President Donald Trump on Monday supported America’s 10% stake in Intel, criticizing detractors of the deal in a morning post on Truth Social.
I PAID ZERO FOR INTEL, IT IS WORTH APPROXIMATELY 11 BILLION DOLLARS. All goes to the USA. Why are “stupid” people unhappy with that? I will make deals like that for our Country all day long. I will also help those companies that make such lucrative deals with the United States States. I love seeing their stock price go up, making the USA RICHER, AND RICHER. More jobs for America!!! Who would not want to make deals like that? – President Donald Trump, August 25, 2025
Suzanne O’Halloran for FOX Business:
Intel shares have gained 28% this month, fueled by the deal to help shore up the struggling chipmaker and focus on American-made semiconductors. The Trump administration is considering more similar deals, according to White House economic advisor Kevin Hassett.
“I’m sure that at some point there’ll be more transactions, if not in this industry, then other industries,” Hassett told CNBC.
The $11 billion stake is a combination of common stock and grants from the U.S. CHIPS and Science Act.
“The government intervention in the free-market economy happened when the CHIPS Act was passed. Remember, it was a grant. And what President Trump has done is turn that grant into an equity position,” Larry Lindsey, a former director of the National Economic Council, said on “Mornings With Maria.” “So I don’t think there’s any increase in socialism here. I think socialism was already committed when we started allocating capital the way we did back then.”
Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., said in a statement to FOX Business: “The CHIPS Act was a doomed Democrat led ploy for corporate welfare; it should be rescinded, not expanded into government acquisition of private companies.”
MacDailyNews Take: Here’s more from Maria Bartiromo’s interview with Larry Lindsay this morning:
Maria, what’s unique about what just happened though, and different from just a willy-nilly purchasing of shares or ownership shares, is that the money had already been spent by the government, so Intel was sitting there with the money as a grant. Now, the government gets something in return for that grant. So, the intervention into the private sector happened when the CHIPS Act was passed.
The CHIPS Act was passed on July 27, 2022 and signed into law during the previous administration on August 9, 2022.
Even if some bets don’t pan out, it’s better than just handing out taxpayers’ money to companies for free. Any grants that do generate revenue will return something instead of nothing for the investor, which is, in these cases, the American taxpayer.
By just handing out taxpayers’ money with no strings attached, the American taxpayer foots the bill for each company involved with no hope of any returns ever. Why was it ever that way? Just an endless string of bad deals made by people who were supposed to be stewards of taxpayer’s money, yet thought of it as their own.
Let us never forget this fundamental truth. The state has no source of money other than the money people earn themselves… There is no such thing as public money, there is only taxpayers’ money. – Margaret Thatcher
This way, if a company uses American taxpayers’ money to generate profits, the taxpayers get returns on their investments.
That said, the United States of America isn’t communist China, so any stake the government takes on behalf of American taxpayers MUST ALWAYS be non-voting.
Finally, some companies are too far gone and are just meant to die. Yes, we’re talking about Intel whose ex-CEO Paul Ottelini made a potentially fatal decision not to take up Steve Jobs on his offer to develop the microprocessor for the original iPhone. One big mistake like that can take down a company. Intel is an also-ran today. Propping up such companies with American taxpayers’ money only prolongs the inevitable.
Death is very likely the single best invention of Life. It is Life’s change agent. It clears out the old to make way for the new. – Steve Jobs
Please help support MacDailyNews — and enjoy subscriber-only articles, comments, chat, and more — by subscribing to our Substack: macdailynews.substack.com. Thank you!
Support MacDailyNews at no extra cost to you by using this link to shop at Amazon.
There is a reason Intel is losing money…
Clearly the orange skinned anti-Christ never got that email and if he decided it was too much reading to comprehend so he deleted it.
and clearly the MAGA cult never got that email about state-sponsored socialism…
And Queue the Looney Tunes music for Returning Caller” 🙂
communism. a political theory derived from Karl Marx, advocating class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs
socialism. a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole
capitalism. an economic and political system in which a country’s trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit
Both George W. Bush and Barack Obama took stakes in GM. Trump has just following Obama’s lead in this. Eventually, the government sold off its stake.
Not the same game: Trump is manipulating it before making personnal profits!
that stake was related/linked to a loan to GM. So not the same as the socialist deal with the dictator
Capitalism isn’t a system. It is merely what free people do naturally. It is the free trade of goods and services. Nobody controls it. No controller is necessary.
No matter how you look at this, it is problematic. Intel has had two decades of incompetent decision making, so buying its stock (and artificially driving up the price) is not going to fix its problems. Sure, the government should not just throw money at companies because they represent a “strategic” industry, but how do you avoid…
Intel making decisions for political rather than commercial considerations
Intel’s board prioritizing government interests over their fiduciary duties
Other companies being pressured to purchase Intel products, weakening their long-term position.
Disadvantaging the competitive position of other companies
Incentivizing the misallocation of private capital
As a business deal, this is better than a bailout. And no, it isn’t socialist to own 10% of non-voting stock in a company. However, I do see it as potentially problematic. We don’t want to create precedent that can back-fire badly going forward. Let’s assume (this will make the libs on hear froth at the mouth) that Trump has 100% good intentions, and wants to help a major company out, and bring good money back to the country… That may not be the case 3, 7, 50 or 100 years from now when someone with bad intentions is in power, and they start making demands on these companies… it could be a slippery slope.