Kristina Roberts
On Thursday, U.S. President Donald Trump called for the immediate resignation of Lip-Bu Tan, the new chief executive officer of Intel. Trump said Tan is “highly conflicted” because of his business connections with Chinese companies. This public demand from a sitting president is rare, especially when it involves asking the head of one of America’s biggest technology companies to leave his job.
Trump’s strong words have brought sudden attention to Intel’s leadership and its future. The company, once a giant in the computer chip industry, has been struggling to compete with rivals from around the world. Many believe that the right leadership is essential for Intel to regain its position at the top. However, Trump thinks that because of Tan’s ties to China, he should not be the one leading this effort.
The situation began earlier this year when Reuters reported in April that Tan had invested at least $200 million in hundreds of Chinese companies. These companies are involved in advanced manufacturing and computer chip technology. Some of them, according to the report, also have links to the Chinese military. This raised questions about whether Tan’s connections could create a conflict of interest while running Intel, which plays a major role in America’s technology and national security efforts.
The matter escalated further when, just a day before Trump’s comments, Reuters reported that Republican Senator Tom Cotton had sent a letter to the chair of Intel’s board. In the letter, Cotton asked about Tan’s past investments in Chinese companies and about a recent criminal case connected to Tan’s former company, Cadence Design. Cotton’s letter suggested that Intel needed to explain whether Tan’s history might affect his ability to lead a company that receives major U.S. government support.
In a post on his Truth Social platform, Trump wrote: “The CEO of INTEL is highly CONFLICTED and must resign, immediately. There is no other solution to this problem.” This short but forceful statement left little room for misunderstanding about the president’s position.
After Trump’s post, Intel’s stock price fell. By the end of the day on Thursday, Intel’s shares had dropped by about 3%. Investors may have been worried that this public controversy could lead to leadership changes and create uncertainty about Intel’s plans.
This is not just an ordinary corporate dispute. Intel is considered a cornerstone of America’s plan to increase domestic chip production. The United States has been working to reduce its dependence on chips made overseas, especially in countries like China. With the growing importance of technology in areas such as defense, communication, and artificial intelligence, making chips at home has become a national priority.
To support this effort, the U.S. government passed the CHIPS Act in 2022. This law provides billions of dollars in subsidies to companies willing to build chip factories in America. Last year, Intel received $8 billion under this program — the largest amount given to any company. The money is meant to help Intel build new factories in Ohio and other states, creating jobs and strengthening America’s technology base.
Because of Intel’s role in this national effort, its leadership is under close watch from both politicians and the public. Any hint of a conflict of interest can quickly turn into a major political issue. That is exactly what is happening now with Tan’s past investments in China.
Tan, who became Intel’s CEO only recently, was expected to help the company recover from several years of falling behind competitors like Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) and Samsung. Intel has faced delays in launching new technologies, which has hurt its market share. Many hoped Tan’s experience in the technology industry would bring fresh ideas and renewed energy to the company.
However, his history with Chinese firms has now become a central issue. Critics argue that it is risky for someone with significant financial connections to Chinese technology companies — especially those linked to China’s military — to lead a company that is so important to U.S. national security. They believe it could create doubts about whether decisions at Intel are made with America’s best interests in mind.
Supporters of Tan might argue that his investments were made as part of normal business activities and that he can separate his past ventures from his current role. They might also say that in today’s global economy, many technology leaders have some kind of international connection, and that does not always mean they are unable to act in their country’s interest.
Still, the fact that both a U.S. senator and the president have openly questioned Tan’s position puts him in a difficult spot. If pressure continues to build, Intel’s board of directors may have to decide whether keeping Tan as CEO is worth the ongoing controversy.
For now, Intel has not made any public statement about Trump’s demand or Cotton’s letter. The company’s leaders may be weighing their options, trying to balance political concerns with the need for stability in the middle of a major rebuilding effort.
The timing of this dispute is also important. The global chip industry is in a period of rapid change. Demand for chips is growing quickly due to advancements in areas like artificial intelligence, electric vehicles, and cloud computing. Countries around the world are investing heavily in their own chip-making capabilities to avoid relying on foreign suppliers.
For the United States, Intel is expected to be at the heart of this strategy. Losing focus because of a leadership crisis could give competitors an even bigger advantage. That is why many are watching closely to see how the situation develops and whether Intel can continue moving forward despite the political storm around its CEO.
In the end, this controversy is not only about one man’s job. It raises bigger questions about how closely corporate leaders should be tied to foreign governments or industries that could pose a security risk. It also shows how technology companies have become central to national politics, with presidents and senators directly involved in their leadership decisions.
Trump’s demand for Tan’s resignation is a reminder that in today’s world, the line between business and politics is often very thin. What happens next will not just affect Intel’s future but could also influence America’s broader technology and security strategy in the years to come.
