Nvidia Can Sell H200 Chips To China For 25% US Cut (axios.com) 95
The Trump administration will allow Nvidia to resume selling H200 chips to China, but only if the U.S. government takes a 25% cut. Axios reports: Trump said on Truth Social that he'll allow Nvidia to sell H200 chips -- the generation of chips before its current, more-advanced Blackwell lineup -- to China, with the U.S. government pocketing a quarter of the revenue. He said he would apply "the same approach to AMD, Intel, and other GREAT American Companies."
American defense hawks fear that China could use Nvidia chips to advance its military ambitions. Trump said Monday that the sales will be subject to "conditions that allow for continued strong National Security." The blockade remains in place for Nvidia's current generation of Blackwell chips, which will be replaced in the second half of 2026 by even more advanced Rubin chips. Huang said recently he was unsure if China would want the older chips. "We applaud President Trump's decision to allow America's chip industry to compete to support high paying jobs and manufacturing in America," Nvidia said in a statement. "Offering H200 to approved commercial customers, vetted by the Department of Commerce, strikes a thoughtful balance that is great for America."
American defense hawks fear that China could use Nvidia chips to advance its military ambitions. Trump said Monday that the sales will be subject to "conditions that allow for continued strong National Security." The blockade remains in place for Nvidia's current generation of Blackwell chips, which will be replaced in the second half of 2026 by even more advanced Rubin chips. Huang said recently he was unsure if China would want the older chips. "We applaud President Trump's decision to allow America's chip industry to compete to support high paying jobs and manufacturing in America," Nvidia said in a statement. "Offering H200 to approved commercial customers, vetted by the Department of Commerce, strikes a thoughtful balance that is great for America."
Is there even a veneer of plausibility here? (Score:5, Insightful)
So hear me out on this one (Score:5, Insightful)
So almost nobody hears about this and then the news cycle eats the attention of anyone who does and we all just move on and forget about it. Does that work for you?
In project 2025 they call it shock and awe. Everything is a distraction from the previous terrible thing Trump did and everything Trump does next is a distraction from whatever he's doing at the time. Meanwhile the economy is continuously collapsing due to mismanagement so you're too busy trying to keep your head above water to care about anything else.
Then you mix in a little voter suppression and the fact that a billionaire Trump sycophant just bought the company that controls all of our voting machines and maybe do a few hundred billion dollars of propaganda right before the election and Bob's your uncle Trump gets a third term or at least JD Vance gets his term.
Then we had 25% unemployment, world war III takes off and goes nuclear and we Fermi paradox ourselves. I don't think the billionaires are planning on that last one but I don't think they are thinking any of this through either. They're just too busy trying to set themselves up as feudal Kings.
Re: (Score:2)
Cox owns Axios. Try harder.
Re: (Score:3)
It seems to me that what makes it into the news cycle doesn't really matter. My news is absolutely clogged with stories about this administration that could have been scandalous enough to end an administration a few decades ago, like Americans have been gaslit into accepting almost anything. People might express outrage for a few hours, especially on social media, but it doesn't seem to change anything, and then there's just another scandal some hours later. It's like int
Re: (Score:3)
The Billionaires do not care about America. They figure they can live anywhere their money will take them. Selling America is just another profit making enterprise for them.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I think that the billionaires are planning for that last one. Bill Gates is buying up large tracts of farm land, and most of the tech oligarchs are building huge compounds for themselves that probably have huge doomsday bunkers in the basement. Their families will be OK when World War 3 or the AI apocalypse happens.
Re:Is there even a veneer of plausibility here? (Score:5, Insightful)
So, in order to protect against possible military applications(known for their cost-sensitivity...); we are making the sale legal as long as El Presidente gets his cut? That's in character, sure; but what's the paper-thin excuse for that being a cogent policy idea?
Cogent sailed a while ago. Here's a quote from Trump announces $12 billion bailout plan for farmers hit by trade war with China [youtube.com] (12m:16s) :
And this money would not be possible without tariffs. The tariffs are taken in, you know, hundreds of billions of dollars and we're giving some up to the farmers ...
Noting that's technically true, but nonsensical: Farmers need a bailout because of tariff / trade war that Trump started and he says bailout wouldn't be possible without the tariffs -- which are paid by U.S. companies and consumers. Once again, solving, or at least mitigating, a problem he started and proud of it. For example, China was buying tons of soybeans from the U.S. before he imposed tariffs, now they're buying them from Brazil.
Re: Is there even a veneer of plausibility here? (Score:1)
"Rabo cites a new trade war with China would drop soybean prices $1.50 to $2 a bushel and reduce soybean planting by as many as 5 million acres." - Jan 7 2025
Does the higher price per bushel of soybeans now contradict that narrative?
And, even if 5 million acres were not planted due to lack of demand, if that represents only $3 billion, at most, by how much will Trump's $12 billion exceed losses from tariffs?
Re: (Score:2)
Not to worry those farmers will cash their checks and then sell their land to build data centers over the next 12 months.
At least those rural areas might finally get internet, that is assuming there is any RAM left to make devices that can get online.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah the prices have gone up. But thats due to input tarifs. The thing thats squeezing US farmers, other than losing all their export markets, is that all their machinery and fertilizer costs have skyrocketed. A combine harvester is a huge investment, not just in initial outlay but continued maintainence. Couple that with fertilizer costs soaring (some of that is due to the ukraine invasion but most of its tarifs) and the loss of an affordable workforce due to ICEs rampage, and its really bad days for farme
Re: (Score:2)
And this money would not be possible without tariffs. The tariffs are taken in, you know, hundreds of billions of dollars and we're giving some up to the farmers ...
Noting that's technically true, but nonsensical: Farmers need a bailout because of tariff / trade war that Trump started and he says bailout wouldn't be possible without the tariffs -- which are paid by U.S. companies and consumers. Once again, solving, or at least mitigating, a problem he started and proud of it. For example, China was buying tons of soybeans from the U.S. before he imposed tariffs, now they're buying them from Brazil.
Taxes are simply a form of economy shaping using redistribution of money. In this case, the tariffs took money from companies and will give them to farmers. Of course, the companies eventually pass along the tariff costs, so in essence Trump took money from consumers to give to farmers.
This sounds bad, but not compared to Trump gifting Argentina $20 billion so that Argentina could displace US soybean going to China. All this just to help prop up a fellow right-wing populist.
Re: (Score:2)
"Passing it along" is a mistaken concept. Sure, the companies will raise their prices but they'll also sell less and make less profit. So the owners, employees, and customers will all take a share of the loss.
Re: (Score:2)
Note that employees will be affected because of reduced raises, reduced bonuses, reduced ability to be hired, and probably even some spillover in the industry that makes it harder to change jobs. The costs of tariffs are diffuse, though I'd expect the customers and others are hit hardest.
Re:Is there even a veneer of plausibility here? (Score:4, Funny)
No, no, no, you're taking it the wrong way. This as a reverse tariff, a very powerful instrument, more powerful than any instrument, it is going to be paid by the big, bad, bad communist Gyna, which by the way is a great country that we can do a lot of business with and we do have a great relationship with Gyna they now respect us much more than ever, and at the same time this reverse tariff will MARA! Yes, that R stands there for "Rich".
Don't be so bitter that you dislike only because your bad, rotten people who don't like these great achievements and by the way the best ballroom that was ever built, and it is completely free and look at all those low, low prices everywhere in the greatest economy with all wars stopped.
Re: (Score:1)
That's la Presidenta, the feminine gender matters in his case. This is small potatoes though to his intention to throw WB to Kushner, the Arabs, and Ellison's Nazi sprog.
Re:Is there even a veneer of plausibility here? (Score:4, Insightful)
The same excuses to impose tariffs because "DRUGS!" while pardoning drug kingpins. Or sinking boats because "DRUG BOATS" while again, pardoning drug kingpins and smugglers.
The excuse is that its pay to play. Those drug king[ins paid Trump for pardons. China pays Trump for chips. As long as you're paying Trump, you're good.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like an export tax. (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm no lawyer but this sounds suspiciously like an export tax. I think Nvidia now has a solid case that A) it's illegal (only congress can tax stuff, right?) and that B) a ban is unwarranted because of the attempted illegal export tax.
Kinda seems like the grifter just shot himself in the foot again.
Re: Sounds like an export tax. (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Kinda seems like the grifter just shot himself in the foot again.
Shoes made of Kevlar as far as I can see. Keeps shooting himself in the foot, but keeps right on walking.
Re:Sounds like an export tax. (Score:5, Insightful)
Kinda seems like the grifter just shot himself in the foot again.
He suffers no consequence for anything and all the judges he appointed rule in his favor. Republicans could hold a vote tomorrow morning to end his little tariff tirade but they're massive pussies and won't.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
scrotums not pussies! Pussies can take a pounding - a scrotum on the otherhand.....
Re: Sounds like an export tax. (Score:2)
Obligatory hilter sketch:
https://youtu.be/Y1DWJQkOJew?s... [youtu.be]
Re: (Score:2)
My dog has a bag with no beans in it you insensitive clod.
Re: (Score:2)
Where did that BS come from? having balls doesn't do any good.
Aggression? yes that is connected; but the kind of sociopath aggression that is over the top requires mental illness not balls. Some courageous people "have balls" but that is courage not aggression. Plenty of descriptive words to use but this "man up" crap and "big balls" is idiotic too. Promoted by writers who suck at English lowering IQs with pop culture. Don't get me started on these "musicians" who can't even rhyme or are marketing / egoman
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Sounds like an export tax. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's quaint that you think the United States is still a republic. It's a monarchy, and Trump's handlers are likely moving currently to make sure that when Vance succeeds him, that the Executive branch and a Congress that will be, through the use of naked force if necessary, remain filled with Republican paper tigers to complement the paper tigers in the Supreme Court, settles into the oligarchy the Framers always really intended it to be. The military will largely be used to recreate the American hemispheric hegemony. The National Guard and ICE will be used as foot soldiers within the US to "secure" elections.
The morons that elected that diseased wicked and demented man have destroyed whatever the hell America was. As a Canadian, I can only hope we can withstand this hemispheric dominance and the raiding of our natural resources to feed the perverse desires of the child molesters, rapists, racists and psychopaths that have already taken control of the US.
Doubtless, I will be downvoted by the remaining MAGA crowd here. You know, the guys that pretended they refused to vote Democrat because Bernie wasn't made leader, but are to a man a pack of Brown Shirts eagerly awaiting the time when they imagine they can take part in the defenestration of American society.
Re: (Score:2)
(not disagreeing)
Re: (Score:3)
Americans are too corrupt and despotic to deserve anything but a despot who represents them. I'm in the minority now. He is not a king until he hands power down to his children. China is a republic too. Not having a king is just a republic. Many despots have existed and in a way are worse since they don't have a line of succession to attack like a monarchy.
Trump doesn't care if you are scum like him, only that he has the power to make you kiss his ass and do what you are told. He loves people to subjugate
Re: (Score:3)
Kinda seems like the grifter just shot himself in the foot again.
Hegseth double-tapped it for him. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
Kinda seems like the grifter just shot himself in the foot again.
Hegseth double-tapped it for him. :-)
Kegsdeath double-tapped it for him. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
I think Nvidia now has a solid case that A) it's illegal (only congress can tax stuff, right?) and that B) a ban is unwarranted because of the attempted illegal export tax.
I'm not sure NVIDIA will object. On the contrary, it appears they have welcomed Trump's new proposal. [livemint.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe but the corporate greed machine is never satisfied. After the first few shipments, they may cry foul.
Re: (Score:2)
No, you see, it's an emergency. The US is being invaded and the president is using his legally granted emergency powers to shake down, er, regulate the flow of trade to China. And deploy the US military against American citizens in American cities. And conduct extrajudicial murder.
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn't matter what the law says, the grifter will do whatever he likes. The "justice" dept won't stop him. Congress doesn't have the power, and certainly not now with the spineless worms in it. And if a court case ever does come up, he'll delay it all the way up to the Fascists on the Supreme Court who will find a way to give him what ever he wants. Our only hope now is that Alzheimer's takes him faster that his Leqembi drug can keep him from looning out on TV.....well, more so than he is currently.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think Nvidia now has a solid case that A) it's illegal (only congress can tax stuff, right?) and that B) a ban is unwarranted because of the attempted illegal export tax.
Only if NVidia chooses to make such a case. But they won't, because 1) NVidia gets to sell stuff that previously they couldn't, and 2) Huang (like the whole tech sector) is such best buds with the President these days.
Re: (Score:2)
Only if NVidia chooses to make such a case.
Greed is never satiated.
But they won't, because 1) NVidia gets to sell stuff that previously they couldn't,
After exports start, they will have established the basis that their product is not a threat to national security. This will give them all the leverage they need to file a suit against the US government.
2) Huang (like the whole tech sector) is such best buds with the President these days.
No because greed is never satiated.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So, the grift here is stock price manipulation. When they eventually get it overturned, its going to hit the news like they are getting a big windfall. Insiders will know this is going to happen before the rest of the market knows.
the real cost? (Score:5, Insightful)
Because national security is worth less than 25% of retail value!!
Now we're just haggling over the price (Score:5, Insightful)
Trump told us it was a matter of national security to ban selling these precious chips to China. Now he tells us 25% for the big guy can make that problem go away.
Sounds pretty cheap to me. So much for the Art of the Deal.
Re: (Score:3)
The trump principle has always been to get his cut, nevermind what this does to the value of the overall business. He literally sees no problem in destroying $100B of value if he gets a million or two out of it in cash in his pocket.
Too stupid to figure out a better way than what he did as a "mogul" when he swindled small businesses, he married his daughter to a shrewder figure, who could come up with the "creative" ways to arrange "presents" from Qatar and "investments" from Saudi Arabia and the meme shitc
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Now we're just haggling over the price (Score:5, Insightful)
I do not think it goes into his pocket. But last I read of it, it goes into a fund controlled by the President -- a slush fund, in olden terms.
Just as he does not personally own the US Steel golden shares which were the price for allowing the sale to the Japanese. But the President personally controls those shares, and he personally has veto over everything US Steel does.
One of the alleged differences between socialism and fascism is that a socialist government owns the means of production while a fascist government "merely" controls them. It's a distinction without a meaningful difference.
The big picture point is, he claimed banning the export of those chips to China was a matter of national security. Now it turns out that paying an unconstitutional 25% export tax into a fund controlled by the President makes the national security aspect vanish. There are names for this kind of corruption.
Re: (Score:2)
But last I read of it, it goes into a fund controlled by the President -- a slush fund, in olden terms.
Where did you read that? If it's true it would be momentous. A totally discretionary fund of $2-6B per year (based on nVidia's projections of selling $2-5B per quarter to China) would give the president enormous unchecked power.
I've spend some time searching and haven't found anything to substantiate this claim. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'd like to see where you got the idea from.
Re: (Score:2)
A totally discretionary fund of $2-6B per year (based on nVidia's projections of selling $2-5B per quarter to China) would give the president enormous unchecked power.
He already has unchecked power.
Re: (Score:2)
I know you don't like him, but such hyperbole doesn't benefit debate or your mental health. It does make you look bad.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't remember now, other than not being some hysterical TDS-ridden pundit. It may have been what was planned then, it may have been the kind of hints Trump likes flicking out, I don't remember. If you say it isn't now, I'll give that more credence, but everything Trump does changes daily.
Re: (Score:2)
It may have been more useful to have already known that it would not be possible for Trump to do what you described. Congress would have to create that fund. The President can only direct funds at his discretion if the Congress has allocated those funds for him.
Trump is more open than
Re: (Score:2)
> The President can only direct funds at his discretion if the Congress has allocated those funds for him.
Well, in theory. Biden tried several times to soak taxpayers for student loans without Congressional approval, and that was up to a trillion dollars all told. Trump kept trying to divert funds for his wall.
If you think "falling" for Trump's trolling over this measly export tax is silly, take it up with the many pundits both pro and con who think it is worth their clickbait.
Re: (Score:2)
Biden tried and failed, because it wasn't legal. He didn't have the authority to cancel debts to the Treasury, so he couldn't do it. Trump had the authority to reallocate certain defense construction funds for defense construction matters, so he could
Re: (Score:2)
Biden tried and failed, because it wasn't legal.
Actually he tried and partly failed because it was only partly legal.
But he definitely cannot create a new revenue stream and direct it however he chooses.
That might not stop him from trying, and unless Congress or the courts rein him in, it won't stop him from doing it. As I pointed out above, in this case it's unclear that anyone would have standing to sue (not taxpayers; it wouldn't be tax money -- maybe nVidia or China, but they like the deal), so stopping him would probably require Congress to act. And what are the odds that the Republican Congress would grow a spine?
Re: (Score:3)
Trump is taking about sending $2000 checks to everybody from tariff revenue. Where does he get that authority?
The whole pile of cards is rotten. Quibbling about which President is worse is just more clickbait, whether you like the word or not.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, in this case I'm not quibbling about which President is worse, I'm just trying to point out that you gave an example of something a President didn't have power to do and an example of something a President does have the power to do. You probab
Re: (Score:2)
I don't fall for clickbait. But it's impossible to ignore the headlines, and sometimes it's fun to read how silly they get, like the UN chief claiming the Earth is boiling.
I apologize for assuming you meant personal criticisms. There's too much of it everywhere, not just slashdot, and I shouldn't assume everyone is doing it.
When slashdot started requiring logins to avoid most of the spambots, it annoyed me, and when I did finally sign up, my handle was my protest. It was amazing back then how many others
Re: (Score:3)
It may have been more useful to have already known that it would not be possible for Trump to do what you described.
"Not be possible" is too strong.
It's clearly possible unless Congress or the courts prevent it, even though it is clearly illegal. But Trump is doing lots of things that are clearly illegal, which is why the courts keep issuing injunctions to stop him (and then SCOTUS keeps staying the injunctions to let him go ahead and do it anyway, at least for a while). In a sane world, the fact that an action is illegal would be a stronger constraint because the president would have to be concerned that Congress wo
Re: (Score:2)
Will this new revenue stream decrease my taxes? Will it fund infrastructure? If taxes are paid then government services should be rendered.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, an export tax is unconstitutional (Score:2)
But an export ban is not. And it's often said that the power to tax is the power to destroy... it turns out that works both ways. If you can ban exports, you can accept a fee in exchange for not banning them, which is effectively a tax. Not sure if it would hold up in court, but it turns out that nobody willing to challenge it will have standing.
Re: (Score:2)
The Obamacare tax wasn't a tax either, until it was.
National Security in worth a 20% cut (Score:3, Insightful)
How quickly would Barack Obama or Joe Biden have been impeached and convicted if they had done this?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Obama would have been impeached the second he bulldozed part of the whitehouse.
My "angle" on this.. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wait just a sec (Score:2)
Didn't China ban companies from buying nvidia stuff?
https://www.ft.com/content/12a... [ft.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Yes.
Re: (Score:2)
They probably have a similar 25% agreement.
Re: Wait just a sec (Score:2)
No I think they invested the money saved on nvidia purchases in new donestic chips
those who cannot remember the past... (Score:1)
"The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them." - Lenin
Some things remain constant, it seems.
Re: those who cannot remember the past... (Score:2)
He was too smart.
But back to our conundrum..
Who is taking whom for fools here? Trum nvidia? Trump china? Nvidia us? Trump us? China trump? What's going on?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We actively helped China the whole time. Even now we are too stupid and just charge them 25% to help them LONG TERM because we somehow are so shortsighted... it's like Trump doesn't have object permanence. That is actually a joke I've heard more than once about him; you've got to be exceptionally stupid to organically have so many people make those jokes.
Re: (Score:1)
The US is just a crime syndicate now (Score:3)
How is this not racketeering? Like everything else this administration does, it's plainly a shakedown.
Donald Trump Raped Multiple Children Repeatedly (Score:2)
I don't like this turdball of a human being with his deep-throated, mushroom-dicked criminality.
Re: (Score:1)
Somebody explain to me... (Score:3)