Former US President Donald Trump announced on Friday that the federal government has acquired a 10 percent stake in semiconductor giant Intel, marking a dramatic departure from traditional American economic policy. The deal, he suggested, may be the first in a series of government investments in major industries.
The $9 billion stake, comprised of non-voting shares, was secured through a conversion of unpaid construction grants originally allocated under the 2023 Chips Act. The legislation had been intended to bolster domestic semiconductor production and reduce reliance on foreign suppliers. Trump, however, framed the move as a strategic business transaction.
“I will make deals like that for our country all day long,” Trump declared on his Truth Social platform, vowing to support companies that engage in what he described as “lucrative deals with the United States.”
The announcement has stirred controversy across the political spectrum. Critics argue the intervention amounts to state ownership in private enterprise—something conservatives have long opposed. “If socialism is government owning the means of production, wouldn’t the government owning part of Intel be a step toward socialism?” said Senator Rand Paul, one of the few Republicans to openly criticize the decision.
Economists have also raised concerns about the precedent. “You’re looking at investment decisions now being made on the basis of politics, not economics,” warned Tad DeHaven, an analyst at the libertarian Cato Institute. He argued the move risks distorting markets and could open the door to corruption.
Supporters, however, claim the decision aligns with national security priorities. Robert Atkinson, head of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, said the policy could ensure greater control over a vital sector. Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, a self-described socialist, also offered cautious backing, saying taxpayers should share in the profits of companies benefiting from federal subsidies.
The move draws parallels to the 2009 financial crisis, when the US government took temporary stakes in General Motors, Citigroup, and AIG to prevent collapse. But unlike those cases, Intel is not facing financial distress, making the purchase more controversial.
Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick has hinted that the administration could pursue similar deals with defense and aerospace contractors, while economic adviser Kevin Hassett floated the idea of a US sovereign wealth fund modeled on those in China and Gulf monarchies.
The announcement has rattled free-market conservatives but underscored Trump’s willingness to blend business and politics. “At the end of the day, it’s Trumpism,” said DeHaven, noting that the former president’s economic approach defies conventional labels.
Whether the Intel deal proves a one-off or the first step toward broader state-backed capitalism, it has already reopened a national debate about the proper role of government in private enterprise—and the future of American economic policy.
