Join for quick access. Enter your email below and we'll send confirmation plus sign you up to our newsletter.
By submitting your information, you confirm you are aged 16 or over,
have read our
Privacy Policy
and agree to the
Terms & Conditions. Geographical rules apply.
Stay On the Cutting Edge: Get the Tom's Hardware Newsletter
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
You are now subscribed
Your newsletter sign-up was successful
Join the club
Get full access to premium articles, exclusive features and a growing list of member rewards.
An account already exists for this email address, please log in.
U.S. Senate passes bill that forces AI chipmakers to prioritize sales to American companies — House now set to amend or pass legislation
The United States Senate has just passed the 'GAIN AI' legislation as part of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which would require AI chipmakers like Nvidia and AMD to prioritize chip orders for American companies over export orders, particularly to China and its allies. As reported by Bloomberg, the bipartisan bill sailed easily through the Senate and is now under consideration by the House.
“Today, the Senate acted to make sure American customers — including small businesses and startups —aren’t forced to wait in line behind China’s tech giants when purchasing the latest AI chips,” Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), who co-sponsored the bill, said in a statement. Senator Jim Bank (R-IN), who is the lead co-sponsor of the bill, also noted that this bill will bolster the U.S. competitiveness in AI and other cutting-edge industries while reducing exports to U.S. rivals, particularly China.
The House of Representatives has already passed its version of the NDAA, but the provision saying that chipmakers must put exports on the back burner in favor of local sales is missing. Because of this, the two chambers must now work together to create a compromise, but whether this rule will be part of the final version that will be signed by the president is still up for debate.
Nvidia has always criticized this bill, saying that its global sales “do not deprive U.S. customers of anything” and that the logic behind it was “based on doomer science fiction.” The company also said that it was “trying to solve a problem that does not exist” and that it would “restrict competition worldwide in any industry that uses mainstream computing chips.” Nvidia has said that its H20 shipments do not affect the supply of H100, H200, and Blackwell chips, which makes sense as these all use different parts, and that the supply of one will not affect the supply of the other.
Although China is Nvidia’s largest market next to the U.S., its China sales still dwarf in comparison. The United States accounts for nearly half of Nvidia’s sales in FY 2024, while China is only at 13% of its overall revenue. Aside from that, this might go down in the near future owing to the ongoing trade war between Washington and Beijing, especially as the latter has banned its biggest tech companies from acquiring Nvidia’s latest chips.
Jowi Morales is a tech enthusiast with years of experience working in the industry. He’s been writing with several tech publications since 2021, where he’s been interested in tech hardware and consumer electronics.
I'm not so sure about 'communism'. My understanding of communism is the state IS the production. That is, there's no separation between the state and what would normally be a company/corporation doing production.
Also, we're talking about legislation, which means it could die in the house. And if it gets through the house with whatever reconciliation there is between the two bills, the affected corporations are free to protest through the judicial system where it could be ruled as unconstitutional.
I think this is very different than the state saying "this is how it is" and, then it is.
I'm not so sure about 'communism'. My understanding of communism is the state IS the production. That is, there's no separation between the state and what would normally be a company/corporation doing production.
Also, we're talking about legislation, which means it could die in the house. And if it gets through the house with whatever reconciliation there is between the two bills, the affected corporations are free to protest through the judicial system where it could be ruled as unconstitutional.
I think this is very different than the state saying "this is how it is" and, then it is.
I'm not sure actual pure communism can ever actually be implemented in society with humans running things. Its inherently controlling, meaning anybody in charge can be tempted to abuse that control pretty regularly. Every time it has been tried its ends up in some bastardization authoritarian regime or ends up with a significant amount of capitalism in it anyways.
