Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Monday, August 11, 2025

In a highly unusual arrangement with President Trump, the companies are expected to kick 15 percent of what they make in China to the U.S. government.

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

Nvidia and AMD agreed to pay 15% of their revenues from chip sales to China to the US government as part of a deal with the Trump administration to secure export licenses, the Financial Times reported Sunday

[image or embed]

-- Bloomberg News (@bloomberg.com) Aug 10, 2025 at 5:40 PM

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

... In a highly unusual arrangement ...

Significant understatement.

#1 | Posted by LampLighter at 2025-08-11 11:55 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Nvidia, AMD to pay 15% of China chip sale revenue to US, official says
www.reuters.com

... The deal is extremely rare for the U.S. and marks President Donald Trump's latest intervention in corporate decision-making, after pressuring executives to invest in American manufacturing and demanding new Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan resign over ties to Chinese companies. ...

The official did not know when or how the agreement with the chip companies would be implemented, but said the administration would be in compliance with the law.

The U.S. Constitution prohibits Congress from laying taxes and duties on articles exported from any state. The Export Clause applies to taxes and duties, not user fees. ...

'SLIPPERY SLOPE'

Still, analysts and experts questioned the logic of resuming sales if the chips could pose a national security risk.

"Decisions on export licenses should be determined by national security considerations and the tradeoffs of U.S. policy goals, not a revenue-creating possibility," said Martin Chorzempa, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, an independent research institution.

"What it ends up creating is an incentive to control things, to then extract a payment, rather than controlling things because we're actually concerned about the risk to national security."

U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said last month the planned resumption of sales of the AI chips was part of U.S. negotiations with China to get rare earths and described the H20 as Nvidia's "fourth-best chip" in an interview with CNBC. ...



#2 | Posted by LampLighter at 2025-08-11 12:28 PM | Reply

Kick back is the exact term for this and it is illegal.

#3 | Posted by Nixon at 2025-08-11 12:48 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." " Benito Mussolini

#4 | Posted by qcp at 2025-08-11 01:04 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Kick back is the exact term for this and it is illegal.
#3 | Posted by Nixon

This is like calling taxes, theft.

#5 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-08-11 01:16 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#4 not a fan of corporate taxes?

#6 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-08-11 01:16 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

In a highly unusual arrangement...
Posted by retort

That's an interesting way to describe extortion.

#7 | Posted by johnny_hotsauce at 2025-08-11 01:41 PM | Reply

#7: images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com

#8 | Posted by C0RI0LANUS at 2025-08-11 02:29 PM | Reply

This is sort of like a reverse tariff, where the government is taxing exports as well as imports.

OCU

#9 | Posted by OCUser at 2025-08-11 02:37 PM | Reply

What does the constitution say about this?

Article 1, Section 9

"No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State."

Yep pretty damn clear

#10 | Posted by truthhurts at 2025-08-12 06:18 PM | Reply

A reminder to you ------- magat scum -------- morons.

If this 15% ISN'T a tax then it is profit sharing, you know government take over of private industry, you know-socialism.

------- magat scum SUCK

#11 | Posted by truthhurts at 2025-08-12 06:21 PM | Reply

@#11 ... If this 15% ISN'T a tax then it is profit sharing, you know government take over of private industry, you know-socialism. ...

Pres Trump originally stated national security was the reason to limit Nvidia's chips export to China.

Now, suddenly, that reason has taken a back seat but not completely removed) with this profit sharing agreement.

What's next, Pres Trump agreeing to sell to China aircraft carriers providing the manufacturers pay a 20% ~export tariff?~


#12 | Posted by LampLighter at 2025-08-12 06:42 PM | Reply

What does the constitution say about this?

Article 1, Section 9

"No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State."

#10 | Posted by truthhurts at 2025-08-12 06:18 PM

This actually applies to states taxing goods moving between states. It does not apply to goods moving out of the country. That being said, I do believe that it's shortsighted to impose taxes on exports. Imports are bad enough, but taxing exports just makes American goods more expensive from the get go.

OCU

#13 | Posted by OCUser at 2025-08-12 08:37 PM | Reply

@#13 .. That being said, I do believe that it's shortsighted to impose taxes on exports ...

I do not disagree.

But, that aside.

My concern here seems to be Pres Trump lowering security requirements in return for companies paying the US to be able to export their products.

Ya know, that whole "deal" thing.

Were those security requirements bogus in the first place, stated just to get a deal? If so, why does Pres trump seem to be so cavalier about the security of the Country?



#14 | Posted by LampLighter at 2025-08-12 08:45 PM | Reply

This is like calling taxes, theft.

#5 | POSTED BY ONEIRONAUT

Onestupidpieceofs*^% rides again.

#15 | Posted by jpw at 2025-08-12 09:03 PM | Reply

This actually applies to states taxing goods moving between states. It does not apply to goods moving out of the country. That being said, I do believe that it's shortsighted to impose taxes on exports. Imports are bad enough, but taxing exports just makes American goods more expensive from the get go.
OCU

#13 | Posted by OCUser

that is simply incorrect

The US Constitution (Article 1, Section 9, Clause 5) prohibits the federal government from imposing taxes or duties on exports. This means that the US doesn't directly tax goods or services when they are shipped to other countries.

#16 | Posted by truthhurts at 2025-08-12 09:37 PM | Reply

Chips are regulated. It's a "licensing fee".

Or unconstitutional export tax, depending on your pov.

#17 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2025-08-13 10:56 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy

Drudge Retort