Sources: the US is lobbying the Netherlands to ban ASML from selling its older deep ultraviolet lithography systems for making less-advanced chips to China
The US is pushing the Netherlands to ban ASML Holding NV from selling to China mainstream technology essential in making a large chunk …
Bloomberg
Context & Ripple Effects
The reported U.S. push targets a layer of ASML equipment below the most advanced tools, at a time when China is reportedly adapting older DUV systems for advanced smartphone and AI chips. It begins an export-control dispute that later coverage shows moving toward planned Dutch controls on chipmaking-equipment exports and proposed limits on immersion DUV tools.
The policy tension has persisted rather than resolved: the Netherlands later permitted some ASML exports after lobbying amid weak demand elsewhere, while more recent coverage describes Dutch resistance to further U.S. restrictions on immersion DUV machines.
First-order effects
ASML's China sales of older DUV systems would depend on the Netherlands accepting the U.S. request, placing its access to a mainstream equipment market under a new licensing or prohibition risk.
Chinese chipmakers relying on imported ASML DUV tools would face a tighter route to adding or upgrading equipment, including systems reportedly being retrofitted for more advanced production.
Second-order effects
China's reported requirement that chipmakers use at least 50% domestically made equipment for new capacity gives local tool suppliers a stronger opening if ASML shipments are curtailed, accelerating export-control substitution.
If controls extend from the most advanced lithography tools to older DUV equipment, the practical boundary of semiconductor export policy shifts from restricting frontier machines to constraining upgrade paths built on mature tools.
The recurring Dutch-U.S. dispute suggests enforcement will increasingly hinge on allied licensing decisions and on whether China can substitute domestic equipment for restricted imports.
The trend: Semiconductor export controls are broadening from denying leading-edge tools to limiting how mature equipment can be upgraded or substituted in China's chip supply chain.
The US is again trying to strongarm a trade embargo on chipmaking gear to China and here's my question: How are you a free-trade, liberal nation if you engage in the same sort of authoritarian protectionism you accuse others of? https://www.bloomberg.com/...
Exactly this. Hugely important 👇 “The US is pushing the Netherlands to ban ASML Holding NV from selling to China mainstream technology essential in making a large chunk of the world's chips” https://www.bloomberg.com/...
Breaking: The US wants $ASML to stop selling critical chipmaking equipment to China. This makes sense as some of this manufacturing gear could give China a significant lead on semiconductor technology they wouldn't otherwise have access to.
I'd assumed this was common knowledge as analysts are always talking about it. Either way, it's a super interesting issue; China can't build the most advanced chips without ASML's tools https://www.bloomberg.com/...
“Lithography equipment is the most difficult equipment for China to replace when it comes to semiconductor production. Without access to foreign DUV lithography equipment, the progress of China's chip industry could come to a halt.” https://www.bloomberg.com/...
The slow motion economic war continues... (and we all know the real reason the U.S. is strangling access to ASML tech is to slow China's acquisition of ASIC machines for Bitcoin mining... 😉 @brian_trollz) https://www.bloomberg.com/...
this information delivers two message: 1. China's chip-making industy is making a great leap forward, but in low/middle end. 2. China's domestic DUV is about to break through, that's why ASML is trying to make the last money
Bad move from the USA. I totally understand export controls on @ASMLcompany EUV machines to China, as it is a military export control avoiding to advance China's hypersonic missile capabilities. But export controls on DUV machines is not reasonable https://www.bloomberg.com/...
Not sure this makes sense. Seems to encourage action on Taiwan. Wouldn't we want to discourage it? How much time do we think we are buying? https://twitter.com/...