Trump Demands Intel CEO Resign Over Alleged China Ties

Former President Donald Trump has demanded the resignation of Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan, citing alleged ties to China that pose a conflict of interest. The call follows a letter from Senator Tom Cotton raising national security concerns, claiming Tan has investments in Chinese firms linked to the military. Intel has not responded. The controversy adds pressure to the struggling chipmaker, whose stock fell amid growing scrutiny over its leadership and U.S. manufacturing commitments.

President Donald Trump on Thursday issued a strong call for the immediate resignation of Intel Corporation’s Chief Executive Officer, Lip-Bu Tan, citing what he described as serious conflicts of interest stemming from alleged ties to China. In a post shared on his social media platform, Truth Social, Trump stated, “There is no other solution to this problem,” underscoring the gravity with which he views the situation.

This latest demand is part of Trump’s broader and increasingly aggressive campaign to exert pressure on the U.S. semiconductor industry, which plays a crucial role in powering advancements in artificial intelligence. Just a day earlier, Trump declared that he would impose a 100% tariff on imported computer chips unless companies shift their manufacturing operations to the United States or at least present clear plans to do so. The message signals his continued emphasis on economic nationalism and a push for tech-sector independence from foreign, particularly Chinese, supply chains.

Trump’s remarks come on the heels of a letter sent by Senator Tom Cotton, a Republican from Arkansas, to Intel’s board chairman, Frank Yeary. In the letter, Cotton expressed deep concerns about the implications of Tan’s leadership at Intel, given what he described as extensive financial and operational links to Chinese companies. According to Cotton, Lip-Bu Tan “reportedly controls dozens of Chinese companies and has a stake in hundreds of Chinese advanced-manufacturing and chip firms,” including at least eight that are said to have connections to China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA).

The senator posed a series of pointed questions to Intel’s board. He asked whether the company had required Tan to divest from any semiconductor firms associated with the Chinese Communist Party or the PLA. He also inquired if Intel was aware of any subpoenas issued to Tan’s previous firm, or whether Tan had disclosed the full extent of his relationships with entities in China that could be perceived as conflicting with U.S. national interests.

The allegations referenced in Cotton’s letter draw heavily from a recent investigative report by Reuters, which reviewed corporate filings from both Chinese and U.S. regulatory bodies. That report detailed how Tan has invested in hundreds of Chinese technology firms, with at least eight of them reportedly tied to China’s military infrastructure.

Intel, as of Thursday, had not issued any public statement in response to either Trump’s Truth Social post or Senator Cotton’s letter. The silence from the tech giant only adds to the mounting scrutiny and speculation surrounding the company’s leadership and global affiliations.

Tan assumed his role as Intel’s CEO on March 18, 2025. Prior to that, he served as the chief executive officer of Cadence Design Systems, a U.S.-based semiconductor design automation company headquartered in California. He led Cadence from 2009 to 2021 and was known for significantly expanding the firm’s global reach, including into Asian markets. His appointment to lead Intel was announced in March by Chairman Frank Yeary and marked a strategic leadership transition aimed at revitalizing the company's standing in the increasingly competitive semiconductor landscape.

Intel’s leadership transition came at a time of mounting challenges. The company had been struggling to catch up with competitors such as Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC), Samsung, Nvidia, and GlobalFoundries. These companies have already begun or announced plans to pour billions into expanding chip production capacity within the United States, either independently or through partnerships with major American firms like Apple. These strategic moves are seen as ways to avoid potential U.S. tariffs while aligning with the country’s push for domestic technology resilience.

Intel’s internal difficulties have not gone unnoticed on Wall Street. Following the emergence of the controversy and Trump’s statement, Intel’s stock price fell more than 2% on Thursday. This decline wiped out the company’s gains for the year and left it significantly trailing the broader market, which has seen a 9% rise in the S&P 500 index. Intel’s current market valuation stands just below $90 billion, a figure that puts it far behind some of its main industry rivals.

The company’s former CEO, Patrick Gelsinger, was removed at the end of 2024 after failing to close the competitive gap with more agile firms leading the charge in AI chip development. Gelsinger had embarked on an ambitious effort to transform Intel by investing in new domestic chip manufacturing facilities, but the scale of the company’s debt and the speed at which rivals had advanced proved difficult to overcome.

Further complicating Intel’s position is the scrutiny surrounding a nearly $8 billion federal grant it received under the Biden administration’s CHIPS Act in November 2024. The grant was intended to support the construction of secure semiconductor factories in the U.S. and to help produce advanced chips for the Defense Department. However, according to a report by The New York Times, the amount was reduced from its initial figure due to doubts among U.S. officials about Intel’s ability to meet the required performance standards and deadlines.

All of these developments have placed Intel at a crossroads, and Tan’s tenure as CEO is under intense political and public scrutiny. Trump’s demand for his resignation adds pressure not only on Tan personally but also on Intel’s board of directors to evaluate how the company’s leadership and global relationships align with U.S. national interests in the high-stakes world of semiconductor technology.