Trade
US deals signal heightened semiconductor equipment competition
Author: June Park, Schmidt Futures
Export controls on semiconductor technology have been expanded after the conclusion of US bilateral negotiations with Japan and the Netherlands in March 2023. This is only the beginning as the United States is set to further tighten export controls, as recommended in the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence’s final report.
The US Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security issued new regulations on 7 October 2022, which were expected to bring about protests from semiconductor equipment makers and foundries. While Washington insists that the measures are designed to protect US intellectual property and defend national security, they reflect the heavy competition in the global semiconductor equipment business.
According to 2019 figures, the United States had a 17 per cent share of overall semiconductor manufacturing equipment exports, trailing behind Japan (28 per cent) and closely followed by the Netherlands (17 per cent), Singapore (10 per cent) and South Korea (10 per cent).
The United States is dominant in the upstream integrated circuit design process, but it faces competition from the Netherlands and Japan in the midstream integrated circuit manufacturing process. It also does not have a substantial market share in the downstream integrated circuit packaging and testing process.
The competitive nature of the global semiconductor industry is particularly salient in lithography equipment (dubbed scanners or steppers). The Dutch company ASML Holding NV dominates this market, which was valued at US$11.8 billion in 2022 and is expected to grow at a compound annual growth rate of 10 per cent, reaching US$18 billion by 2025.
The current moves to deter the Netherlands and Japan from exporting semiconductor equipment to China aim to undercut China’s access to high-end chip manufacturing equipment. But these efforts might also lead to a shift in market share depending on how export controls are implemented.
After months of deliberation amid negotiations with the United States, ASML announced it would prevent the sales of specific models of semiconductor equipment to an unnamed country. The affected models were the TWINSCAN NXT:2000i, the NXT:2050i and the NXT:2100i, which are immersion deep ultraviolet machinery used for lithographic processes in the most advanced logic and memory chips.
ASML has announced that the added measures will not affect its revenue, as it is currently operating at capacity. But given that the US Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security has already prohibited the sale of extreme ultraviolet machinery to China, ASML must plan its next steps wisely and diversify into other jurisdictions. The additional measures are pending implementation until the Netherlands enacts new laws and ASML is bound by any existing contracts to deliver machines until that time.
Japan has expressed its intent to participate in export controls, announcing its own export control mechanisms in March 2023. But Japanese Foreign Minister Yoshimasa Hayashi subsequently paid a visit to his counterpart in Beijing, Qin Gang, given the possible backlash from China. As expected, China has contemplated placing export controls on rare earth materials in retaliation. There is speculation on which Japanese companies would be subject to the ban on semiconductor equipment sales to China, with the most likely being Tokyo Electron.
Depending on how Japan implements the export curbs, Japanese companies Canon and Nikon may seek to revive their lithography businesses, a market in which they once flourished but in which they have lost market share as they have instead focussed on camera lenses.
The Bureau of Industry and Security measures announced on 7 October 2022 have led to a plunge in semiconductor equipment sales to China, demonstrating the immediate impact of the measures on US companies such as Applied Materials, KLA and Lam Research.
The implementation of US export controls on semiconductor equipment may reset the competition for market share and created uncertainty for major players. Other countries such as Singapore, Germany and South Korea are likely to be subject to additional measures in the near future.
As access to the Chinese market shrinks under US export controls, it is bound to spur heightened competition and geo-economic conflict between the United States and China.
June Park is a political economist and an inaugural Asia Fellow of the International Strategy Forum at Schmidt Futures.
The post US deals signal heightened…
Trade
Self-Reliance and Openness: Core Principles of China’s Third Plenary Session
The Third Plenum communique from the CCP indicates a prioritization of stability and compromise in response to China’s economic challenges. It highlights the concept of Chinese-style modernization and establishes political guidelines for balancing regulation and market forces.
The CCP’s Third Plenum communique signals a focus on stability and compromise in the face of China’s economic challenges. It emphasises Chinese-style modernisation and sets political directions for balancing regulation and market forces. While not as groundbreaking as previous plenums, it acknowledges the importance of market mechanisms and technological self-reliance, aiming to address issues like high youth unemployment and private sector uncertainty. The communique seeks to navigate the complexities of global competition and domestic innovation, potentially reshaping global supply chains and trade dynamics. Overall, it presents a pragmatic blueprint for China’s economic future.
Source : Self-reliance and openness central pillars of China’s Third Plenum | East Asia Forum
Trade
Trade Prevails Over Political Persuasions in China-Germany Relations
China and Germany maintain a strong bilateral relationship, rooted in economic cooperation despite ideological differences. Recent visits and agreements focus on expanding trade and addressing mutual concerns, navigating challenges while nurturing ties.
Evolving Bilateral Ties
China and Germany share a strong bilateral relationship, rooted in history since 1972. This connection has seen moments of cooperation intertwined with periods of tension. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s April 2024 visit underscores Germany’s commitment to fostering this partnership, reflecting a mutual interest in maintaining economic ties despite ideological differences.
Economic Pragmatism
As the second and third largest global economies, China and Germany’s economic interdependence is crucial. Germany emerged as China’s primary trading partner in 2023, with trade values reaching €254.4 billion (US$280 billion). In response to global scrutiny, Germany has taken a balanced approach, emphasizing economic stability over political discord. This was evident during Scholz’s prior visit in November 2022, where his diplomatic tone contrasted with broader EU sentiments.
Facing Challenges Together
Despite increasing public skepticism in Germany regarding China’s global influence and human rights issues, both nations continue to seek common ground. Their October 2023 Joint Statement highlights intentions to pursue cooperation in areas like carbon neutrality and open markets. To navigate these complex terrains, Germany can utilize its institutional frameworks to enhance dialogue, while also considering supply chain diversification to reduce dependency on China. The intertwining nature of their economies suggests that, despite challenges, both countries will continue to prioritize their substantial trade relations.
Source : Trade trumps political persuasions in China–Germany relations
Trade
Fixing fragmentation in the settlement of international trade disputes
Fragmentation in global trade due to the lack of development in multilateral trade rules at the WTO has led to an increase in FTAs. The Appellate Body impasse has further exacerbated fragmentation, requiring a multilateral approach for reform.
Fragmentation in Global Trade
Fragmentation in global trade is not new. With the slow development of multilateral trade rules at the World Trade Organization (WTO), governments have turned to free trade agreements (FTAs). As of 2023, almost 600 bilateral and regional trade agreements have been notified to the WTO, leading to growing fragmentation in trade rules, business activities, and international relations. But until recently, trade dispute settlements have predominantly remained within the WTO.
Challenges with WTO Dispute Settlement
The demise of the Appellate Body increased fragmentation in both the interpretation and enforcement of trade law. A small number of WTO Members created the Multi-Party Interim Appeal Arbitration Arrangement (MPIA) as a temporary solution, but in its current form, it cannot properly address fragmentation. Since its creation in 2020, the MPIA has only attracted 26 parties, and its rulings have not been consistent with previous decisions made by the Appellate Body, rendering WTO case law increasingly fragmented.
The Path Forward for Global Trade
Maintaining the integrity and predictability of the global trading system while reducing fragmentation requires restoring the WTO’s authority. At the 12th WTO Ministerial Conference in 2022, governments agreed to re-establish a functional dispute settlement system by 2024. Reaching a consensus will be difficult, and negotiations will take time. A critical mass-based, open plurilateral approach provides a viable alternative way to reform the appellate mechanism, as WTO Members are committed to reforming the dispute settlement system.
Source : Fixing fragmentation in the settlement of international trade disputes
- China Dismantles Prominent Uyghur Business Landmark in Xinjiang – Shia Waves
- China Expands Nationwide Private Pension Scheme After Two-Year Pilot Program
- How a scandal over sanitary pads is shaping feminist activism in China
- Yakult Unveils Restructuring Plans for Its China Operations | ESM Magazine
- Italy’s Strategic Shift Towards China After Exiting the Belt and Road Initiative
- Financial Analysis and Cost Audits: Uncovering Cost Inefficiencies
