Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Business

Netherlands Seizes Chinese-Owned Chipmaker in Unprecedented Security Move

Published

5 minute read

Sam Cooper's avatar Sam Cooper

Court-approved removal of executive Zhang Xuezheng bears hallmarks of counter-intelligence concern

The Dutch government has taken control of Chinese-owned semiconductor manufacturer Nexperia, invoking an urgent national-security law directed at Beijing to safeguard Europe’s access to critical technology used across the automotive and electronics industries.

In a statement issued late Sunday, the Ministry of Economic Affairs said it had taken the “highly exceptional” decision to invoke the Goods Availability Act on September 30. The move followed “recent and acute signals” of such “significant scale and urgency” involving “serious governance shortcomings and actions within Nexperia” that Minister Vincent Karremans was compelled to intervene.

“The decision aims to prevent a situation in which the goods produced by Nexperia would become unavailable in an emergency,” the ministry said.

“These signals posed a threat to the continuity and safeguarding on Dutch and European soil of crucial technological knowledge and capabilities. Losing these capabilities could pose a risk to Dutch and European economic security.”

It is not known what specific information Dutch authorities gathered on Nexperia executive Zhang Xuezheng, who has been suspended from all management and board positions, but the move, approved by the Amsterdam Court of Appeal, has the hallmarks of a national security alert deemed severe by Dutch lawmakers.

Nexperia, headquartered in Nijmegen, produces semiconductors used widely in the European automotive industry and consumer electronics and is a key link in the continent’s industrial supply chain. The government said normal production will continue, but Karremans now has powers to block or reverse company decisions that could harm national or European interests.

The ministry’s order bars Nexperia and all its global subsidiaries, branches, and offices from making any adjustments to their assets, intellectual property, business operations, or personnel for one year.

Nexperia’s Chinese parent company, Wingtech Technology Co., a Shanghai-listed conglomerate placed on the U.S. Commerce Department’s Entity List in 2023, denounced the Dutch move, saying it “constitutes an act of excessive interference driven by geopolitical bias, not by fact-based risk assessment.” Wingtech said the measure “gravely contravenes the European Union’s long-standing advocacy for market-economy principles, fair competition, and international trade norms,” and “strongly” protested “discriminatory treatment toward a Chinese-owned enterprise.”

Wingtech disclosed to the Shanghai Stock Exchange that it had been notified of the Dutch order on September 30, but the government did not make the intervention public until October 12.

The Dutch government’s action marks the first time the Netherlands has used its emergency powers to seize control of Chinese-state linked company — an escalation that mirrors Washington’s strategic-industrial posture and signals Europe’s entry into a new era of techno-sovereignty.

In Britain, Nexperia’s ownership structure had already triggered alarm. In 2021, the company’s acquisition of Newport Wafer Fab, the UK’s largest semiconductor plant, was blocked by the Conservative government over national-security fears. The UK later ordered Nexperia to divest most of its stake under the National Security and Investment Act in 2022.

The controversy resurfaced this year amid the collapse of a high-profile espionage prosecution under Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s government. The Mail on Sunday reported, citing an unidentified source, that Christopher Berry—one of two men previously charged with spying for China—“sent details of the row within government on the Newport Wafer Fab semiconductor factory, which was initially sold to Nexperia but later blocked by the Conservative government over national-security fears.”

The Netherlands’ intervention follows escalating moves by allied governments to tighten control over critical-tech supply chains. Just days earlier, Beijing imposed sweeping export restrictions on rare-earth minerals, essential for cars, wind turbines, and electronics, citing “national security” grounds — mirroring Western justifications for semiconductor controls. The action drew a strong counter-threat from U.S. President Donald Trump, who warned that Washington could impose 100 percent additional tariffs on all Chinese goods if Beijing “weaponizes its mineral dominance.”

A semi-detente appeared to emerge after Trump’s weekend remarks suggesting a pause in escalation. But the Dutch government’s unilateral action underscores a global race to secure access to critical industrial components amid fears of spreading conflict in Europe and rising tensions in Asia.

The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Business

Will Paramount turn the tide of legacy media and entertainment?

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Bill Flaig And Tom Carter

The recent leadership changes at Paramount Skydance suggest that the company may finally be ready to correct course after years of ideological drift, cultural activism posing as programming, and a pattern of self-inflicted financial and reputational damage.

Nowhere was this problem more visible than at CBS News, which for years operated as one of the most partisan and combative news organizations. Let’s be honest, CBS was the worst of an already left biased industry that stopped at nothing to censor conservatives. The network seemed committed to the idea that its viewers needed to be guided, corrected, or morally shaped by its editorial decisions.

This culminated in the CBS and 60 Minutes segment with Kamala Harris that was so heavily manipulated and so structurally misleading that it triggered widespread backlash and ultimately forced Paramount to settle a $16 million dispute with Donald Trump. That was not merely a legal or contractual problem. It was an institutional failure that demonstrated the degree to which political advocacy had overtaken journalistic integrity.

Dear Readers:

As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.

Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.

Thank you!

For many longtime viewers across the political spectrum, that episode represented a clear breaking point. It became impossible to argue that CBS News was simply leaning left. It was operating with a mission orientation that prioritized shaping narratives rather than reporting truth. As a result, trust collapsed. Many of us who once had long-term professional, commercial, or intellectual ties to Paramount and CBS walked away.

David Ellison’s acquisition of Paramount marks the most consequential change to the studio’s identity in a generation. Ellison is not anchored to the old Hollywood ecosystem where cultural signaling and activist messaging were considered more important than story, audience appeal, or shareholder value.

His professional history in film and strategic business management suggests an approach grounded in commercial performance, audience trust, and brand rebuilding rather than ideological identity. That shift matters because Paramount has spent years creating content and news coverage that seemed designed to provoke or instruct viewers rather than entertain or inform them. It was an approach that drained goodwill, eroded market share, and drove entire segments of the viewing public elsewhere.

The appointment of Bari Weiss as the new chief editor of CBS News is so significant. Weiss has built her reputation on rejecting ideological conformity imposed from either side. She has consistently spoken out against antisemitism and the moral disorientation that emerges when institutions prioritize political messaging over honesty.

Her brand centers on the belief that journalism should clarify rather than obscure. During President Trump’s recent 60 Minutes interview, he praised Weiss as a “great person” and credited her with helping restore integrity and editorial seriousness inside CBS. That moment signaled something important. Paramount is no longer simply rearranging executives. It is rethinking identity.

The appointment of Makan Delrahim as Chief Legal Officer was an early indicator. Delrahim’s background at the Department of Justice, where he led antitrust enforcement, signals seriousness about governance, compliance, and restoring institutional discipline.

But the deeper and more meaningful shift is occurring at the ownership and editorial levels, where the most politically charged parts of Paramount’s portfolio may finally be shedding the habits that alienated millions of viewers.The transformation will not be immediate. Institutions develop habits, internal cultures, and incentive structures that resist correction. There will be internal opposition, particularly from staff and producers who benefited from the ideological culture that defined CBS News in recent years.

There will be critics in Hollywood who see any shift toward balance as a threat to their influence. And there will be outside voices who will insist that any move away from their preferred political posture is regression.

But genuine reform never begins with instant consensus. It begins with leadership willing to be clear about the mission.

Paramount has the opportunity to reclaim what once made it extraordinary. Not as a symbol. Not as a message distribution vehicle. But as a studio that understands that good storytelling and credible reporting are not partisan aims. They are universal aims. Entertainment succeeds when it connects with audiences rather than instructing them. Journalism succeeds when it pursues truth rather than victory.

In an era when audiences have more viewing choices than at any time in history, trust is an economic asset. Viewers are sophisticated. They recognize when they are being lectured rather than engaged. They know when editorial goals are political rather than informational. And they are willing to reward any institution that treats them with respect.

There is now reason to believe Paramount understands this. The leadership is changing. The tone is changing. The incentives are being reassessed.

It is not the final outcome. But it is a real beginning. As the great Winston Churchill once said; “Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning”.

For the first time in a long time, the door to cultural realignment in legacy media is open. And Paramount is standing at the threshold and has the capability to become a market leader once again. If Paramount acts, the industry will follow.

Bill Flaig and Tom Carter are the Co-Founders of The American Conservatives Values ETF, Ticker Symbol ACVF traded on the New York Stock Exchange. Ticker Symbol ACVF

Learn more at www.InvestConservative.com

Continue Reading

Business

Parliamentary Budget Officer begs Carney to cut back on spending

Published on

By Franco Terrazzano 

PBO slices through Carney’s creative accounting

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is calling on Prime Minister Mark Carney to cut spending following today’s bombshell Parliamentary Budget Officer report that criticizes the government’s definition of capital spending and promise to balance the operating budget.

“The reality is that Carney is continuing on a course of unaffordable borrowing and the PBO report shows government messaging about ‘balancing the operating budget’ is not credible,” said Franco Terrazzano, CTF Federal Director. “Carney is using creative accounting to hide the spiralling debt.”

Carney’s Budget 2025 splits the budget into operating and capital spending and promises to balance the operating budget by 2028-29.

However, today’s PBO budget report states that Carney’s definition of capital spending is “overly expansive.” Without using that “overly expansive” definition of capital spending, the government would run an $18 billion operating deficit in 2028-29, according to the PBO.

“Based on our definition, capital investments would total $217.3 billion over 2024-25 to 2029-30, which is approximately 30 per cent ($94 billion) lower compared to Budget 2025,” according to the PBO. “Moreover, based on our definition, the operating balance in Budget 2025 would remain in a deficit position over 2024-25 to 2029-30.”

The PBO states that the Carney government is using “a definition of capital investment that expands beyond the current treatment in the Public Accounts and international practice.” The report specifically points out that “by including corporate income tax expenditures, investment tax credits and operating (production) subsidies, the framework blends policy measures with capital formation.”

The federal government plans to borrow about $80 billion this year, according to Budget 2025. Carney has no plan stop borrowing money and balance the budget. Debt interest charges will cost taxpayers $55.6 billion this year, which is more than the federal government will send to the provinces in health transfers ($54.7 billion) or collect through the GST ($54.4 billion).

“Carney isn’t balancing anything when he borrows tens of billions of dollars every year,” Terrazzano said. “Instead of applying creative accounting to the budget numbers, Carney needs to cut spending and debt.”

Continue Reading

Trending

X