Intel Spars with EU Regulators Over $421.4 Million Antitrust Fine 

Intel's logo is pictured during preparations at the CeBit computer fair, which will open its doors to the public on March 20, at the fairground in Hanover, Germany, March 19, 2017. (Reuters)
Intel's logo is pictured during preparations at the CeBit computer fair, which will open its doors to the public on March 20, at the fairground in Hanover, Germany, March 19, 2017. (Reuters)
TT
20

Intel Spars with EU Regulators Over $421.4 Million Antitrust Fine 

Intel's logo is pictured during preparations at the CeBit computer fair, which will open its doors to the public on March 20, at the fairground in Hanover, Germany, March 19, 2017. (Reuters)
Intel's logo is pictured during preparations at the CeBit computer fair, which will open its doors to the public on March 20, at the fairground in Hanover, Germany, March 19, 2017. (Reuters)

US chipmaker Intel on Friday sparred with EU antitrust regulators over a 376 million euro ($421.4 million) fine levied nearly two years ago for excluding rivals from the market, arguing that it was disproportionate and unfair.

The case dates to 2009 when the European Commission slapped a then-record 1.06 billion euro fine on Intel for blocking rival Advanced Micro Devices.

The tech giant managed to convince the General Court, Europe's second-highest, to scrap the penalty in 2022.

Judges however agreed with one part of the Commission's 2009 decision, prompting the EU competition watchdog to re-impose a 376 million euro fine for payments made by Intel to HP, Acer and Lenovo to halt or delay rival products between November 2002 and December 2006.

Such practices are known as naked restrictions and are frowned on by antitrust regulators. Intel then took its case back to the General Court, asking for the new EU decision and penalty to be annulled.

Intel's lawyer said the EU competition enforcer had not taken into account the limited scope of the violations related to HP, Acer and Lenovo.

"The Commission cannot sustain a finding that there was an overall strategy to foreclose competitors from the entire x86 chips market. These were narrow, tactical moves," Daniel Beard told the panel of five judges.

"The naked restrictions can't be treated as in effect of equal weight to each of the pricing practices which were overturned. Nor do they have the same sort of cumulative effect or strategic weight. They, on their own, don't sustain an overall, market-wide strategy finding," he said.

Beard said the Commission had imposed "a wholly disproportionate and unfair" fine.

The EU watchdog rejected Intel's arguments.

"The Commission correctly applied the finding guidelines, and when in doubt, opted in Intel's favor," its lawyer Pedro Caro de Sousa said.

"The fine is clearly not disproportionate to the seriousness of Intel's conduct, amounting to 1% of its turnover on the last year of the infringement, and about 0.5% of its turnover today," he said.

Both Intel and the Commission called on the court to resolve the issue by setting the size of the fine. A ruling is expected in the coming months.

The case is 09:30 T-1129/23 Intel Corporation v Commission.



US May Target Samsung, Hynix, TSMC Operations in China

A man walks past the logo of Samsung Electronics displayed outside the company's Seocho building in Seoul on April 30, 2025. (Photo by Jung Yeon-je / AFP)
A man walks past the logo of Samsung Electronics displayed outside the company's Seocho building in Seoul on April 30, 2025. (Photo by Jung Yeon-je / AFP)
TT
20

US May Target Samsung, Hynix, TSMC Operations in China

A man walks past the logo of Samsung Electronics displayed outside the company's Seocho building in Seoul on April 30, 2025. (Photo by Jung Yeon-je / AFP)
A man walks past the logo of Samsung Electronics displayed outside the company's Seocho building in Seoul on April 30, 2025. (Photo by Jung Yeon-je / AFP)

The US Department of Commerce is considering revoking authorizations granted in recent years to global chipmakers Samsung, SK Hynix and TSMC, making it more difficult for them to receive US goods and technology at their plants in China, according to people familiar with the matter.

The chances of the United States withdrawing the authorizations are unclear. But with such a move, it would be harder for foreign chipmakers to operate in China, where they produce semiconductors used in a wide range of industries, Reuters said.

A White House official said the United States was "just laying the groundwork" in case the truce reached between the two countries fell apart. But the official expressed confidence that the trade agreement would go forward and that rare earths would flow from China, as agreed.

"There is currently no intention of deploying this tactic," the official said. "It's another tool we want in our toolbox in case either this agreement falls through or any other catalyst throws a wrench in bilateral relations."

Shares of US chip equipment makers that supply plants in China fell when the Wall Street Journal first reported the news earlier on Friday. KLA Corp dropped 2.4%, Lam Research fell 1.9% and Applied Materials sank 2%. Shares of Micron, a major competitor to Samsung and SK Hynix in the memory chip sector, rose 1.5%.

A TSMC spokesman declined comment. Samsung and Hynix did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Lam Research, KLA and Applied Materials did not immediately respond, either.

In October 2022, after the United States placed sweeping restrictions on US chipmaking equipment to China, it gave foreign manufacturers like Samsung and Hynix letters authorizing them to receive goods.

In 2023 and 2024, the companies received what is known as Validated End User status in order to continue the trade.

A company with VEU status is able to receive designated goods from a US company without the supplier obtaining multiple export licenses to ship to them. VEU status enables entities to receive US-controlled products and technologies "more easily, quickly and reliably," as the Commerce Department website puts it.

The VEU authorizations come with conditions, a person familiar with the matter said, including prohibitions on certain equipment and reporting requirements.

“Chipmakers will still be able to operate in China," a Commerce Department spokesperson said in a statement when asked about the possible revocations. "The new enforcement mechanisms on chips mirror licensing requirements that apply to other semiconductor companies that export to China and ensure the United States has an equal and reciprocal process.”

Industry sources said that if it became more difficult for US semiconductor equipment companies to ship to foreign multinationals, it would only help domestic Chinese competitors.

"It’s a gift," one said.