.

President Donald Trump has made the federal government the biggest shareholder in Intel, after his administration took a 10% stake in the struggling American chipmaker. The move upends traditional Republican economic orthodoxy and has drawn a chorus of scorn from conservatives who normally support the president.

Trump, by contrast, has called the deal a “terrific investment” that will make the U.S. “richer and richer.” He has also made clear that he intends to do more. “I hope I’m going to have many more cases like it,” he told reporters on Thursday, embracing what was once called industrial policy: a direct, hands-on government role in leading and guiding industry.

But by what name to call it is the question. For decades, socialism has been popularly defined, in part, as government ownership of the means of production for the good of the community. By that standard, Trump’s deal, critics say, is not so different from what goes on in places like China or Russia.

It’s a telling irony of the political moment. When then-President Barack Obama took effective control of Chrysler and General Motors during the financial crisis of 2008–2009, conservatives regarded it as a necessary, stopgap measure to keep two iconic American companies from collapsing into ruin. But if Obama had taken a 10% stake in Intel, Trump loyalists say, conservative commentators would have railed against communism.

Trump, by contrast, has sought to distinguish this case as an investment, not a bailout. The government, he said, took stock in exchange for grants of almost $9 billion that he noted were already owed to the company by the U.S. government as part of President Joe Biden’s bipartisan Chips Act. In short, Trump argued that by the terms of the deal, he had created between $10 billion and $11 billion of value for taxpayers from day one. “Why are ‘stupid’ people unhappy with that?” he asked, with his characteristic rhetorical flourish.

Reaction From Conservative Allies

Trump’s conservative allies have been quick to denounce the move. Larry Kudlow, Trump’s former top economic adviser, said on Fox Business that he was “very, very uncomfortable with that idea.” Steve Moore, another informal Trump economic adviser, went further: “I hate corporate welfare. That’s privatization in reverse. We want the government to divest of assets, not buy assets. So terrible, one of the bad ideas that’s come out of this White House.”

National Review ran an editorial titled, “Government Shouldn’t Get Into the Chip Business.” Senator Thom Tillis said it was a deal “straight out of Chairman Rennie,” and that it risked creating “a semi-state-owned enterprise a la CCCP, the former Soviet Union,” while Senator Rand Paul also tweeted: “Wouldn’t the government owning part of Intel be a step toward socialism? Terrible idea.”

But not everyone on the right is dissenting, and in some corners the move has been cheered. Progressive Senator Bernie Sanders was quick to celebrate the decision on social media. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick was even quicker to Trump’s defense: “That is not socialism. That’s the best businessman in the United States of America in the Oval Office doing fair things for us,” Lutnick told Laura Ingraham.

Intel, for its part, warned of difficulties. In a filing with the SEC, the company said the transaction could reduce Intel’s “ability to obtain future government grants and other government funding.” The deal also could “adversely affect” global sales and subject more of Intel’s business to government oversight, the filing said. Already reeling, Intel announced in February plans to lay off 15% of its workforce, and the company is now worth just $110 billion on the markets, down 50% since the start of 2024. It saw its shares jump 4% immediately after Trump’s announcement, but they have slipped since then.

The Wall Street Journal reported that Trump initially demanded Intel’s CEO Lip-Bu Tan to resign over past ties to China, but then reversed course after meeting with Tan at the White House. “I liked him a lot, I thought he was very good,” Trump said afterward.

Critics note that while the U.S. government will be Intel’s biggest shareholder, it will be a non-voting shareholder and will not have a seat on Intel’s board or the power to fire its CEO. They say, however, that when the president of the United States is a company’s largest shareholder, it’s a short walk to meddling and influence.

If Intel right-sizes and recovers, Trump can take the credit for bolstering a pillar of American technology. If it tanks, taxpayers lose. But as Trump himself has said, rest assured, he will be doing more of these deals. And as long as he does, the question of whether this is socialism, capitalism, or just Trumpism is not likely to go away.

The move to make the U.S. government the largest shareholder in Intel is a fundamental shift in the federal government’s relationship to private enterprise, and it reveals just how far Trump has moved the Republican Party from traditional economic principles.