon and others have proposed a “climate peace clause,” under which governments would commit to refrain from using the World Trade Organization and other trade agreements to challenge one another’s climate policies for 10 years.“The complete legitimacy of the global trading system has never been more in question,” she said.In the United States, support appears to be growing among both Republicans and Democrats for more nationalist policies that would encourage domestic production and discourage imports of dirtier goods — but that would also most likely violate World Trade Organization rules.Most Republicans do not support the idea of a national price on carbon. But they have shown more willingness to raise tariffs on foreign products that are made in environmentally damaging ways, which they see as a way to protect American jobs from foreign competition.Robert E. Lighthizer, a chief trade negotiator for the Trump administration, said there was “great overlap” between Republicans and Democrats on the idea of using trade tools to discourage imports of polluting products from abroad.“I’m coming at it to get more American employed and with higher wages,” he said. “You shouldn’t be able to get an economic advantage over some guy working in Detroit, trying to support his family, from pollution, by manufacturing overseas.” More