作者/Author(s): Matt Brazil 

網站來源/Source: War on the Rocks 

日期/Date: 10/09/2025 

關鍵字/Keywords: 經濟、科技、晶片


美國該如何應對？ 
  • 川普與拜登皆將半導體製造業視為國家安全風險的一部分，並鼓勵台積電與三星在美國設廠。雖然這兩家企業已開始在美國建廠，但他們與母國政府仍對將最先進晶片生產轉移至美國持保留態度，僅同意生產第二或第三級的先進製程。 
  • 擴大美國本土晶片產能只解決了一半的問題，若美國晶圓廠無法生產最先進製程或提供具競爭力的價格，美國科技企業仍傾向從海外採購晶片。關稅可能可以緩解這種失衡現象，但企業也會試著鑽漏洞，投資者則會將關稅視為另一種不確定風險。 
  • 盧特尼克的「晶片換晶片」構想非常明確直接：將關稅減免政策直接與美國國內晶片產量掛鉤。企業可繼續以低關稅進口晶片，只是當美國晶圓廠實現量產時，此減免政策即告終止。 
  • 盧特尼克提案的直接效應如下： 
  1. 一旦美國晶片製造業進入規模化生產，就能有效安撫投資者並降低晶圓廠擴建風險。
  2. 此舉將迫使跨國美籍企業調整採購策略，因關稅減免與支持美國晶圓廠息息相關。 
  3. 可堵住漏洞，並在企業未完成承諾時予以處罰。
  • 海外晶片製造商可能不看好這個提案。因此，盧特尼克恐需修改提案並爭取關鍵利益相關者支持。 
  1. 跨國企業為了降低成本並提升便利性，早已積極改善整體供應鏈。若重組成本過高，它們可能會抵制「晶片換晶片」政策。 
  2. 利潤微薄的終端用戶可能將成本轉嫁給消費者。 
  3. 美國盟友可能透過WTO表達關切，質疑美國是否扭曲市場條件。
  • ​​​​​​​所幸，製造晶片所需的關鍵設備、化學品與其他配套設施都在美國本土，讓推動美國本土擴張生產晶片成為一項可行的政策。然而，在美國開設晶圓廠的過程十分耗時且艱鉅，引發眾人質疑盧特尼克提案的合理性。
  • 與此同時，中國正以技術自主為長期目標，積極擴張本土晶片產能、收緊對關鍵材料的掌控。若盧特尼克的提案成功，將促使美國企業更緊密配合自身國家利益，打破相互依賴的循環。

How should the US respond? 
  • Trump and Biden identified semiconductor manufacturing as a national security risk and encouraged TSMC and Samsung to build fabrication plants in the US. Although these companies have begun constructing fabs, they and their governments remain hesitant to shift their most advanced chip production to the US, and have only agreed to produce the second or third-most advanced nodes. 
  • Expanding chip production in the US is only half the problem. If the fabs could not produce the most advanced node or offer competitive prices, US technology firms would still prefer to obtain their chips from overseas. Although tariffs may help reduce these imbalances, firms would try to exploit tariff loopholes, and investors would see tariffs as an uncertain risk. 
  • Lutnick's chip-for-chip proposal is straightforward: allocate tariff relief directly linked to confirmed domestic production achievements. Companies could continue to import chips at a lower tariff, and the waiver would expire when the US fab reached volume production. 
  • The immediate effects of Lutnick's proposal are as follows: 
  1. Once US production capacity reaches a scaled production, it could reassure investors and mitigate risks for fab expansion. 
  2. It will compel international US firms to change their sourcing strategies since tariff relief is tied to support for US fabs. 
  3. It would mend loopholes and penalize companies if they failed to meet their pledge. 
  • Overseas chip producers may scorn the framework. Therefore, Lutnick might have to revise his proposal to gain approval from key stakeholders. 
  1. Transnational firms had optimized the supply chain to reduce costs and increase convenience. They will resist reallocating if the costs become high. 
  2. End-users operating on little profit may divert the costs to their consumers. 
  3. US allies might raise concerns with the WTO about how the US is affecting market conditions. 
  • Luckily, most of the necessary chipmaking components — equipment, chemicals, and other facilities — are US-based, making expansion in the US a viable option. However, opening fabs in the US is a time-consuming and challenging process, casting doubt on the rationale of Lutnick's proposal. 
  • At the same time, China is expanding its domestic chipmaking capacity and tightening its grasp on critical materials with technological self-sufficiency as a long-term goal. If Lutnick's proposal succeeds, it will encourage companies to align more closely with the US national interest and break the cycle of dependence. 
回上層