Tangle Podcast Summary

Episode Title: Should the government invest in Intel?
Date: August 21, 2025
Host: Isaac Saul

Overview

In this episode, Isaac Saul leads a thorough discussion on the Trump administration’s potential deal to take a 10% government stake in Intel, America’s major semiconductor company. The episode explores the political, economic, and strategic implications of this move, drawing perspectives from across the political spectrum and technology sector. Isaac shares his own nuanced analysis, considering both upsides and significant risks, in light of Intel's vital role in U.S. technology and national security.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

The News: White House Considering Intel Investment

• Announcement: The Trump administration is reportedly negotiating to convert $10.86 billion in federal grants given to Intel (primarily via the CHIPS Act) into a non-voting, non-governance 10% equity stake in the company.
• Context:
  • Intel remains the only U.S. company with leading-edge semiconductor manufacturing.
  • The 2022 CHIPS Act allocated $39 billion in U.S. grants for semiconductor production.
  • Intel has received the largest portion, using it to expand fabrication facilities nationwide.
  • Intel has struggled against international competitors and has seen significant financial setbacks.
• SoftBank Investment: Japanese firm SoftBank has committed to invest $2 billion in Intel, signaling international confidence in the company's turnaround.

[05:26] John Law: "The Biden administration literally was giving Intel for free ... Donald Trump turns that into saying, hey, we want equity for the money."

Perspectives from Across the Spectrum

What the Right is Saying

• General View: Skepticism about government intervention in private industry. Divided between viewing Intel as a strategic asset and as a failing company with little investment value.
• Concerns:
  • Violates traditional conservative, free-market economic principles.
  • Potential for government overreach and backdoor regulation.
  • Precedent that could open doors for interventions in other industries (food, medicine).
• Memorable Quotes:
  • [10:48] Matthew Lynn, The Spectator: “In reality, Intel has become hooked on subsidies and grants … not so good at making chips or serving customers. It’s very hard to see how a few more billions from the White House is going to turn that around.”
  • [12:03] Daniel J. Smith, Wall Street Journal: "Hayek warns in 'The Road to Serfdom' that state ownership threatens both prosperity and liberty ... Even a modest share of federal ownership would be a powerful bargaining chip for striking unions, especially if a Democrat sat in the White House."

What the Left is Saying

• General View: Also critical, seeing the deal as an extension of Trump’s desire for personal or state control over the economy.
• Concerns:
  • Move towards "state capitalism" unprecedented outside of emergencies (e.g., 2008 auto bailouts).
  • Danger of shifting government power from regulation to ownership.
  • Corporate America’s silence seen as self-serving, prioritizing potential tax cuts over principle.
• Notable Quotes:
  • [13:53] Harold Meyerson, The American Prospect: “It’s impossible to imagine Trump or Republicans ... supporting any form of state capitalism. ... The state has become primarily the vehicle through which he can maximize his personal control.”
  • [15:12] Morrow & Mattingly, CNN: “[There has been] silence from corporate America to Trump’s incursion into private businesses ... Make yourself a target or fall in line and wait for massive tax cuts.”

What Technology Writers are Saying

• General View: Mixed opinions; see government stake as potentially helpful but requiring deeper restructuring, with concern about unintended interference.
• Key Points:
  • U.S. needs advanced domestic chip manufacturing for security reasons.
  • Suggest a more ambitious approach — e.g., majority government ownership with public-private partnerships (TSMC, etc.).
  • Risks include government interference in operational decisions.
• Memorable Quotes:
  • [16:47] Dave Valente, Silicon Angle: "A contemplated investment ... without a significant restructuring of Intel’s entire business is a recipe for failure. ... We call on the U.S. government to use money from the CHIPS Act ... to secure a position for a U.S.-domiciled company."
  • [18:02] John Foley, Financial Times: “Given all that largess, why not demand something back? ... The risk is that government investors have an incentive to urge companies to do things other shareholders would rather they didn’t.”

Isaac Saul’s Take

Analysis Summary

• Acknowledges that government involvement with companies like Intel has clear drawbacks:

  • Mixed incentives between public and private stakeholders could distort business decisions.
  • Risk of politically-motivated interference depending on the administration in power.
  • Sets a new precedent for government equity stakes outside crisis situations.

• Recognizes that this approach could be a clever way to turn already-approved subsidies into a potentially profitable investment. Important to ensure:

  • The stake is non-intrusive and non-voting.
  • There are clear milestones and an exit strategy for the government.
  • The President and his family are prevented from personally profiting.

• Strategic Importance: Isaac argues the semiconductor industry is so critical to national security that extraordinary measures are justifiable, provided they are structured carefully and transparently.

[19:37] Isaac Saul:

“Maybe more to the point is just how critical this industry is to our economy and national security. ... If this industry is critical enough for us to stare down China, is it not so critical to justify taking an unusually aggressive stake in the industry’s premier American company?”

[24:40] Isaac Saul:

“The government stake would have to be a non-intrusive and non-voting one. ... And then there would need to be automatic sell-downs to exit the government stake once Intel clears those milestones.”

• Top Risks Identified:

  • Possibility of Trump leveraging the deal for personal gain ([22:09] “I’ll be very concerned that he finds a way to profit personally”)
  • Market implications (Intel may be seen as needing a bailout, thus stock could fall).
  • The dangerous precedent of government intervention beyond true crises.

• Final Thought:

  • Isaac remains cautiously open-minded: “I think this sector is important enough, Intel is strong enough, and our position is vulnerable enough to justify unusual action. But I do appreciate the significant risks of this proposal. ... Until we see the details ... it’s hard to know if the risks are worth taking.” ([25:59])

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• [05:26] John Law on Trump’s approach:
  “Donald Trump turns that into saying, hey, we want equity for the money. If we’re going to give you the money, we want a piece of the action.”

• [16:47] Dave Valente, on need for restructuring:
  "A contemplated investment ... without a significant restructuring of Intel’s entire business is a recipe for failure."

• [19:37] Isaac Saul:
  "Government involvement in a company like Intel could go south for a few obvious reasons..."

• [24:05] Isaac Saul:
  “The details of any deal will matter a lot.”

Timestamps for Key Segments

• [01:42] – Isaac Saul opens the show and sets the stage
• [05:08] – Intel news explained by John Law
• [10:48] – Perspectives from the right
• [13:53] – Perspectives from the left
• [16:47] – Technology writers weigh in
• [19:37] – Isaac Saul’s analysis and take
• [27:30] – Listener question (not about Intel) and show wrap-up

Conclusion

This episode provides a comprehensive, balanced look at the complex question of government investment in a critical, struggling technology sector. While many are wary of the move—left, right, and in tech—Isaac sees merit in a carefully designed, limited government stake tied to clear, public-interest outcomes. The key, he emphasizes, is transparency, strict limits, and absolute avoidance of political self-dealing.

For further reading and to access member-exclusive content, listeners are directed to readtangle.com.