The White House is reported to have successfully extorted TSMC, based on a reason that is astonishing: no blind engineers!
Recently, Rutnik disclosed in a closed-door interview a thought-provoking detail — the White House recently forced TSMC to significantly increase its investment in the United States by citing "violations of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) clauses." A global top-tier semiconductor manufacturing company was accused of breaching the contract for not employing blind contractors and lacking transgender female engineers? However, if one delves into the background, contract mechanisms, and U.S. strategies, this seemingly absurd pressure actually turns out to be a meticulously designed extortion.
In 2020, when TSMC announced its decision to establish a factory in the United States, it indeed signed an agreement containing numerous non-technical additional clauses. The issue is whether these clauses are enforceable. From a legal perspective, if TSMC accepted federal funds or tax incentives, then the DEI obligations written in the contract would be binding.
Rutnik claimed that the U.S. found that the personnel composition of TSMC's initial construction phase in Arizona was almost entirely male engineers, with no accessibility facilities or childcare centers, which in form indeed constituted a deviation from the contract. Although the semiconductor industry in Taiwan itself has a gender structure imbalance (according to data from the Industrial Technology Research Institute, the proportion of women among frontline engineers in Taiwanese wafer plants has long been below 10%, and LGBTQ+ identities are highly private and difficult to count), this might be seen as "failing to fulfill commitments" under U.S. legal context.
More intriguingly, there was a shift in the U.S. strategy. Traditionally, Republicans were critical of DEI and often advocated abolishing such "political correctness" clauses. However, Rutnik clearly stated, "We are not that kind of Republican." This statement reveals a reality: rather than openly opposing DEI, it is better to use it as a lever. By pointing out TSMC's "technical breach," the U.S. could bypass the fiscal controversy of direct subsidies and instead exchange the "exemption from DEI obligations" for additional investments from companies — ultimately resulting in TSMC committing to invest $165 billion in the United States (far exceeding the original plan of $12 billion), while the U.S. government did not have to pay the originally planned $6.6 billion subsidy.
It's absurd, but as Rutnik said, it somehow became something worth being proud of.
Original article: toutiao.com/article/1854166867551435/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author himself.