Political Money Piles On: The Mounting Pressure Crushing Intel in 2025

Intel faces a perfect storm. It's not just about chips anymore—it's about checks.

The once-unassailable titan of silicon finds itself squeezed from all sides. Rivals aren't just out-innovating in the fab; they're out-lobbying in the halls of power. Political capital is flowing, and the pressure is turning from competitive to existential.

Follow The Money

Campaign contributions, strategic PAC funding, and a whirlwind of legislative favors—the game has changed. The battlefield extends far beyond transistor density into the murky world of policy and influence. While Intel scrambles to regain process leadership, its competitors are busy rewriting the rules of the game.

A Costly Distraction

Every dollar spent navigating political headwinds is a dollar not spent in the lab. Every executive hour spent in a congressional hearing is an hour not spent on the next architectural breakthrough. The core business of building better chips suffers as the company fights a war on two fronts.

It's a stark reminder that in tech, the most disruptive innovation can sometimes be a well-placed donation—a cynical truth that would make any finance bro nod in grim recognition before checking his crypto portfolio.

The clock is ticking. Can Intel outmaneuver the political machinery bearing down on it, or will the pressure finally crack the foundation?

Pressure mounts on Intel as political money hits the company

The last four years under Intel’s former CEO Pat Gelsinger were rough, as his plan to open the foundry to outside customers required heavy spending, and the long timeline scared investors away.

So the Intel board pushed Pat out in late 2024 and brought in Lip-Bu Tan in March 2025. So far, Lip-Bu has kept most of the old strategy but used a calmer tone, tighter costs, and a large network of industry contacts to steady nerves on Wall Street.

That change helped, but the real jolt came when the US government put $9 billion into the company.The money came through the CHIPS Act, but the approval happened right after a dispute between Lip-Bu and the TRUMP administration over the CEO’s business links to China.

Federal officials have pushed hard to MOVE more chipmaking to the US since the pandemic exposed supply chain risks tied to Taiwan. Rising tension with China, including fears of a Taiwan conflict, made the pressure stronger.

Technalysis analyst Bob O’Donnell said semiconductors were vital for both the economy and national security, adding that Intel had the largest US-based infrastructure.

Critics argued the investment showed how far the US had moved toward state capitalism under Trump, saying the government now had mixed interests as both regulator and shareholder. Analysts said the new 10% federal stake could give Intel more weight in trade talks. Others said Washington might even push big players like Apple to use Intel fabs.

SoftBank added $2 billion, and Nvidia added $5 billion. Those investments helped the company slow its deep losses. But the Nvidia deal did not include a manufacturing agreement for Nvidia’s chips, which limited the impact.

Intel’s foundry hopes rely on securing customers for 14A

Intel’s future now depends on convincing outside clients to trust its new manufacturing processes. Nvidia, Apple, and Qualcomm are top targets, but all of them also compete with Intel products and already work with TSMC.

TSMC is building $165 billion in US capacity, which weakens Intel’s geopolitical selling point. The company’s 18A process, once promoted to outside users, is now mainly used for its own chips, including Panther Lake for PCs and Clearwater Forest for data centers.

Analysts said the success of those products will completely transform demand for the next processes, called 18AP and 14A.

Rumors suggest Apple may use the 18AP process for its lowest-end chips, but nothing is locked in.

BNB Paribas analyst David O’Connor said Intel has 12 to 18 months to land a major 14A customer, calling that process “the crux of Intel being successful on the foundry business or not.” He also said the company might even exit manufacturing if 14A fails.

Other analysts expect a much slower recovery. Bernstein analyst Stacy Rasgon said it took a decade to break the company, so there was no reason to expect a fix in less time.

Join Bybit now and claim a $50 bonus in minutes