特朗普将政府拨款转换为企业股权这一非常规干预措施引发了企业的恐慌。 英特尔周一表示，美国政府持有其10%的股权可能对公司业务构成风险，不仅可能损害国际销售，还可能限制其获取未来政府拨款的能力。 据华尔街见闻此前文章，特朗普称政府已获得英特尔10%股份。据分析，这项交易将使美国政府以每股20.8美元（较上周五24.8美元的收盘价有4 美元折扣）的价格购买英特尔股票，涉资约89亿美元。这一行动被视为特朗普政府对美国半导体产业战略支持的重大转变，交易预计将于8月26日 完成。 英特尔：政府入股可能损害国际业务前景，拨款转股权可能影响未来政府支持 英特尔在证券文件中警告，美国政府成为重要股东可能使公司受到其他国家（尤其在亚洲）额外法规或限制的约束，如外国补贴法。这对其庞大 的海外业务构成潜在威胁。 "美国政府的重要股东地位可能导致一些国家对我们实施新的监管要求或商业限制，"英特尔在文件中表示。 这一担忧尤为突出，因为英特尔新任CEO陈立武与特朗普会面后达成这项交易。 政府的特殊股东地位可能对公司治理和战略决策产生深远影响，引发投资者对未来公司自主性的担忧。这种担忧在股价表现上已有所反映，投资 者正在权衡政府支持带来的 ...

在美国政府决定将对英特尔的补助转换为股权后，英特尔在一份证券文件中列出了新的"风险因素"。 英特尔表示，目前尚不确定这一交易是否会导致其他政府机构尝试将现有补助转换为股权投资，或使它 们不愿意支持未来的补助。(作者/箫雨) 凤凰网科技讯 北京时间8月25日，据路透社报道，英特尔公司周一表示，美国政府持有其10%股权可能 会对其业务构成风险，从可能损害其国际销售，到限制其未来获得政府补助。 ...

Group 1 - The U.S. stock market opened lower on August 25, with the Dow Jones index down by 0.24%, the S&P 500 index down by 0.17%, and the Nasdaq Composite index down by 0.19% [1] - Pinduoduo saw a decline of over 1%, while Intel experienced an increase of more than 2% [1] - Chinese real estate stocks performed well, with Fangdd rising over 2% and Beike increasing by more than 3% [1]

Intel Corporation (NASDAQ: INTC) shares were trading at $25.25 on Monday, up 3.02% on the day and more than 22% higher over the past month, after President Donald Trump declared that the United States “paid zero” for its newly acquired stake in the semiconductor giant.Intel 1-month stock chart. Source: FinboldIn a post on Truth Social, Trump claimed:“I PAID ZERO FOR INTEL, IT IS WORTH APPROXIMATELY 11 BILLION DOLLARS. All goes to the USA… I will make deals like that for our Country all day long.” The U.S. g ...

转自：证券时报 人民财讯8月25日电，美股三大指数小幅低开，道指跌0.24%，纳指跌0.14%，标普500指数跌0.15%。拼 多多开跌1.08%，热门中概股普涨，英特尔涨1.9%，阿里巴巴涨1.94%。 ...

Core Viewpoint - The company has acquired Intel shares at no cost, with an estimated value of approximately $11 billion, and all profits will benefit the United States [1] Group 1 - The acquisition is framed as a positive development for the country, suggesting that such high-profit deals should be welcomed [1] - The company expresses a willingness to support firms that engage in profitable transactions with the U.S., indicating a focus on boosting stock prices and creating more jobs [1] - The statement questions why there would be dissatisfaction with such beneficial deals, highlighting a perspective that prioritizes national economic growth [1]

Core Viewpoint - The Trump administration's acquisition of an 8.9% equity stake in Intel highlights the problematic trend of government involvement in business, which often leads to inefficiencies and market distortions rather than progress or innovation [1][7][15]. Government Involvement in Intel - Intel has been a beneficiary of government subsidies since the America COMPETES Act was signed in 2007, with continued support through various administrations, culminating in the recent equity stake by the Trump administration [4][5]. - The rationale for converting $5.7 billion in unpaid CHIPS Act grants into equity includes stabilizing the semiconductor supply chain and reducing reliance on foreign foundries [5][6]. Implications of Government Equity Stake - The government's equity stake in Intel represents a shift towards public-private partnerships, raising concerns about the impact on competition and innovation within the semiconductor industry [6][7]. - The involvement of the federal government in Intel's operations could lead to conflicts of interest, particularly in regulatory decisions affecting competitors and new entrants in the market [7][12]. Historical Context of Government Nationalization - The current situation is compared to historical instances of government nationalization during crises, but the Intel stake occurs in a non-crisis context, raising questions about the appropriateness of such actions [10][11]. - Previous nationalizations, such as those during World War I and the 2008 financial crisis, were justified by immediate needs, unlike the current Intel situation [10][11]. Concerns Over Market Distortion - The infusion of government capital into Intel may undermine the principles of free market competition, leading to a misallocation of resources and talent [7][13][14]. - Critics argue that government involvement distorts market dynamics, blurs ownership rights, and politicizes scientific advancements [7][13]. Call for Separation of Economy and State - There is a strong argument for reinforcing the separation between government and business to prevent further entanglement and ensure that companies operate based on merit rather than government favoritism [14][15][16]. - Ending direct subsidies and public-private partnerships is seen as essential to restoring competitive enterprise and protecting the integrity of the market [15][16].

President Trump announcing Intel has agreed to give the US government a 10% stake in the company. Joining us right now, talk about that and so much more. We're going to talk about Jay Powell and everything else. White House National Economic Council Director Kevin Hasset. Uh Kevin, it is great to see you uh this morning. Thanks for coming on. Yeah, it's great to be here. So, so here's the question. Uh Ronald Reagan famously said the most the nine most terrifying words in the English language are, "I'm from ...

Government Intervention & Investment - The US government, through the CHIPS Act, is providing significant funding to Intel, leading to a unique arrangement where the government receives a 10% equity stake in the company [3] - This equity stake is non-voting, implying no direct government interference in Intel's business operations, but rather a form of investment similar to a sovereign wealth fund [4] - The Trump administration views this Intel deal as a potential model for future transactions, suggesting the possibility of the US government taking equity stakes in other industries, especially in AI and chip manufacturing [5][6] - The government aims to maximize the value of taxpayer dollars by securing equity in companies receiving federal funds, ensuring taxpayers benefit from the investment [8][13] Strategic & Economic Implications - The administration believes onshoring production through policies like tariffs will increase the profitability of companies like Intel [17][18] - Intel needs to improve chip demand, either by making better chips or finding new customers, but the administration does not plan to directly influence companies to buy Intel chips [13][14][15] - The current administration suggests that previous administrations should have considered taking equity when the CHIPS Act was initially implemented to incentivize chip companies to build fabs in the US [16] Historical Context & Policy Shift - The move towards government equity stakes represents a potential shift from traditional free market principles, where the government avoids direct involvement in companies [9] - The US government already has equity in entities like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, making this Intel deal not entirely unprecedented [12] - The administration denies that it is picking winners and losers, but rather creating a situation that benefits both the company and the taxpayers [11][10]

The government's stake in Intel is part of a broader strategy to create a sovereign wealth fund that could include more companies, White House economic advisor Kevin Hassett said Monday.In a deal that marked a further incursion of federal involvement with private companies, the White House on Friday announced that it was taking a 10% share of the chipmaking giant. The move is worth some $8.9 billion, some of which will come from grant funding associated with the CHIPS Act while the rest will be under separa ...