Author Archives: beatriceco

TSMC Suppliers from Taiwan Team Up to Survive in the United States

On the evening of March 17, Arizona Governor Katie Hobbs and U.S. Department of Commerce officials hosted a reception at the W Hotel in Taipei for members of various Taiwanese industry associations, including the Taiwan Electrical and Electronic Manufacturers’ Association, the Taiwan Listed Companies Association, and the National Innovation and Entrepreneurship Association. Representatives from the American Institute in Taiwan, the de facto U.S. embassy, were also in attendance.“They came to deliver a message: TSMC is coming to the U.S.—and increasing its investment. So, we hope you suppliers will come too,” explained a senior executive from a semiconductor supply chain company.

Just a week before Hobbs’ visit, TSMC Chairman and CEO C.C. Wei appeared alongside President Donald Trump at the White House to announce an additional US$100 billion investment in the U.S., bringing the total to US$165 billion. The plan includes six advanced chip fabs and two packaging plants in the U.S., positioning Arizona as a dual base alongside Taiwan for manufacturing semiconductors below the 5-nanometer node.

Survival Is the Top Priority

Will Taiwan’s suppliers follow TSMC to the United States? Interviews with various companies reveal that scale and cost are decisive factors.

In 2020, when TSMC began construction in Arizona, the first to follow were electronics-grade chemical manufacturers. Sunlit Fluo & Chemical, for instance, planned to produce high-purity hydrofluoric acid next to the TSMC fab. Chang Chun Petrochemical and LCY Chemical Corp. acquired land in Casa Grande, roughly 100 kilometers from Phoenix.

However, as construction at TSMC’s Arizona fab progressed slowly, initial production capacity remained just one-third of that in Taiwan. As a result, many chemical suppliers have yet to scale up operations.

“The first question we ask is: can we survive there?” says the COO of a supplier. After TSMC announced its expansion, the mood shifted. Sunlit Fluo purchased additional land, and small- and medium-sized suppliers began considering joint ventures to mitigate risk.

TSS Holdings: An Alliance of Eight Companies

Chueh Sheng-Che, chairman of both Yeedex Electronic Corporation and TSS Holdings, has brought together eight semiconductor-related companies under the TSS umbrella. These include Gudeng Precision (EUV pods), SAA Symptek Automation Asia (automation equipment), and Microprogram Information (ICT design). They share Yeedex’s U.S.-based offices and warehouses to support local customers.

Yeedex’s rubber sealing rings, though small, are critical to semiconductor manufacturing. Monthly production is shipped by air to Phoenix, then delivered by truck within 30 minutes. Chueh notes that setting up a plant in the U.S. costs three times as much as in Taiwan, and that forming alliances offers a more controllable way to manage risk.

Topco Scientific: Building a Shared Platform

“Everyone used to take a wait-and-see approach. But now, not having a plan is no longer an option,” says Charles Lee, executive director of Topco Group, which acts as an agent for Japanese semiconductor materials.

(Source: TSC)

Topco established operations in Phoenix as early as 2022. Though initially unprofitable due to delays in TSMC’s production, the company began breaking even in 2024.

Topco now serves as a platform for over 10 Taiwanese equipment manufacturers, including Hong Plastic Technology and All Ring Tech. Though Hong Plastic lacks its own U.S. plant, it uses Topco’s on-site engineers for installation and maintenance, enabling local customer service.

Topco has also acquired land and plans to co-invest in a new facility with other Taiwanese firms. “It’s about securing a future position,” Lee says. If Taiwanese companies hesitate, U.S.-based service providers might step in to fill the gap.

The U.S. Wants More Than Just Manufacturing

TSMC built a full local supply chain in Taiwan to ensure fast and responsive support. Now, that supply chain is beginning to shift overseas.

(Source: Chiu Chien-ying)

Isaiah Research analyst Chuang Da-wei explains that while the U.S. previously focused on building basic manufacturing capabilities (under Trump 1.0 and Biden), Trump 2.0 is emphasizing market influence and long-term investment commitments.

Jimmy Goodrich, former vice president at the Semiconductor Industry Association and now a senior advisor at the RAND Corporation, says the U.S. knows it can’t and doesn’t need to achieve full self-sufficiency—it would simply be too costly. However, the U.S. does need supply chain “node capabilities” from upstream to downstream.

His guiding principle: “derisk without decoupling.” He also reveals that Washington is exploring the idea of working with Taiwan on mature-node semiconductor processes. While not finalized, it is now part of long-term planning.

The underlying aim: ensure domestic manufacturing capabilities in case of disruptions in Taiwan. The joint press conference between Trump and Wei was meant to send exactly that message.

Taiwanese Suppliers Plan Strategically

Taiwanese companies are proceeding cautiously. A general manager at one equipment company estimates it takes about three years to complete a new fab. Even with TSMC’s expanded investment, Trump’s second term may see only the third Arizona plant reach production, with the fourth just breaking ground.

TrendForce estimates that by 2030, only 6% of TSMC’s production capacity will be in the U.S., while Taiwan will retain or exceed 80%. “The current market size isn’t enough to justify building a factory abroad. Just breaking even is tough, let alone making a profit,” the executive says.

Still, some view this as a chance to grow. Lee believes that by going abroad, Taiwanese companies can overcome domestic constraints such as limited water, electricity, and talent. Their overseas expansion, he says, “can be seen as an extension of Taiwan’s economic power.”

The next five years will be pivotal for Taiwan’s semiconductor supply chain transformation. The ability of Taiwanese firms to strengthen their international operations and technical capacity will determine whether they can continue to thrive amid rising geopolitical risks.

Have you read?

Translated by Susanne GanzUploaded by Fiona Lin

Rocket Lab USA (NasdaqCM:RKLB) Secures US$5.6B U.S. Space Force Contract Despite 12% Weekly Decline

Rocket Lab USA was recently selected for a significant U.S. Space Force contract valued at up to $5.6 billion. Despite this positive development, the company’s shares experienced an 11.53% decline over the past week. The market, overall, faced a 3.4% drop amid broader economic concerns such as impending tariffs and weaker-than-expected manufacturing data, which likely exacerbated pressures on smaller tech and aerospace firms like Rocket Lab. Such market sentiments overshadowed positive news, including Rocket Lab’s successful satellite deployments, contributing to investor caution and influencing the observed share price decrease against a fluctuating market backdrop.Be aware that Rocket Lab USA is showing 2 warning signs in our investment analysis.NasdaqCM:RKLB Revenue & Expenses Breakdown as at Apr 2025Find companies with promising cash flow potential yet trading below their fair value.AdvertisementAdvertisementAdvertisementRocket Lab USA’s shares have shown impressive growth, delivering a total return of 338.24% over the past year. This substantial increase outperformed both the US Aerospace & Defense industry and the broader US market, which returned 16.5% and 6.1%, respectively. Several pivotal developments have played a role in this performance. Rocket Lab’s selection for the U.S. Space Force contract, valued up to $5.6 billion, has been a significant driver of investor interest, showcasing the company’s expanding role in national security missions. Meanwhile, the company’s advancements in satellite technology, such as the launch of the Advanced Satellite Dispenser and improvements in software capabilities, have enhanced its offerings and operational efficiency.Additionally, Rocket Lab secured a mutual agreement with NASA for Neutron launch services, further cementing its strategic partnerships in the aerospace sector. However, a class action lawsuit in California regarding alleged misleading statements on launch schedules introduced some uncertainty. Despite this, Rocket Lab remains focused on growth, as reflected in its robust revenue guidance for Q1 2025, forecasted between US$117 million and US$123 million. This focus on innovation and strategic expansion continues to underpin its remarkable market performance.Evaluate Rocket Lab USA’s historical performance by accessing our past performance report. This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned.AdvertisementAdvertisementAdvertisementCompanies discussed in this article include NasdaqCM:RKLB.Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team@simplywallst.com

The European Union wants more defense autonomy from the United States. But they still want a partnership with Washington.

Growing concerns about the U.S. relationship with NATO allies—fueled by Donald Trump’s overtures to Russia and attacks on Ukraine and Denmark—have spurred European officials to biweekly meetings about replacing American defense goods, according to a European diplomat with knowledge of the discussions. But those increasingly intense discussions have highlighted that it wouldn’t be easy, fast, or cheap.“Nobody actually wants to be autonomous. They all want to keep the ties with the Americans. Always have and always will,” the diplomat said.French president Emmanuel Macron described the urgency of the situation in March: “I want to believe that the United States will remain at our side. But we must be ready if that is not the case.” No U.S. representatives have participated in the meetings thus far, according to the diplomat. But the engagements are helping to flesh out details for increased cooperation—such as which nations can produce which arms—and have led to four higher-level meetings between European leaders about joint weapons development, support for Ukraine, and other “big-picture” questions, the diplomat said. In March, the EU published a 22-page white paper on closing capability gaps. The plan, agreed to by European Union members, includes a joint commitment to spend 800 billion euro by 2030 on joint defense capabilities via a 150-billion-euro loan instrument, debt sold on capital markets, and other vehicles. Big increases in European defense spending align with what Trump has been urging since his first administration: more European spending on defense. It’s an idea NATO leaders have also been championing as vital to the strength of the alliance, and something many Eastern European countries have long called for.  Former President Joe Biden’s national security team saw bigger European defense budgets as a win for U.S. defense manufacturers, since European countries supporting Ukraine would need to purchase at least some equipment from U.S. defense firms—and that support would not come at the expense of U.S. taxpayers. A plan to continue support for Ukraine with vital U.S. weapons that took shape in the final weeks of the last administration was conceived as a way to give Trump an easy political win and continue to support the country fending off invasion. But the Oval Office spectacle with Ukraine’s president in February, combined with recent White House rhetoric on Denmark, and the decision to briefly halt U.S. intelligence sharing with Ukraine, have fractured European leaders’ trust in American leadership, the diplomat said: “Those have absolutely been turning points.” The fracturing relationship has also weakened the allure of U.S. defense goods, as other nations worry that the White House, or individual defense contractors like Elon Musk, can change military outcomes based on personal political or financial incentives, the diplomat said. “What if there’s a conflict in Europe and the same happens but for France, Germany, Denmark, or Norway? ‘Hey guys, if you don’t make a deal, there’s no more spare parts for your F-35s or no more ammo for Patriot [missile batteries?]’ Unreliability or unpredictability is not just poison for NATO. It’s also poison for industry.” While European leaders are increasingly wary of Trump, they don’t actually want to cut the United States out. The preference is still very much for  collaboration, Estonian Prime Minister Kristen Michal told Defense One in an email. “Trade between the EU and the U.S. has more than doubled over the past decade. The European Union is a reliable source of critical supplies to the United States, while being the largest buyer of the United States’ natural gas and oil. Millions of jobs in the U.S. depend on the EU,” he said. “The entire free world benefits from the cooperation between the EU and the USA. No one wins in a trade war or by ignoring each other’s interests, especially in defence. The United States is the EU’s largest export partner and second-largest import partner.”An Eastern European defense official emphasized this point as well, signaling support for the “Trumpian” notion of larger EU defense budgets and greater European defense independence. But they also expressed a longing for a better partnership with the United States toward those mutual goals. “We are also looking to strengthen and enhance the capabilities of European defense. But we don’t want to build walls where they are not necessary,” the official said.There’s a big reason not to build those walls, said Dan Darling, vice president of market insights at Forecast International.  He said European defense independence by 2030 is unlikely, or at least very difficult, due to industrial gaps. “Europe is critically short of key enablers—command-and-control, long-range strike capability (crucial for suppression of enemy air defenses) intelligence-surveillance-reconnaissance, artillery systems, drones and counter-drone systems, air-defense, airborne transport, logistical tail, and sufficient munitions,” he said.A State Department official who spoke to Defense One via email also downplayed the political rift and emphasized the importance of U.S. defense companies to Europe. “They bring advanced technologies, innovation, and competitive pricing that enhances Europe’s defense capabilities with the necessary speed and scale. Maintaining NATO standards and interoperability as the foundation of Alliance security requires that all Allies work together on building our capabilities,” the official said. “The EU claims they want to strengthen European security, yet their exclusion of U.S. companies from European defense projects would come at the detriment of their own security.”One difficult-to-replace U.S. capability is satellite-based intelligence; the ability to see where Russians are staging missile and other attacks has proven essential to Ukraine’s defense. An independent defense industry analyst from the United States said it is also extremely unlikely that Europe would be able to develop its own space-based satellite capability by 2030. Europe is also in the midst of a demographic crisis of shrinking populations. Even with advances in autonomy that may allow European operators on the ground to do more with less, “any army will require an expansion in the number of soldiers to operate the new kit,” Darling said.  “Therefore, any money spent on growing capabilities will have to go toward recruitment. Recruitment across Europe has proven difficult over the years.”Then there is the “patchwork” quality of European defense companies, as the U.K. based Royal United Services Union, or RUSI, think tank noted in March 2023. European governments are still incentivized to look out for their nations’ companies. RUSI pointed out that despite a 2020 EU pledge for countries to put 25 percent of their defense budgets toward collaborative investments, the actual number achieved was 11 percent. “This limited cooperation has, in turn, resulted in critical defence capability shortfalls, hampered interoperability among European armies and created economic losses due to unrealised economies of scale,” RUSI notes.Darling said Europe is simply too diverse, with too many countries with wildly different relationships with Washington and  Moscow, to reach simple, fast agreements on such big issues. “Asking 28-30 countries to be in constant alignment is naturally hard. Each country views their own security concerns and relations with Washington differently,” he said. However, a new major geopolitical crisis, such as a Russian advancement on a NATO ally, could change that dynamic, forcing European governments to work together in ways that today would be politically difficult. German intelligence services reportedly believe Russian President Vladimir Putin will attempt some sort of action against a NATO ally by the end of the decade. But, according to European media reporting, Lithuanian intelligence services believe Russia doesn’t have the means to carry out such a plan. Darling is also skeptical that Russia would attempt an attack on a NATO ally now, regardless of Putin’s ambitions. “What is the likelihood Russia has enough bandwidth to invade the Baltics while it is struggling to carry out its current invasion of Ukraine?” he said.Still, a very different crisis might emerge to accelerate a painful European-U.S. divorce: a U.S. attack on Greenland. But sources were reluctant to engage on that possibility. “I don’t want to speculate on such a topic. Denmark and the U.S. are NATO allies, close partners, and this relationship offers broad opportunities for mutual cooperation, discussions, and ensuring security in the Arctic,” said Estonia’s Prime Minister.Remarked the European defense official: “That would affect the whole international rules-based order. That would be a huge step and difference from today’s world.”Note: Forecast International shares a parent company with Defense One.