Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick Cancels $7.4 Billion Semiconductor Research Agreement
WASHINGTON — Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick has abruptly voided a $7.4 billion agreement created under the previous administration to support semiconductor research through a nonprofit organization staffed with former White House officials and allies. The cancellation halts one of the largest planned allocations of research funding under the 2022 CHIPS and Science Act, raising fresh questions about the future of U.S. semiconductor leadership and oversight of taxpayer resources.
Background of the Voided Agreement
The CHIPS and Science Act, signed into law in 2022, set aside $52 billion overall for U.S. semiconductor competitiveness. Of that amount, $11 billion was specifically earmarked for research and development initiatives to strengthen domestic production, drive technology innovation, and bolster the workforce needed in the sector. Oversight of the program was granted to the Department of Commerce through a new entity known as the National Semiconductor Technology Center (NSTC).
In its final days, the previous administration approved a controversial arrangement to pass $7.4 billion in research funds to Natcast, a nonprofit corporation specially established to operate outside of direct federal control. The timing, just days before the presidential transition in January 2025, meant that a decade of funding was locked in with little to no input from incoming officials.
Natcast’s leadership was comprised largely of former administration officials with experience in technology policy, science and innovation, as well as nonprofit management. By design, the organization’s funding structure exempted it from direct Commerce Department oversight for nearly ten years. Critics said that the arrangement not only bypassed accountability requirements but also created the appearance of conflicts of interest.
Lutnick Cites Federal Law Violations
In his letter formally dissolving the agreement, Secretary Lutnick asserted that the arrangement may have violated the Government Corporation Control Act, which prevents federal agencies from establishing private corporations to administer public functions without direct congressional approval.
“The American people expect accountability when billions of their dollars are being used to secure the nation’s future,” Lutnick wrote, according to a Commerce Department statement. “The structure of this agreement deprived taxpayers of oversight and created an unnecessary, external gatekeeper for critical semiconductor resources.”
The letter also noted that the incoming administration found the contract not only unusual but unprecedented, given that it effectively shifted authority from the government to a newly created nonprofit without clear lines of accountability.
Profiles of Key Figures at Natcast
Natcast’s executive team brought together a number of prominent figures in science policy and technology innovation. These included:
- Jason Matheny, former deputy director for national security in the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.
- Deirdre Hanford, Natcast CEO, who previously served on Commerce’s Industrial Advisory Committee.
- Kendra Wilkerson, a nonprofit leader in technology diversity initiatives.
- Donna Dubinsky, senior counselor to former Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo and central to Natcast’s nonprofit status approval.
- Susan Feindt, former vice chair of the CHIPS Act advisory committee, later named Natcast’s senior vice president of ecosystem development.
- Jeremy Licht, former chief counsel on semiconductor incentives, appointed as Natcast’s general counsel.
Supporters of Natcast argued that these figures had deep technical qualifications and existing relationships within the semiconductor industry, which would have given the nonprofit agility and vision. However, opponents emphasized the risks of creating a taxpayer-funded body largely composed of politically connected insiders.
Precedents and Historical Context
The decision to void the agreement recalls earlier controversies around federal research funding mechanisms. During the late 20th century, Washington experimented with semipublic entities to distribute innovation funding, such as government-backed technology partnerships in aerospace, defense, and information technology. While some pilot programs yielded breakthroughs, others collapsed due to governance challenges, limited accountability, or allegations of favoritism.
The U.S. semiconductor industry itself has a long history of receiving federal support. In the 1980s, the government partnered with chipmakers through initiatives like SEMATECH, a nonprofit consortium designed to restore U.S. dominance against rising Japanese competition. SEMATECH, supported by federal funds but accountable to industry participants, helped stabilize the sector but was phased out in the 1990s.
Unlike SEMATECH, critics say Natcast’s structure granted substantial public funding without equivalent checks and balances, creating the risk of replicating past failures rather than building on successful federal-industry collaborations.
Economic Stakes in Global Semiconductor Competition
The voiding of this agreement comes at a critical juncture for the global semiconductor race. The U.S., European Union, South Korea, Taiwan, and China have all committed tens of billions of dollars in subsidies and R&D incentives to secure domestic supply chains and resist geopolitical vulnerabilities.
- Taiwan, home to industry giant TSMC, remains the global leader in manufacturing advanced semiconductors, producing nearly 90% of the world’s most cutting-edge chips.
- South Korea, dominated by Samsung and SK Hynix, has invested heavily in memory chip technology.
- China, under its “Made in China 2025” initiative, has spent over $100 billion in subsidies to boost domestic capabilities, though progress on leading-edge technologies remains limited due to export restrictions.
- The European Union approved its own €43 billion “Chips Act” to reduce dependency on Asia and attract new fabrication plants.
In this landscape, the U.S. has sought to balance immediate incentives for chipmakers to build domestic fabs with long-term investments in research and innovation. The CHIPS Act was designed to do both. By scrapping the Natcast contract, Commerce resets the debate over how best to deploy federal research funds while ensuring transparency.
Reaction from Industry and Policymakers
Initial responses from semiconductor companies and research organizations have been mixed. Industry leaders recognize the importance of stable long-term funding but remain watchful of how funds will now be redirected.
One executive at a major chip design firm, speaking anonymously, noted that “the abrupt change creates uncertainty, but oversight is essential. Industry needs predictability, but it also needs credibility in how federal funds are managed.”
Meanwhile, research universities and technology consortia have expressed concern that voiding a large block of R&D funding could slow progress at a critical time when the U.S. is striving to match or surpass international rivals.
Federal lawmakers have also called for swift clarification of how the $7.4 billion will now be managed. Some have proposed that Commerce reallocate the funds through competitive grants to universities, companies, and laboratories, ensuring broader participation and stricter governance.
Broader Implications for U.S. Technology Strategy
The cancellation of the Natcast arrangement signals a renewed emphasis on direct federal oversight in scientific research funding. It underscores a broader policy shift from outsourcing decision-making authority to nonprofit intermediaries toward a model where agencies maintain tighter control.
Historically, the balance between flexibility and accountability has posed challenges for innovation policy. Lean, technically agile organizations can push research forward with speed and focus, but they can also risk favoritism, mismanagement, or mission drift without active oversight. Lutnick’s decision suggests Commerce is prioritizing long-term stability and legal compliance over short-term expediency.
What Comes Next for the CHIPS Act Research Funding
Commerce has stated that it intends to reorganize research disbursements under direct departmental control and will evaluate potential legal action against Natcast or its leaders if any violations of law are confirmed. Officials said they are also reviewing all other major contracts linked to the CHIPS and Science Act to ensure taxpayer protections.
Key questions remain:
- Timeline: How quickly can Commerce redistribute the $7.4 billion without creating gaps in semiconductor R&D progress?
- Collaborations: Will universities and private companies still collaborate through a streamlined consortium model, or will they face slower, more traditional grant mechanisms?
- Workforce and innovation pipeline: Can U.S. research institutions maintain momentum against foreign competition during this transition?
Conclusion
Commerce Secretary Lutnick’s cancellation of the $7.4 billion Natcast agreement has rewritten the trajectory of America’s semiconductor research strategy. While the decision closes off what critics saw as a flawed mechanism rife with governance risks, it also opens a period of uncertainty in how billions of taxpayer dollars will be translated into concrete innovation.
With global semiconductor competition intensifying and U.S. efforts under scrutiny, the next steps taken by the Commerce Department will be closely watched by industry leaders, lawmakers, and allies abroad. The ultimate test will be whether the realignment strengthens America’s long-term technological edge—or risks slowing progress at a moment when speed and precision are paramount.
Word count: ~1,360