Trump on Thursday publicly demanded Tan’s resignation, accusing the longtime semiconductor executive of being “highly conflicted” due to his past financial ties to Chinese firms. The move follows an April Reuters investigation revealing that Tan, during his tenure at Cadence Design Systems, had invested in hundreds of Chinese companies — some reportedly linked to the Chinese military.
Tan, a naturalized U.S. citizen and chip industry veteran, took over as Intel’s chief executive earlier this year after the board ousted Pat Gelsinger over continued financial losses and operational missteps. But the growing political scrutiny of his background — and its potential implications for national security — now threatens to derail the early stages of his leadership.
Investors React: ‘This Is a Distraction’
Market watchers and Intel shareholders have voiced concern that Trump’s public intervention could pull Tan away from the hard decisions he’s begun to implement, including deep cost-cutting and strategic refocusing.
“It is distracting,” said Ryuta Makino, an analyst at Intel investor Gabelli Funds, which owns more than 200,000 Intel shares. “I think Trump will make goals for Intel to spend more, and I don’t think Intel has the capabilities to spend more, like what Apple and Nvidia are doing.”
The former president has championed an “America First” tech policy, encouraging U.S. giants to outspend rivals in areas such as chip manufacturing and AI. Apple and Nvidia have committed hundreds of billions toward expanding domestic production — investments Intel is no longer positioned to match after scaling back ambitious plans unveiled under Gelsinger.
In fact, Tan has recently moved to delay construction at new chipmaking facilities in Ohio, stating that Intel would only expand capacity when demand justified it. The cautious approach, while fiscally responsible, may further strain ties with Trump and his supporters, who view aggressive industrial investment as a patriotic imperative.
Board Support, But Wavering Confidence
Intel issued a brief statement on Thursday affirming that the company, its board, and its CEO are making “significant investments aligned with Trump's America First agenda.” Notably, the company did not directly address Trump’s call for Tan’s resignation — a silence that some investors interpreted as indecisive.
“The statement was bland,” said David Wagner, portfolio manager at Aptus Capital Advisors, which holds Intel shares through index funds. “Either defend your leader, which will be the beginning of a difficult road ahead, or consider making a change. Having this play out over a few months is not something that Intel can afford.”
Tan responded with a personal statement late Thursday:
“The United States has been my home for more than 40 years. I love this country and am profoundly grateful for the opportunities it has given me. I also love this company.”
He emphasized that the Intel board is “fully supportive of the work we are doing to transform our company.”
Still, the pressure is mounting. U.S. Senator Tom Cotton has reportedly sent a letter to Intel’s board chair requesting clarity on Tan’s investments and the separate legal issues tied to Cadence Design Systems — the company Tan led from 2008 to 2021. Last month, Cadence agreed to pay over $140 million in fines after pleading guilty to illegally selling software to a Chinese military-affiliated university, though the sales occurred during Tan’s leadership.
Tan insists his record is clean. “There has been a lot of misinformation circulating about my past roles,” he said. “I have always operated within the highest legal and ethical standards. My reputation has been built on trust.”
Legal Gray Areas, Political Red Lines
It is not illegal for U.S. citizens to invest in Chinese companies — unless those firms appear on the U.S. Treasury’s Chinese Military-Industrial Complex Companies List, which bans such investments. Reuters found no evidence that Tan had stakes in any blacklisted entities.
Nonetheless, Trump's remarks have brought new political heat to Intel’s boardroom, further complicating a high-stakes corporate reboot. According to a former Intel executive, the additional scrutiny could bog down decision-making at a moment when speed and clarity are essential.
“If you add in another layer of government scrutiny, and everybody looking into how the company is doing whatever it’s doing... that just makes it harder,” said the source, who was part of Gelsinger’s team before being laid off last year.
Under Tan, Intel is attempting to shed unproductive assets and narrow its focus to core products in a bid to regain competitiveness — particularly in the face of dominant rivals like TSMC, Nvidia, and AMD.
“If Tan leaves, it’s going to just prolong whatever Intel has to do and needs to do really quickly,” the former executive added.
What's Next?
For now, Tan appears determined to stay the course. But as political, investor, and internal pressures collide, Intel’s leadership is being tested in ways that go far beyond chip design. Whether Tan can maintain the board’s confidence — and keep Intel’s turnaround on track — may ultimately hinge on how the company navigates both the market and the court of public opinion in the weeks ahead.